These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#661 - 2013-05-15 05:10:12 UTC
Alexander Renoir wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:


I have better skills and implants than you, and I need a painter. You're just deluding yourself.

-Liang


Better skills? LolLolLolLolLolLolLolLol

You cant have more than ALL LEVEL 5. Roll


You didn't train "knowing what the **** you're talking about" to level 1. Tough break, really.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#662 - 2013-05-15 05:13:00 UTC
Ruze wrote:
I don't fly Caldari, so it took me a while to catch up. But let me get this straight:

Some of you guys are upset that the Caldari Navy Raven, which is a faction Battleship, cannot out PVE a Golem, which is a Marauder?

I mean, maybe I'm just Amarr, but the Apoc's Navy version has never even come close to the Paladin. I guess I'm just ignorant, but the pure training time and requirements to use a Marauder over a navy issue (which is essentially just more money, and if I'm reading the numbers right, isn't even close to the cost of that marauder) makes the marauder the pure win every single time. Fewer weapons, more damage, room for tractor and salvage, t2 tank, lots of cargo hold, etc, etc, etc.

So if by some chance I'm just an idiot who doesn't understand why a cheaper ship that requires less skills to use as a prerequisit should outperform a more expensive and more skill intensive ship, or even come close enough to be an option ... please, say so. I know you will.

Maybe it's just an Amarr thing. But if somebody told me the Navy Apoc or Geddon was supposed to be as good as a Marauder, I'd kick them from corp and call them an idiot. Well, not in that order. Then I'd have to create a private channel and probably pay some outrageous CSPA charge, and ....


I don't know if I really believe you here. I see lots more recommendations for the NApoc than Paladin for PVE purposes. The argument usually goes that the NApoc has better range and tracking with scorch than the Paladin with Tachs. I'm not totally sold on it, but I see the argument. That said, I feel like you're missing the point because the NApoc is going to have a a role when all this shakes out. The CNR, however, will not.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Alexander Renoir
Covenant Trading Agency
#663 - 2013-05-15 05:14:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexander Renoir
Liang Nuren wrote:
Alexander Renoir wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:


I have better skills and implants than you, and I need a painter. You're just deluding yourself.

-Liang


Better skills? LolLolLolLolLolLolLolLol

You cant have more than ALL LEVEL 5. Roll


You didn't train "knowing what the **** you're talking about" to level 1. Tough break, really.

-Liang

Mission runner since more than 5 years! Skills: ALL Level 5. Ship: CNR with Tech II fit (except Navy BCU).
All I can say is, that I do NOT need a painter if I fly my ship with Cruise Missiles. Thats all. And sometimes I have to shoot at Elite Frigates because of the changed NPC-AI which would otherwise destroy my drones if I start them.
I do missions.. I am not just talking about it.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#664 - 2013-05-15 05:15:08 UTC
Alexander Renoir wrote:
Ruze wrote:
Some of you guys are upset that the Caldari Navy Raven, which is a faction Battleship, cannot out PVE a Golem, which is a Marauder?


You are right pal. Skills should be the answer for problems in EVE. Not changed statistics on ships, new / other modules or something other. Just hard skillsets.
I hate the idea of a fast entry on BS for noobs or absolute low-skiller. THEY deserve problems with their missions if they have a bad skillset. CCP should not listen to such persons.

Btw: The GOLEM (or the Marauder Class at once) is a poor design at present. And I do not mean the color or shape. Blink


The old CNR has better DPS than the new one from BS3. Tell me more about how I'm wanting to deprive noobs of a ship.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#665 - 2013-05-15 05:16:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Alexander Renoir wrote:

Mission runner since more than 5 years! Skills: ALL Level 5. Ship: CNR with Tech II fit (except Navy BCU).
All I can say is, that I do NOT need a painter if I fly my ship with Cruise Missiles. Thats all. And sometimes I have to shoot at Elite Frigates because of the changed NPC-AI which would destroy my drones if I start them.
I do missions.. I am not just talking about it.


Cool story. 5 years and you're still using a painterless T2 fit on your CNR. You must have learned so much.

-Liang

Ed: Would you do me a favor and entertain us all by posting your shitfit CNR here?

