These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey] Tech 1 Battleships - Amarr

First post First post First post
Author
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2321 - 2013-05-03 00:27:20 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Who is "saying they should be comparable?"

You mean other than the quote in question or the implications of remarks like James'?
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Anybody on the last, oh hell, I'd even go as far as 10 pages of this thread, are just arguing over which ones can be compared for dps analysis.

Duals = Duals

Megas = 350s

Tachs = 425s.

Those are the size tiers of Large Hybrid and Laser battleship weapons. We each have three, see?

People are arguing whether the dps of Megas should be based on their closest statistical equivalent, 425s, or not. Because they are remarkably, even lazily, statistically close.

That's it. Idk what hat you pulled "you all want Tachs to be as easy to fit as 425s" from, but it sure wasn't anyone I know of.

Which carries with it fitting implications as well, unless you think performance equivalencies and fittings to be uncoupled concepts. But when someone brings up tachs in a megapulse ship to 425 ship comparison saying the megapulse to 425 comparison isn't fair we are very much comparing all aspects as equivalents including fitting.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2322 - 2013-05-03 00:27:37 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
You lie. No one says this, no one has.

Oh really ? So you can explain what "we want our weapon to be usable" mean ?
Because if that's not "like 425mm railguns", then that is how beams will be with the fix in the beams turrets thread : they should be usable with 10% less PG and 20% less cap use.

What you're saying is equivalent to "x < y, and z < y, therefore z = x."
See the problem?

No, that's not what I'm saying.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2323 - 2013-05-03 00:29:29 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Who is "saying they should be comparable?"

You mean other than the quote in question or the implications of remarks like James'?
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Anybody on the last, oh hell, I'd even go as far as 10 pages of this thread, are just arguing over which ones can be compared for dps analysis.

Duals = Duals

Megas = 350s

Tachs = 425s.

Those are the size tiers of Large Hybrid and Laser battleship weapons. We each have three, see?

People are arguing whether the dps of Megas should be based on their closest statistical equivalent, 425s, or not. Because they are remarkably, even lazily, statistically close.

That's it. Idk what hat you pulled "you all want Tachs to be as easy to fit as 425s" from, but it sure wasn't anyone I know of.

Which carries with it fitting implications as well, unless you think performance equivalencies and fittings to be uncoupled concepts. But when someone brings up tachs in a megapulse ship to 425 ship comparison saying the megapulse to 425 comparison isn't fair we are very much comparing all aspects as equivalents including fitting.


The only implications are ones you infer for yourself.

Heck, if we want to discuss Megas in terms of 350s, then you go ahead and do that. But stop telling me such nonsense as thinly veiled accusations that we all basically want Tachyon power with 425s easy fitting. Because no one has said any such thing.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Avald Midular
Doomheim
#2324 - 2013-05-03 00:32:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Avald Midular
Some people have been re-requesting comparison analysis between the fitting difficulties or lack thereof of the 4 races. Below are a comparison of each races ship that is most likely to use long range weapons (in my opinion) with the % PG and CPU used by fitting a full rack of weapons along with their cap use per second while firing. The data is all using level 5 skills and the new large energy weapon changes. The Tech 2 version of each weapon is used.

Ship(PG, CPU)
Abaddon (26250, 700)
Maelstrom (26250, 800)
Rokh (18750, 975)
Hyperion (20000, 750)

Weapon (PG, CPU, Cap / Sec)
Duel Heavy (1559.25, 35.25, 3.9)
Mega (2895.75, 43.5, 5.8)
Tach (3341.25, 47.25, 6.1)

1200 (2722.5, 33, 0)
1400 (3217.5, 35.25, 0)

Duel 250 (1039.5, 43.5, 1.8)
350 (1559.7, 47.25, 2.1)
425 (2079, 55.5, 2.2)

NOTE: Notice the cap per second differences at all levels

Now for the comparison. Each entry will have 2 values, one is the % hull of PG to fit a full rack, the other is the % CPU to fit a full rack.

