These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#981 - 2013-05-17 19:09:50 UTC
Sisohiv wrote:
I bought two Navy Scorpions. I can see them being the new, old Drake. A full passive Navy Scorp is going to be a tough nut to crack.

I'm not sure if the shield recharge time of the SNI will change but i fitted the new SNI in EFT and it's nowhere near Rattlesnake.

With 4 BCU's fitted on each here are the Uniform damage defence numbers:

SNI - 415
Drake - 368
Rattle - 680
Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#982 - 2013-05-17 19:15:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Johnson Oramara
Jenn aSide wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
Johnson Oramara wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=230551&find=unread

PDF Reports comparing the Odyssey cruise missile/ship changes are available in the above link:
* cnr_flare_v_rigor_odyssey.pdf
* cnr_rigs_odyssey.pdf
* cnr_v_fleet_typhoon_odyssey.pdf
* cnr_v_typhoon_v_raven_v_fleet_typhoon_v_sni_v_golem_odyssey.pdf
* cruise_cnr_v_torp_golem.pdf
* raven_v_cnr_odyssey.pdf
* tengu_ham_v_hml.pdf

It should help answer the CNR is just a Golem-Lite question. Or whether the CNR's "applied damage" bonus sets it apart from the "everything now has 8 effective launchers" ship changes.

You can also mess around with the easy to read spreadsheet.[1]


[1] I think Perl is easy to read. That's your only warning.

So when you factor in drones killing frigs and most cruisers the CNR bonus drops to almost nonexistent?

First, use missiles on cruisers. Drones are slow.

And as Jenn aSide pointed out, it's become less about raw missile DPS and more about different aspects of the ship hulls. Having 9.33 launchers is no longer an "I-win" button for the CNR. Pick the hull that suits your particular needs.

Unfortunately this means it is likely that CCP managed to successfully balance missile battleships (without dumbing them down) which will most likely result in reduced tears and ranting on the forums. I, for one, do NOT welcome our quieter, less whinging forum overlords drama queens.





Not to worry, even after odyssey there will still be whining about the CNR because on paper it doesn't look much different from some other ship. I'm simply betting that (like the couple of people I now know have flown it on SiSi), most CNR pilots will recognize it as a superior ship than they had before June 4.

If i may add, of course it feels great with the cruise missile buffs, but what if you first tried decently fit Raven, TFI or any other cruise missile bs and then jumped to CNR would it be really that different?

Edit: I'm planning to test it myself on SiSi when i get back home...
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#983 - 2013-05-17 19:20:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Josilin du Guesclin
Altimo wrote:

Well basically your saying it has superior dps on smaller ships, however, if I wanted that I could just use a battlecruiser, The Typhoon can get the same kind of tank if not more so, with the option of drones no matter what to aid it, I would still say the typhoon is superior, it also has the element of surprise going for it as well, because you can set up the typhoon to do all kinds of things, where as the tempest is already limited in its role, which is not very good, not the fleet issue, a higher damage buff is needed, 7.5% ROF to reinforce it's position and I might just be fine with that.


The 'Phoon FI has a worse tank than the 'Pest FI. To get a better tank, you have to use more modules on the tank than the 'Pest uses. At that point your DPS advantage starts slipping away. If you want tank, go with the 'Pest.

As for this notion of a +7.5%/level RoF bonus - that gives 6 x 1/0.625 x 1.25 = 12 turret equivalents. Not happening. I don't see a +7.5%/level damage bonus either, because that still gives 6 x 1/0.75 x 1.375 = 11 turret equivalents.

Any problems the 'Pest (both standard and FI) have with DPS output is a flaw in the weapon system, not the hulls.

BTW, about those complaints that the Maelstrom does more DPS - not if you use sentries, because the 'Pest FI can afford Drone Link Augmentors, so it's drones have a much greater engagement range, and because the TFI can afford painters, giving better damage application against closer targets. Assuming the target has transversal, of course - the Mael does bring more raw DPS (and more alpha). Of course the Mael is also slower, less agile, has a larger sig radius, and is more fraglie, so it is far less flexible an artillery platform. Cheaper of course, but 'cheap' is not generally the first thing on your mind when you decide to get a faction hull.