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Alexander Renoir
Covenant Trading Agency
#666 - 2013-05-15 05:19:21 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
The old CNR has better DPS than the new one from BS3. Tell me more about how I'm wanting to deprive noobs of a ship.

-Liang

You are talking crap! All I say is that a noob cant expect to be effective with a low skillset and that he should skill something up to L5 to be effective and NOT whine at CCP to get a better CM or better statistics on his ship.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#667 - 2013-05-15 05:21:10 UTC
Alexander Renoir wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
The old CNR has better DPS than the new one from BS3. Tell me more about how I'm wanting to deprive noobs of a ship.

-Liang

You are talking crap! All I say is that a noob cant expect to be effective with a low skillset and that he should skill something up to L5 to be effective and NOT whine at CCP to get a better CM or better statistics on his ship.


No, I'm actually talking about this crazy thing called math. You may have heard of it.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Alexander Renoir
Covenant Trading Agency
#668 - 2013-05-15 05:21:38 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Alexander Renoir wrote:

Mission runner since more than 5 years! Skills: ALL Level 5. Ship: CNR with Tech II fit (except Navy BCU).
All I can say is, that I do NOT need a painter if I fly my ship with Cruise Missiles. Thats all. And sometimes I have to shoot at Elite Frigates because of the changed NPC-AI which would destroy my drones if I start them.
I do missions.. I am not just talking about it.


Cool story. 5 years and you're still using a painterless T2 fit on your CNR. You must have learned so much.

-Liang

Ed: Would you do me a favor and entertain us all by posting your shitfit CNR here?

Sure it would be possible to be a bit better with painters on my ship. But you Claim that EVERY BS Missile ship Needs a painter. This is wrong. It goes a Little bit better.. but it is not essential to do missions. Roll
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#669 - 2013-05-15 05:26:08 UTC
Alexander Renoir wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Alexander Renoir wrote:

Mission runner since more than 5 years! Skills: ALL Level 5. Ship: CNR with Tech II fit (except Navy BCU).
All I can say is, that I do NOT need a painter if I fly my ship with Cruise Missiles. Thats all. And sometimes I have to shoot at Elite Frigates because of the changed NPC-AI which would destroy my drones if I start them.
I do missions.. I am not just talking about it.


Cool story. 5 years and you're still using a painterless T2 fit on your CNR. You must have learned so much.

-Liang

Ed: Would you do me a favor and entertain us all by posting your shitfit CNR here?

Sure it would be possible to be a bit better with painters on my ship. But you Claim that EVERY BS Missile ship Needs a painter. This is wrong. It goes a Little bit better.. but it is not essential to do missions. Roll


Discussing missile ship mission performance without talking about painters is absolute silliness. According to your logic fitting BCUs wasn't essential to doing missions in the old SPR passive Drakes. Yes, you can eventually finish the mission in a **** fit BC. You can also finish them in a Condor if you're so inclined. That doesn't mean we should be making balancing decisions around it.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#670 - 2013-05-15 05:56:07 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hey guys

I've been watching the thread closely, and I really want to post something because I would hate to think you feel ignored. The problem is, I'm really not sure what to tell you! The discussion here seems extremely passionate, but for almost every ship and topic there are people arguing both sides........



Exactly!

have you seen anyone argueing that the tempest/fleet is good as proposed?
(exclueding naomi troll who points and screams op at all things with minmatar stamped on them...)

nearly every other bs has people who
1.) admit its better and gained usefullness (even its a more specific use than before)
2.) point out it might be borderline op (even if they can fly it!)

aslong you dont make them both fleet alpha tempests (cause its a to small nice to be used outside 0.0 fights) and nothing else i dont care what you make of em aslong as they are cool and usefull in some way!
(i personally like the oversized bc idea but atm it fails horribly at that it needs way more speed and a little more fitting and dmg for that)
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#671 - 2013-05-15 06:12:12 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hey guys

I've been watching the thread closely, and I really want to post something because I would hate to think you feel ignored. The problem is, I'm really not sure what to tell you! The discussion here seems extremely passionate, but for almost every ship and topic there are people arguing both sides. I think overall thats a good sign, and I feel good about the ships as a whole.