Weapon (% PG, % CPU)

Abaddon
Duel Heavy (47.5%, 40.3%)
Mega Beams (88.3%, 49.7%)
Tachyon (102%, 54%)

Maelstrom
1200 (83%,33%)
1400 (98.1%, 35.25%)

Rokh
Duel 250(44.4%, 35.7%)
350 (66.5%, 38.8%)
425 (88.7%, 45.5%)

Hyperion
Duel 250 (31.2%, 34.8%)
350 (46.8%, 37.8%)
425 (62.4%, 44.4%)

Feel free to draw your own conclusions but I will include mine here....

I don't think it's hard to argue that Amarr have it the toughest by far (keep in mind the cap per second as well). You might say, look at the Maelstrom it's getting close on PG too, but it can be actively shield tanked hence the increased CPU, while the Amarr need what little PG they have left to fit a tank and MWD (if they have any cap left). This comparison also points out how out of whack the fitting and cap use is for beams relative to their performance against the other weapons at all levels.

I like to come at it from a low-SP, mission runner, small scale PVP point of view so i will leave the large fleet PVP to someone else, but these numbers are insane for the Amarr compared to the relative easy of which it is to fit (and fire) the Rokh and Hyperion (and Mael to a lesser extent). A low skill Amarr pilot will have WAY WAY WAY more trouble fitting than the other races and will have to make significant tradeoffs with his fit that other races just won't have to make at low SP.

CCP Rise or Fozzie, what is the reason for the obnoxious jump in fitting and cap when going from Duel Heavy to Mega-beam given the relative performance of Mega's versus the other races weapons and even Scorch?
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2325 - 2013-05-03 00:50:58 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

The only implications are ones you infer for yourself.

Heck, if we want to discuss Megas in terms of 350s, then you go ahead and do that. But stop telling me such nonsense as thinly veiled accusations that we all basically want Tachyon power with 425s easy fitting. Because no one has said any such thing.

Then again, the question is what was wrong with 425 to Megapulse comparison? what was there to object to?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2326 - 2013-05-03 00:54:21 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
You lie. No one says this, no one has.

Oh really ? So you can explain what "we want our weapon to be usable" mean ?
Because if that's not "like 425mm railguns", then that is how beams will be with the fix in the beams turrets thread : they should be usable with 10% less PG and 20% less cap use.

What you're saying is equivalent to "x < y, and z < y, therefore z = x."
See the problem?

No, that's not what I'm saying.

You're saying that "more usable" tachyons means "like 425mm railguns".
425mms use less cap and PG than tachyons. They're asking for less cap and PG use for tachyons. You're saying that therefore that means they want the same cap and PG as 425s.
It's pretty clear to me that this is your argument.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2327 - 2013-05-03 00:57:13 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
You're saying that "more usable" tachyons means "like 425mm railguns".
425mms use less cap and PG than tachyons. They're asking for less cap and PG use for tachyons. You're saying that therefore that means they want the same cap and PG as 425s.
It's pretty clear to me that this is your argument.

They already got less PG and cap use. So what's the next level ? When will they have enough ?

Some people here clearly stated that their ship should be able to fit and run all their weapons without fitting or cap mod. What is the difference with railguns ?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2328 - 2013-05-03 01:01:43 UTC
They'll still have more PG and cap use. You seem to think that crippling PG and cap use to the point where nobody deems use of these weapons worthwhile is indicative of good game balance. It isn't. And there's no way you can dispute that.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2329 - 2013-05-03 01:05:56 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
They'll still have more PG and cap use. You seem to think that crippling PG and cap use to the point where nobody deems use of these weapons worthwhile is indicative of good game balance. It isn't. And there's no way you can dispute that.

Amarr ship have a lot of PG and cap.

Apoc and Abaddon should be able to fit and use megabeams without much sacrifices with the buff. That's hardly crippling anymore.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#2330 - 2013-05-03 01:17:35 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Amarr ship have a cap.