By the way, the market doesn't seem to have gotten the memo about the Tempest FI being terrible - they're going for more than Typhoon FI hulls right now, and as the latter are 40-50M ISK more than they were last week, it's not like the market hasn't reacted to the announced changes.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#984 - 2013-05-17 19:42:07 UTC
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:

By the way, the market doesn't seem to have gotten the memo about the Tempest FI being terrible - they're going for more than Typhoon FI hulls right now, and as the latter are 40-50M ISK more than they were last week, it's not like the market hasn't reacted to the announced changes.


Out of idle curiosity, what's the production cost (including LP and tags) of a Typhoon Fleet vs a Tempest Fleet?

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#985 - 2013-05-17 19:49:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ersahi Kir
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Altimo wrote:

Well basically your saying it has superior dps on smaller ships, however, if I wanted that I could just use a battlecruiser, The Typhoon can get the same kind of tank if not more so, with the option of drones no matter what to aid it, I would still say the typhoon is superior, it also has the element of surprise going for it as well, because you can set up the typhoon to do all kinds of things, where as the tempest is already limited in its role, which is not very good, not the fleet issue, a higher damage buff is needed, 7.5% ROF to reinforce it's position and I might just be fine with that.


The 'Phoon FI has a worse tank than the 'Pest FI. To get a better tank, you have to use more modules on the tank than the 'Pest uses. At that point your DPS advantage starts slipping away. If you want tank, go with the 'Pest.

As for this notion of a +7.5%/level RoF bonus - that gives 6 x 1/0.625 x 1.25 = 12 turret equivalents. Not happening. I don't see a +7.5%/level damage bonus either, because that still gives 6 x 1/0.75 x 1.375 = 11 turret equivalents.

Any problems the 'Pest (both standard and FI) have with DPS output is a flaw in the weapon system, not the hulls.

BTW, about those complaints that the Maelstrom does more DPS - not if you use sentries, because the 'Pest FI can afford Drone Link Augmentors, so it's drones have a much greater engagement range, and because the TFI can afford painters, giving better damage application against closer targets. Assuming the target has transversal, of course - the Mael does bring more raw DPS (and more alpha). Of course the Mael is also slower, less agile, has a larger sig radius, and is more fraglie, so it is far less flexible an artillery platform. Cheaper of course, but 'cheap' is not generally the first thing on your mind when you decide to get a faction hull.

By the way, the market doesn't seem to have gotten the memo about the Tempest FI being terrible - they're going for more than Typhoon FI hulls right now, and as the latter are 40-50M ISK more than they were last week, it's not like the market hasn't reacted to the announced changes.


You've listed a few reasons why the tempest FI is better, yet none of those give it a role. Pretty much every role that the tempest FI can fill is better filled with either the mael or the typhoon FI. The only real role that I can see the tempest FI doing better then either ship is spider tanked howitzer sniper, but that seems less a role and a kind of micro-niche. A fleet issue ship shouldn't exist in a micro-niche, it should own a role.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#986 - 2013-05-17 19:49:36 UTC
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Altimo wrote:

Well basically your saying it has superior dps on smaller ships, however, if I wanted that I could just use a battlecruiser, The Typhoon can get the same kind of tank if not more so, with the option of drones no matter what to aid it, I would still say the typhoon is superior, it also has the element of surprise going for it as well, because you can set up the typhoon to do all kinds of things, where as the tempest is already limited in its role, which is not very good, not the fleet issue, a higher damage buff is needed, 7.5% ROF to reinforce it's position and I might just be fine with that.


The 'Phoon FI has a worse tank than the 'Pest FI. To get a better tank, you have to use more modules on the tank than the 'Pest uses. At that point your DPS advantage starts slipping away. If you want tank, go with the 'Pest.

