These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Purpose of a Ferox?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#21 - 2015-09-14 10:24:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Torgeir Hekard
The Bigpuns wrote:

But fleet cane, 10% dps loss for a falloff gain? You need to be quite far into falloff for the bonus to compensate for the nerf.

That's falloff and optimal gain. AND a tracking bonus. Fleet cane doesn't currently have a tracking bonus.
That's minimal dps loss (if you exclude drones) for a substantial application boost. Essentially it will be doing more damage on anything that's not sitting close at zero transversal. AND it will have alpha second only to sleip among the medium guns. Around 4,5K volley on faction close range ammo (RF EMP and the like) with 3 gyros or 3K volley on tracking ammo (RF DU/TS). With a tracking, optimal and falloff bonus.
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#22 - 2015-09-14 10:28:53 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Yea I don't really get the 7.5 turret thing.

How does taking away a turret, 7-1, end up equaling 7.5?

Are they implying that after factoring in level 5 damage bonuses that it ends up being 7.5 total compared to the 7 before the minus one's flat damage with no dps bonus?

Which if that's the case, the dps loss for anyone without level 5 cal BC is going to really hurt. Probably even cause them to stop flying the ferox until the complete 28 day level 5 training prerequisite is finished. Which will result in less people flying the ferox, the opposite of this change's intention?

It's 7.5 with BC5 or 7.2 with BC4 which is still more than 7.
Moreover, with rails an optimal range bonus is pretty much equal to damage bonus, because you can use more damaging ammo on the same range. And the ferox is arguably getting the most from the range bonus, because rails benefit from both optimal and falloff.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#23 - 2015-09-14 10:35:33 UTC
Torgeir Hekard wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Yea I don't really get the 7.5 turret thing.

How does taking away a turret, 7-1, end up equaling 7.5?

Are they implying that after factoring in level 5 damage bonuses that it ends up being 7.5 total compared to the 7 before the minus one's flat damage with no dps bonus?

Which if that's the case, the dps loss for anyone without level 5 cal BC is going to really hurt. Probably even cause them to stop flying the ferox until the complete 28 day level 5 training prerequisite is finished. Which will result in less people flying the ferox, the opposite of this change's intention?

It's 7.5 with BC5 or 7.2 with BC4 which is still more than 7.
Moreover, with rails an optimal range bonus is pretty much equal to damage bonus, because you can use more damaging ammo on the same range. And the ferox is arguably getting the most from the range bonus, because rails benefit from both optimal and falloff.


Better than nothing I suppose. It's range bonus is already active so that 7.0--->7.2 difference is probably going to be near negligible. It's the shield bonus removal that worries me.
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#24 - 2015-09-14 10:40:32 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:

Better than nothing I suppose. It's range bonus is already active so that 7.0--->7.2 difference is probably going to be near negligible. It's the shield bonus removal that worries me.

Range bonus is not active. Now it only has 10% per level.
It will get 25% optimal/fallof ON TOP OF THAT. So a double range bonus.
And the shield bonus is offset by a mid you can use for an invul.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#25 - 2015-09-14 10:57:29 UTC
Torgeir Hekard wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:

Better than nothing I suppose. It's range bonus is already active so that 7.0--->7.2 difference is probably going to be near negligible. It's the shield bonus removal that worries me.

Range bonus is not active. Now it only has 10% per level.
It will get 25% optimal/fallof ON TOP OF THAT. So a double range bonus.
And the shield bonus is offset by a mid you can use for an invul.


Well that sounds promising.

I hold onto these BPC's.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#26 - 2015-09-29 18:43:22 UTC
Alright so how's the ferox doing after this battlecruiser update?
Uriam Khanid
New Machinarium Corporation
#27 - 2015-09-29 22:05:54 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Alright so how's the ferox doing after this battlecruiser update?


a little better. just a little.Sad
Ion Kirst
KIRSTONE ALLIANCE
#28 - 2015-09-29 23:58:28 UTC
Because of the new changes to the Ferox, this is a follow up posting. Go back and take a look at post #13.

. . . not only did they give the Ferox a 6th mid slot (yeah), they gave it more gank. Even at the expense of going from 7 turrets to 6, it does much better with the new bonuses. Of course when you gain something you lose some thing. The 4% resists have been eliminated, that is no big deal. The Ferox's fall-off and optimal have been increased, along with the dps.