Actually with Odyssey stats gallente battleships have more cap than amarr ones.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2331 - 2013-05-03 01:19:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Bouh Revetoile
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Amarr ship have a cap.

Actually with Odyssey stats gallente battleships hyperion have more cap than amarr ones.

Hyperion also have less firepower now, and still have its armor rep bonus. Also, it might be OP (but not because of cap in fact), but feel free to complain about it on the gallente thread.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2332 - 2013-05-03 01:57:26 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Amarr ship have a cap.

Actually with Odyssey stats gallente battleships hyperion have more cap than amarr ones.

Hyperion also have less firepower now, and still have its armor rep bonus. Also, it might be OP (but not because of cap in fact), but feel free to complain about it on the gallente thread.


It lost one effective turret, and gained a low slot. Not much difference.

What still baffles me about it is that it has such a mediocre lock range. 60km? Wtf.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Calathorn Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2333 - 2013-05-03 02:03:41 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Amarr ship have a cap.

Actually with Odyssey stats gallente battleships have more cap than amarr ones.



da ****? that shouldn't happen, ammar need cap more than any other race, they should have the most as a result



course, this being a RATIONAL thing to expect, CCP will never implement itRoll

BRING BACK THE JUKEBOX

I attended the School of Hard Nocks, the only place you will ever learn anything of value, sadly most Americans never meet the requirments to attend

Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#2334 - 2013-05-03 02:39:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Kusum Fawn
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
You lie. No one says this, no one has.

Oh really ? So you can explain what "we want our weapon to be usable" mean ?
Because if that's not "like 425mm railguns", then that is how beams will be with the fix in the beams turrets thread : they should be usable with 10% less PG and 20% less cap use.

What you're saying is equivalent to "x < y, and z < y, therefore z = x."
See the problem?

No, that's not what I'm saying.


You're saying that "more usable" tachyons means "like 425mm railguns".
425mms use less cap and PG than tachyons. They're asking for less cap and PG use for tachyons. You're saying that therefore that means they want the same cap and PG as 425s.
It's pretty clear to me that this is your argument.


having tachs be like 425 rail guns does not in any way shape or form mean they need to be exactly the same, nor that they should have the exact same fittings.

you have all wasted like five pages being neckbeards.

the word "like" in this context can refer to many things such as
[beams being like 425s in ] fitting progression in terms of percent increase over the closest lower step
[beams being like 425s in ] cap usage increase over next lowest step.

the lower step being the previous turret size in the progression of turret in its own class. Ie. Duals, 350 425 : duals, megabeams, tachyeons.

what they seem to be asking for, and what you seem to be so stubbornly ignoring, James and Bouh, is the progression in cap use and fitting costs from the lower tiered turrets in their own class to be consistent across all turrets or at least the progression in terms of percent increase in beam lasers to be comparable to the percent increase in railguns, in this manner.

to copy and expand this a bit. .......................----> Percent increase over previous step
Weapon .........(PG,............ CPU, .....Cap / Sec) ...( PG ....... CPU ........Cap/sec)
Duel Heavy ...(1559.25, ...35.25, ....3.9) ---->Base
Mega ..............(2895.75, ...43.5, ......5.8) ...............(85.71 .....23.40 .....48.717)
Tach................ (3341.25, ..47.25, ....6.1)...............(15.38 .....8.62 ........ 5.17)

1200 ...............(2722.5, ......33,......... 0) ---->Base
1400 ...............(3217.5, ......35.25, ....0)..................(18.18 ....6.818..........~)

Duel 250........ (1039.5, ......43.5,...... 1.8) ---->Base
350 ..................(1559.7, ......47.25,.... 2.1) ..............(50.04.....8.62 ......16.6)
425 ..................(2079, ..........55.5,...... 2.2)...............(33.29....17.46......4.67)

I will be the first to admit that this is not a totally fair comparison. but if the beam lasers were to follow the percent increase of the railgun steps, they would look like this,

Weapon .........(PG,............ CPU, .....Cap / Sec)
Duel Heavy ...(1559.25, ...35.25, ....3.9)
Mega ..............(2339.50, ...38.28, ....4.5) = (-556.25 .... -5.22.....-1.3)
Tach............... (3118.32, ...44.88, ....4.7) = (-222.93.....-2.37 .....-1.4)

I dont know if this is what you want from them, but thats what that means at least.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.