As for this notion of a +7.5%/level RoF bonus - that gives 6 x 1/0.625 x 1.25 = 12 turret equivalents. Not happening. I don't see a +7.5%/level damage bonus either, because that still gives 6 x 1/0.75 x 1.375 = 11 turret equivalents.

Any problems the 'Pest (both standard and FI) have with DPS output is a flaw in the weapon system, not the hulls.

BTW, about those complaints that the Maelstrom does more DPS - not if you use sentries, because the 'Pest FI can afford Drone Link Augmentors, so it's drones have a much greater engagement range, and because the TFI can afford painters, giving better damage application against closer targets. Assuming the target has transversal, of course - the Mael does bring more raw DPS (and more alpha). Of course the Mael is also slower, less agile, has a larger sig radius, and is more fraglie, so it is far less flexible an artillery platform. Cheaper of course, but 'cheap' is not generally the first thing on your mind when you decide to get a faction hull.

By the way, the market doesn't seem to have gotten the memo about the Tempest FI being terrible - they're going for more than Typhoon FI hulls right now, and as the latter are 40-50M ISK more than they were last week, it's not like the market hasn't reacted to the announced changes.



Do it does NOT. Same nubmer of damage mods... they end up with same tank almost. But typhoon is SMALLER and WAY more DPS.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
ProphetGuru
Evolution
Northern Coalition.
#987 - 2013-05-17 19:54:21 UTC
RE the Navy Domi, I don't understand the logic of leaving the split weapon bonus, to create brutal options, when removing them from the base ship made so much sense. It puts the ship back into one of those (kinda does a few things good but not great) categories. If we are making it a drone boat, lets jump in with both feet and do it. The slot difference and it becoming a combat ship are enough justification to make it a "navy" version without having different bonuses just for the sake of having something different.
Claire Raynor
NovaGear
#988 - 2013-05-17 20:23:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Claire Raynor
.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#989 - 2013-05-17 20:34:10 UTC
Altimo wrote:

More tank than a maelstrom? Uh, I don't think so, the mael gets a shield boost bonus, the tank on a mael depending on how you set it up is far superior to the Tempest fleet issue, provided you set up the maelstrom for tank.

Some posts ago I mentioned that I tend to look at things from the perspective of small fleets. Fleets mean buffer tanks, and the Maelstrom's is fragile.
Quote:

If I want a smaller faster and more agile battleship, then I'll use a tornado, why would I spend 500 mill on a paper tanked fleet tempest? just because it has an extra low slot, but is virtually the same ship? Uh no I don't think so. Seriously if your suggesting we use this as a speedy armor tanked battleship, it's not going to work so well, feel free to try it yourself, you can right now on the regular server, never mind the test server.

If speedy armour tanked battleships are useless, why is everyone going on about how good the Typhoon FI is?
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#990 - 2013-05-17 20:39:27 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:

By the way, the market doesn't seem to have gotten the memo about the Tempest FI being terrible - they're going for more than Typhoon FI hulls right now, and as the latter are 40-50M ISK more than they were last week, it's not like the market hasn't reacted to the announced changes.


Out of idle curiosity, what's the production cost (including LP and tags) of a Typhoon Fleet vs a Tempest Fleet?

-Liang

That I can't tell you, off-hand, because I'm not an industrialist of any stripe.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#991 - 2013-05-17 20:43:04 UTC
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:

By the way, the market doesn't seem to have gotten the memo about the Tempest FI being terrible - they're going for more than Typhoon FI hulls right now, and as the latter are 40-50M ISK more than they were last week, it's not like the market hasn't reacted to the announced changes.


Out of idle curiosity, what's the production cost (including LP and tags) of a Typhoon Fleet vs a Tempest Fleet?

-Liang

That I can't tell you, off-hand, because I'm not an industrialist of any stripe.