There are a few common concerns and I'm going to keep watching and then have a talk with the rest of the balance team in a day or two about some possible adjustments.

Thanks for the discussion - I really appreciate seeing all the different perspectives.



you still haven't said whether the scorp will actually have 110 scan res like it says on the caldari BS topic or if it is staying at 75 scan res.

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Deerin
East Trading Co Ltd
#672 - 2013-05-15 06:23:17 UTC
Here is the main idea behind tiercide:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/9129

...and here is the relevant picture about Navy stuff

http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/8742/1/Shiptech_1920.jpg

So current CNR is performing better than Golem, which is a specialized T2 ship.

After the patch it will still be a great improvement from T1, but Golem will outperform it at its specialized area.

/me looks at the picture again.

Tiercide working as intended.

They adressed CNR's shortcoming of cruise missiles for PvP. An inbuilt non-stacking target painter + very fast missiles for fast damage application. For both PvP and PvE it is a better choice than its t1 version, albeit at a higher price. The tech2 PvE ship outperforms it for PvE.

Yup. Working as intended.
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#673 - 2013-05-15 06:33:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Ersahi Kir
CCP Rise wrote:
Hey guys

I've been watching the thread closely, and I really want to post something because I would hate to think you feel ignored. The problem is, I'm really not sure what to tell you! The discussion here seems extremely passionate, but for almost every ship and topic there are people arguing both sides. I think overall thats a good sign, and I feel good about the ships as a whole.

There are a few common concerns and I'm going to keep watching and then have a talk with the rest of the balance team in a day or two about some possible adjustments.

Thanks for the discussion - I really appreciate seeing all the different perspectives.


I just want to know who's arguing for the tempest fleet issue. I thought we had pretty much agreed that the tempest was a subpar ship that has a tiny niche between the typhoon fleet issue and the maelstrom.

Unimpressive drone bay, tight when fitting 1400's, even with double bonused turrets doesn't put out impressive damage, it just seems uninspired. Find something this ship can do that sets it apart, we don't need a sub par armor maelstrom with utility highs that it can't fill without fitting mods. Honestly, if the typhoon fleet issue had more powergrid it would kick the tempest around the block in every role it could possibly fill and be more flexible to boot.
Burning Chrome
State War Academy
Caldari State
#674 - 2013-05-15 06:34:20 UTC
Lots of people complaining about battleships not having 8 turrets.
Prior to tier 3 battleships it was very unusual to have a full set of turrets, many years ago this was accepted and embraced. You'd fit cruise missiles to your 2 missiles slots in the Apoc and lasers in the rest, projectile turrets on your raven's spare slots.

I still fully support this concept, there's plenty of items in the game that can go into high slots that aren't your primary damage type and give your ships variation. It keeps the game being about the fit you bring to the fight, not the hull and reduces cookie cutter builds. There's still lots of fun things you can put in left over high slots with varying effectiveness. From assault missile launchers to help deal with frigates to less effective things like defender missiles, if nothing else it's a great spot for an offline salvager.

I personally find the idea of a battleship with 8 primary weapons very boring, it has a very narrow set of fitting options and an equally narrow purpose in the game ( 0.0 blob fights?). Generally I imagine they'd lead to a lot of embarrassing death mails when you get caught outside your very narrow engagement window (range/tracking/target size limitations).

I can't really afford to fly navy battleships but I'm still pretty excited about the Typhoon and to some extent the tempest.

If you must have more damage from your battleships, ask devs for more bonus not more slots :)
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#675 - 2013-05-15 06:54:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
CCP Rise wrote:
Hey guys

I've been watching the thread closely, and I really want to post something because I would hate to think you feel ignored. The problem is, I'm really not sure what to tell you! The discussion here seems extremely passionate, but for almost every ship and topic there are people arguing both sides. I think overall thats a good sign, and I feel good about the ships as a whole.

There are a few common concerns and I'm going to keep watching and then have a talk with the rest of the balance team in a day or two about some possible adjustments.

Thanks for the discussion - I really appreciate seeing all the different perspectives.