Calathorn Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2335 - 2013-05-03 03:01:01 UTC
information overload

BRING BACK THE JUKEBOX

I attended the School of Hard Nocks, the only place you will ever learn anything of value, sadly most Americans never meet the requirments to attend

Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2336 - 2013-05-03 09:00:34 UTC
Kusum Fawn wrote:
having tachs be like 425 rail guns does not in any way shape or form mean they need to be exactly the same, nor that they should have the exact same fittings.

you have all wasted like five pages being neckbeards.

the word "like" in this context can refer to many things such as
[beams being like 425s in ] fitting progression in terms of percent increase over the closest lower step
[beams being like 425s in ] cap usage increase over next lowest step.

the lower step being the previous turret size in the progression of turret in its own class. Ie. Duals, 350 425 : duals, megabeams, tachyeons.

what they seem to be asking for, and what you seem to be so stubbornly ignoring, James and Bouh, is the progression in cap use and fitting costs from the lower tiered turrets in their own class to be consistent across all turrets or at least the progression in terms of percent increase in beam lasers to be comparable to the percent increase in railguns, in this manner.

to copy and expand this a bit. .......................----> Percent increase over previous step
Weapon .........(PG,............ CPU, .....Cap / Sec) ...( PG ....... CPU ........Cap/sec)
Duel Heavy ...(1559.25, ...35.25, ....3.9) ---->Base
Mega ..............(2895.75, ...43.5, ......5.8) ...............(85.71 .....23.40 .....48.717)
Tach................ (3341.25, ..47.25, ....6.1)...............(15.38 .....8.62 ........ 5.17)

1200 ...............(2722.5, ......33,......... 0) ---->Base
1400 ...............(3217.5, ......35.25, ....0)..................(18.18 ....6.818..........~)

Duel 250........ (1039.5, ......43.5,...... 1.8) ---->Base
350 ..................(1559.7, ......47.25,.... 2.1) ..............(50.04.....8.62 ......16.6)
425 ..................(2079, ..........55.5,...... 2.2)...............(33.29....17.46......4.67)

I will be the first to admit that this is not a totally fair comparison. but if the beam lasers were to follow the percent increase of the railgun steps, they would look like this,

Weapon .........(PG,............ CPU, .....Cap / Sec)
Duel Heavy ...(1559.25, ...35.25, ....3.9)
Mega ..............(2339.50, ...38.28, ....4.5) = (-556.25 .... -5.22.....-1.3)
Tach............... (3118.32, ...44.88, ....4.7) = (-222.93.....-2.37 .....-1.4)

I dont know if this is what you want from them, but thats what that means at least.

That is true. But how I understand it is more like the scales being differents.
dual heavy beam is on the same level than dual 250mm, but amarr then skip a stage, and megabeam come to the level of 425mm ; and tachyon on a higher scale.

A second thing to consider is the special place dual heavy beams actually occupy : this weapon is in fact at the place of gatling pulse (and you can see it with the fact that there is no low grade pulse laser for medium and large weapons ; only hybrid have 3 short and long range guns). So the dual heavy beam is on an another scale in fact, and more of a low grade pulse than a low grade beam.
Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#2337 - 2013-05-03 11:34:22 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Amarr ship have a cap.

Actually with Odyssey stats gallente battleships hyperion have more cap than amarr ones.

Hyperion also have less firepower now, and still have its armor rep bonus. Also, it might be OP (but not because of cap in fact), but feel free to complain about it on the gallente thread.