Let's just say that it's not surprising that the Pest is more expensive than the Phoon. ;-)

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#992 - 2013-05-17 20:43:33 UTC
That needs fixing, then.
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#993 - 2013-05-17 22:07:10 UTC
ProphetGuru wrote:
RE the Navy Domi, I don't understand the logic of leaving the split weapon bonus, to create brutal options, when removing them from the base ship made so much sense. It puts the ship back into one of those (kinda does a few things good but not great) categories. If we are making it a drone boat, lets jump in with both feet and do it. The slot difference and it becoming a combat ship are enough justification to make it a "navy" version without having different bonuses just for the sake of having something different.

You are implying that it was not a drone boat to begin with.

The new bonus on the T1 variation is simply trash. CCP was wise enough to not translate it further onto the navy version. You should fit the navy version with a full rack of neutron blasters overloaded with void, flight of ogres, with a splash of triple mag stabs and triple drone damage mods.

An absolute dps **** machine. I'm just sad CCP took away the T1 version to allow for a reasonable priced version.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#994 - 2013-05-17 22:22:12 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hey guys

Posting to let you know that we are going to make two small adjustments to the Armageddon Navy Issue.
  • First, we're going to lower the drone bay to 200m3. We gave it the giant bay as a way to connect it to the new tech 1 Geddon, but as you've pointed out, it just seems weird.
  • Second, we're going to lower the signature radius of the Armageddon to 400. The original increase was because of trying pull a lot of the core metrics closer together for the ships within a role (like I did with sensor strength or lock range etc) but in this case it was a totally unnecessary nerf to performance when nothing else on the ship was changing substantially.

    • The OP will be updated to reflect these changes.


    I like this change. The superfat geddon just felt weird to me.

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

    Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
    Altimo
    Kitchen Sink Kapitals
    #995 - 2013-05-17 22:28:49 UTC
    Josilin du Guesclin wrote:

    Some posts ago I mentioned that I tend to look at things from the perspective of small fleets. Fleets mean buffer tanks, and the Maelstrom's is fragile.


    I beg to differ, if your talking about small fleet warfare the maelstrom excels in that with its dual asb set up.

    Quote:

    If speedy armour tanked battleships are useless, why is everyone going on about how good the Typhoon FI is?


    Because the typhoon has more options as an armour tanked battleship that goes fast, it's got more versatility and it has drones.

    You seem to be ignoring the strengths of the typhoon fleet issue, and no matter what you come up with, I will come up with a fit that has more dps than any tempest fleet issue you can put out.

    I will say this again, the typhoon has the tempest beat in every single scenario, Close range, long range, buffer tank with damage, buffer tank with ewar, larger drone bay = more options. The typhoon is also faster natively, over all it is superior.

    And I'll correct myself on this, what I meant to say is that a speedy armor tanked tempest is useless, because it loses the one thing it was supposed to be good at, which is a fast attack battleship. It also loses its damage potentiat because you fit armor tank and there goes your speed, and option for damage mods which the ship relies on.

    Natively the typhoon can do more because it has more bonused weapons, and it has drones to aid them, so it has 3 sets of strengths going for it, the tempest has 1, which is the dual bonuses to projectiles. The speed doesn't give it an edge over other battleships, not when you have long ranged ships hitting you from over 100km away, and now with the TE nerf the tempest will have to move closer to get its targets with TE's, so an armor tanked tempest is just bad. because theres no fall off bonus to offset the need for tracking enhancers or tracking computers. And if you can't fit tracking enhancers because your armor tanking well have fun, not only are you slowed down but your range is not very good. If you're using tracking computers, you are losing slots for ewar.
    Animal Nitrate
    Vanishing Point.
    The Initiative.
    #996 - 2013-05-17 22:34:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Animal Nitrate
    Malcanis wrote:
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Hey guys

    Posting to let you know that we are going to make two small adjustments to the Armageddon Navy Issue.
  • First, we're going to lower the drone bay to 200m3. We gave it the giant bay as a way to connect it to the new tech 1 Geddon, but as you've pointed out, it just seems weird.
  • Second, we're going to lower the signature radius of the Armageddon to 400. The original increase was because of trying pull a lot of the core metrics closer together for the ships within a role (like I did with sensor strength or lock range etc) but in this case it was a totally unnecessary nerf to performance when nothing else on the ship was changing substantially.