From the numbers in post #13 you can add these new ones:

6x250mm T2, Caldari antimatter, 4xMFSII (same character, same implants, same same)

fall off - 52 km (old 40km)
optimal - 33km (old 25km)
628dps - (old 565)

So, IMHO, the Ferox is much better. (when you eliminate targets quicker, you can get away with less tank.)

-Kirst

Always remember Tovil-Toba, and what was done there.
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar
#29 - 2015-09-30 00:52:33 UTC
Blasterox is a lot nicer now.

Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy.

I invented Tiericide
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#30 - 2015-09-30 09:00:31 UTC
NExt day or so I should be able to personally check the ferox out and determine if it's worthy of the Divine Seal of Approval.
Garrett Osinov
Doomheim
#31 - 2015-09-30 10:22:42 UTC
It can hit up to 150-160 km, has 1000 damage per volley with spike, doesn't cost much and when there is a gang of 20-30 of those it is difficult to counter them.

Moa doesn't have range of a ferrox, that why there are no Moa's fleets.

It isn't a solo ship.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#32 - 2015-09-30 13:21:52 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
If the Ferox good? I dunno. RvB used them against the Mercs when they decced Sengirs corp. And absolutely destroyed them. It need proper tackle support and a good logi wing but they burned a fleet made up of Battleships and T3's.


Inaccurate. You're thinking of thr Galactic Skyfleet Empire POCO coalition clusterfuck, Sengier and his alliance was a different thing. RVB were also predominantly fighting GSE themselves who were totally unskilled carebears and marmite who are notoriously terrible. The entire thing was a disorganized ****-show on the merc/GSE end.

Massed anything is effective against a rabble like that.
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#33 - 2015-10-01 00:18:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Trinkets friend
Who said the Ferox isn't a solo boat?

You can get a C-type LSB, cap booster and rigs, pop a blue pill and top out at 720 DPS active tank, with an eyewatering 870DPS OH. Add in an OGB and Crystals, and there should be some spectacular solo vids coming out soom (tm).

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#34 - 2015-10-01 00:59:53 UTC
Alright so I've been playing around with the ferox a bit today.

#dreamship

I can't say anything about any of the other BC's because I don't fly them, and this thread is about them anyways.

But damn, I'm really diggin' this little change it's got. Like I can easily fit 250mm guns on it now, which before it was one or the other, paper thin tank with 250mm or a beefy 200mm fit.

+1 CCP thanks
Bayou
Doomheim
#35 - 2015-10-01 10:35:22 UTC
Probably to slow for brawling, maybe it will work if people switch into bcs over cruisers again.
Mephiztopheleze
Laphroaig Inc.
#36 - 2015-10-01 10:44:40 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
The ferox is just so. . . Meh. Very underwhelming.


Which must be why the CFC oops, sorry The Imperium, used a Ferox doctrine before the buff?

Occasional Resident Newbie Correspondent for TMC: http://themittani.com/search/site/mephiztopheleze

This is my Forum Main. My Combat Alt is sambo Inkura
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#37 - 2015-10-01 11:26:16 UTC
Mephiztopheleze wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
The ferox is just so. . . Meh. Very underwhelming.


Which must be why the CFC oops, sorry The Imperium, used a Ferox doctrine before the buff?


who?
ChromeStriker
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2015-10-01 13:11:19 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Mephiztopheleze wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
The ferox is just so. . . Meh. Very underwhelming.


Which must be why the CFC oops, sorry The Imperium, used a Ferox doctrine before the buff?


who?


The Goons dude... if you dont know who they are... your actually pretty lucky lol

No Worries
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2015-10-01 14:45:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
More on topic, they did.
This summer, at least about 120 feroxes died sporting same or almost the same fit, also it was openly discussed from time to time. General narrative was along the lines that BC fleets were somewhat viable, they just needed some edge over cruisers and they are also threatened quite easily with bombers, which was (and still is) a problem.
Again, this is what people used to say, not something I can personally claim/confirm.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Garrett Osinov
Doomheim
#40 - 2015-10-01 15:12:00 UTC
ChromeStriker wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Mephiztopheleze wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
The ferox is just so. . . Meh. Very underwhelming.


Which must be why the CFC oops, sorry The Imperium, used a Ferox doctrine before the buff?


who?


The Goons dude... if you dont know who they are... your actually pretty lucky lol


Lol...and those ppl are asking what is the purpose of a ferrox. I've seen a fleet of ferroxes couple days ago in Pure Blind.
Previous page123Next page