No one is arguing that the fleetpest is too good

No one is arguing that the navscorp is bad

To me that signals those ships for review. Otherwise, I wholly agree with you.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#676 - 2013-05-15 06:56:11 UTC
Ersahi Kir wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Hey guys

I've been watching the thread closely, and I really want to post something because I would hate to think you feel ignored. The problem is, I'm really not sure what to tell you! The discussion here seems extremely passionate, but for almost every ship and topic there are people arguing both sides. I think overall thats a good sign, and I feel good about the ships as a whole.

There are a few common concerns and I'm going to keep watching and then have a talk with the rest of the balance team in a day or two about some possible adjustments.

Thanks for the discussion - I really appreciate seeing all the different perspectives.


I just want to know who's arguing for the tempest fleet issue. I thought we had pretty much agreed that the tempest was a subpar ship that has a tiny niche between the typhoon fleet issue and the maelstrom.

Unimpressive drone bay, tight when fitting 1400's, even with double bonused turrets doesn't put out impressive damage, it just seems uninspired. Find something this ship can do that sets it apart, we don't need a sub par armor maelstrom with utility highs that it can't fill without fitting mods. Honestly, if the typhoon fleet issue had more powergrid it would kick the tempest around the block in every role it could possibly fill and be more flexible to boot.

Pretty much.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction
Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#677 - 2013-05-15 07:29:45 UTC
Alexander Renoir wrote:
Concernig the CNR:
All I can say is, that I strongly need one high slot for a Tractor Beam. So please do not change the slot-layout nor the Rate of Fire-Bonus.
You have changed the Cruise Missile Ammunition. Thats enough.
A Tech I Raven is useless for my skillset but my ALL Level 5 Golem is also bad today (And will be bad after the CM change). The best solution for MY PERSONAL Playstile ever was the CNR. But with this change it is ruined for me. I need one free available high-slot. Thats all.
Torpedo's where NEVER EVER an option for me. Sure I have also all Level 5 in torpoedoes.. but they are useless for my playstile.

So please overthink the Rate Of Fire-Bonus and the Slot Layout. Perhaps it will be better to change back some statistics of the CM to fit again with an ROF-bonus and a 7 launcher Slot-layout. Thanks.

MY PERSONAL OPINION:
Do not touch the CNR as ship. Changing the ammunition is enough.
+ I see a Problem with the gone rof-bonus. Yeah! I can make damage with the new CM but if the BS in Vengeance repairs itself faster than I can shoot the new CM wont be better.
+ I Need one free available high Slot for my Tractor Beam. (Noctis is not an Option. Playstile.. you know?)


Dude, seriously.. get a Golem. Best advice you can probably get.

After all, you have the mini Golem allready.. shouldn't be much of a change (and might actually improve your missile experience).

There is just no reason to fly a CNR in PvE any longer.
marVLs
#678 - 2013-05-15 07:49:24 UTC
Old CNR:

http://scr.hu/4s/uu30c

New CNR:

http://scr.hu/4s/ldtjp




And plenty of CPU with 3xRigor missile stats:

http://scr.hu/4s/nnsdx
Trolly McForumalt
Doomheim
#679 - 2013-05-15 08:12:59 UTC
Oh crap I just noticed the CNR has a bonus to velocity for *only* cruise missiles (musta glossed over it).

Intended? If so that is utter rubbish. I've never seen a bonus on a ship only for rails, artillery or beam lasers. This bonus needs to apply to torps as well.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#680 - 2013-05-15 08:14:44 UTC
Deerin wrote:
Here is the main idea behind tiercide:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/9129

...and here is the relevant picture about Navy stuff

http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/8742/1/Shiptech_1920.jpg

So current CNR is performing better than Golem, which is a specialized T2 ship.

After the patch it will still be a great improvement from T1, but Golem will outperform it at its specialized area.

/me looks at the picture again.

Tiercide working as intended.

They adressed CNR's shortcoming of cruise missiles for PvP. An inbuilt non-stacking target painter + very fast missiles for fast damage application. For both PvP and PvE it is a better choice than its t1 version, albeit at a higher price. The tech2 PvE ship outperforms it for PvE.

Yup. Working as intended.



I could buy into that if the CNR wasn't becoming just a ****** Golem. Roll

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.