    • The OP will be updated to reflect these changes.


    I like this change. The superfat geddon just felt weird to me.


    Thanks v much for giving this some reconsideration and reducing the impact of the sig nerf. Of course I'd prefer no increase at all but this is a lot more tolerable. Thanks <3

    Edit: A little more CPU would be good though. :)
    Johnson Oramara
    Science and Trade Institute
    Caldari State
    #997 - 2013-05-18 00:07:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Johnson Oramara
    CCP Rise wrote:
    Hey guys

    Posting to let you know that we are going to make two small adjustments to the Armageddon Navy Issue.
  • First, we're going to lower the drone bay to 200m3. We gave it the giant bay as a way to connect it to the new tech 1 Geddon, but as you've pointed out, it just seems weird.
  • Second, we're going to lower the signature radius of the Armageddon to 400. The original increase was because of trying pull a lot of the core metrics closer together for the ships within a role (like I did with sensor strength or lock range etc) but in this case it was a totally unnecessary nerf to performance when nothing else on the ship was changing substantially.

    • The OP will be updated to reflect these changes.

    Hey, that is a good start.

    Would you also take another look at the CNR? At the moment it looks like the cute sort of animal with Raven and Phoon next to it while TFI is a real monster.

    The advantages of the CNR currently include being able to hit smaller rats slightly better with fof missiles when jammed, and... err... that's about it...

    Cheaper ships however perform very closely to it, which makes me wonder if it is worth the price tag.
    Askulf Joringer
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #998 - 2013-05-18 00:28:55 UTC
    Going to throw this out there as a suggestion for the nmega...

    8 Turrets, damage bonus instead of rof bonus for 10 relative turrets vs 9.3
    Josilin du Guesclin
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #999 - 2013-05-18 00:50:50 UTC
    Altimo wrote:

    I beg to differ, if your talking about small fleet warfare the maelstrom excels in that with its dual asb set up.

    They're pointless if you have logi. We don't run battleships without logi, as a rule, so that's where I'm coming from.
    Quote:

    I will say this again, the typhoon has the tempest beat in every single scenario, Close range, long range, buffer tank with damage, buffer tank with ewar, larger drone bay = more options. The typhoon is also faster natively, over all it is superior.

    It doesn't have more buffer tank than the 'Pest FI. Check the stats.
    Quote:

    And I'll correct myself on this, what I meant to say is that a speedy armor tanked tempest is useless, because it loses the one thing it was supposed to be good at, which is a fast attack battleship. It also loses its damage potentiat because you fit armor tank and there goes your speed, and option for damage mods which the ship relies on.

    It's no longer an attack BS.
    Altimo
    Kitchen Sink Kapitals
    #1000 - 2013-05-18 01:23:55 UTC
    Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
    Altimo wrote:

    I beg to differ, if your talking about small fleet warfare the maelstrom excels in that with its dual asb set up.

    They're pointless if you have logi. We don't run battleships without logi, as a rule, so that's where I'm coming from.
    Quote:

    I will say this again, the typhoon has the tempest beat in every single scenario, Close range, long range, buffer tank with damage, buffer tank with ewar, larger drone bay = more options. The typhoon is also faster natively, over all it is superior.

    It doesn't have more buffer tank than the 'Pest FI. Check the stats.
    Quote:

    And I'll correct myself on this, what I meant to say is that a speedy armor tanked tempest is useless, because it loses the one thing it was supposed to be good at, which is a fast attack battleship. It also loses its damage potentiat because you fit armor tank and there goes your speed, and option for damage mods which the ship relies on.

    It's no longer an attack BS.



    1. That only applies to how you use the ship, that doesn't change the fact it has a superior tank.

    2. I'm not talking about HP wise, but how the ship is used along side its massive tank, the missile bonus + the drone bay gives it far more usability and options than the tempest fleet issue does.

    3. Rise said it was meant to be the "Fastest" of the combat battleships. But then when you armor tank it....