Yet it gained another heavy drone. It lost about 36 dps[neutrons, navy antimatter], but traded that in for less cap use on the guns, less ammo consumption, a utility high, another low, more grid AND having less guns to fit.........it made out like a bandit. Hell, that's if it uses the extra low for more tank. It's actually a net gain if you fit another damage mod. Also not taking into account that you can fit bigger guns now, thanks to only having to fit 6 guns.

All for the low low price of less than 3% of it's dps.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2338 - 2013-05-03 11:49:43 UTC
Templar Dane wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Amarr ship have a cap.

Actually with Odyssey stats gallente battleships hyperion have more cap than amarr ones.

Hyperion also have less firepower now, and still have its armor rep bonus. Also, it might be OP (but not because of cap in fact), but feel free to complain about it on the gallente thread.


Yet it gained another heavy drone. It lost about 36 dps[neutrons, navy antimatter], but traded that in for less cap use on the guns, less ammo consumption, a utility high, another low, more grid AND having less guns to fit.........it made out like a bandit. Hell, that's if it uses the extra low for more tank. It's actually a net gain if you fit another damage mod. Also not taking into account that you can fit bigger guns now, thanks to only having to fit 6 guns.

All for the low low price of less than 3% of it's dps.

I never denied that. I was actually one of the first to say the Hyperion could be too good. But feel free to ask for a nerf on the gallente thread, and face the crowd of gallente pilots pissed with their armor rep bonus.
Jill Antaris
Jill's Open Incursion Corp
#2339 - 2013-05-03 12:49:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Jill Antaris
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Templar Dane wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Amarr ship have a cap.

Actually with Odyssey stats gallente battleships hyperion have more cap than amarr ones.

Hyperion also have less firepower now, and still have its armor rep bonus. Also, it might be OP (but not because of cap in fact), but feel free to complain about it on the gallente thread.


Yet it gained another heavy drone. It lost about 36 dps[neutrons, navy antimatter], but traded that in for less cap use on the guns, less ammo consumption, a utility high, another low, more grid AND having less guns to fit.........it made out like a bandit. Hell, that's if it uses the extra low for more tank. It's actually a net gain if you fit another damage mod. Also not taking into account that you can fit bigger guns now, thanks to only having to fit 6 guns.

All for the low low price of less than 3% of it's dps.

I never denied that. I was actually one of the first to say the Hyperion could be too good. But feel free to ask for a nerf on the gallente thread, and face the crowd of gallente pilots pissed with their armor rep bonus.


The reason the hype got the massive cap is that it was designed to use active tank + mwd + blasters what requires massive amounts of cap and was one of the key weaknesses of the dualrep mega anno 2006. The hype actually gained a significant boost in dps if you fit it with a hybrid tank(plate + single rep) like most of the hypes that actually seen use outside of dock/jump range before QR, since it now can fit a neut, neutrons and 2 MFS. It still needs a HP nerf to bring it in line with the other attack BS and might lose a bit of the fitting. Given it is far more niche than the new mega or the other Tier 3 hulls, it is actually a good choice to balance it a bit above other BS, to make it more useful in the metagame.

@Rise, the Apoc needs a better capacitor. The massive cap use of the abaddon was a designed drawback for giving the ship 2 of the strongest bonuses in eve(damage + resists). Most of the fleets you would fight with a apoc fleet are sub BS, so you need the mwd on the apoc to adjust ranges and the tracking bonus isn't this important at 70km as it is at 5km for a blaster ship. The apoc only got a 30km range window where it is better than the abaddon(no damage bonus and no resist bonus), if you limit the ability to use the mwd on it by crippling the cap to the same level as the abaddon it would be a considerable heavy nerf for it, at least bigger as the gain of a tracking bonus at her common combat range.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2340 - 2013-05-03 14:04:31 UTC
Kusum Fawn wrote:
what they seem to be asking for, and what you seem to be so stubbornly ignoring, James

Maybe you should actually read my posts next time instead of chiding me for advancing the same point as you.

You might actually accomplish more than making yourself look like a ****.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)