These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#481 - 2013-04-27 18:18:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsio III
If you think the Talos is a better 100 km sniper than the Naga, then you're madder than that notorious madman, Mad Jack McMad.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#482 - 2013-04-27 18:36:19 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
If you think the Talos is a better 100 km sniper than the Naga, then you're madder than that notorious madman, Mad Jack McMad.


Better damage potential and better tracking at 100km. I am saying exactly that because it is.
On top of that, it is also a faster ship, that can use a small flight of drones. So if a frig manages to point you, that flight of ECM drones can potentially save your butt..

Yes, the Talos is a better sniper unless you are sniping from 250 out which is still suicide with probers these days.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#483 - 2013-04-27 18:44:20 UTC
Hagika wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
If you think the Talos is a better 100 km sniper than the Naga, then you're madder than that notorious madman, Mad Jack McMad.


Better damage potential and better tracking at 100km. I am saying exactly that because it is.


Alright, post your fit, and I'll post a superior Naga. This should be entertaining.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#484 - 2013-04-27 18:51:43 UTC
The Talos is a great ship, but it's made for Blasters, not rails. Naga easily outclasses it as a sniper.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#485 - 2013-04-27 18:55:04 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Hagika wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
If you think the Talos is a better 100 km sniper than the Naga, then you're madder than that notorious madman, Mad Jack McMad.


Better damage potential and better tracking at 100km. I am saying exactly that because it is.


Alright, post your fit, and I'll post a superior Naga. This should be entertaining.


What fit needs to be posted. The Talos gets more low slots, has higher damage potential and a huge tracking bonus to which the naga does not.

So if you add all that up and then top it off with a flight of ECM for SHTF moments, then its a no brainer.

Alll you are doing is trying to justify an inferior ship when its obvious the Gallente version at 100km is superior. That is also including hitting smaller and faster targets that would be on the way to intercept you.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#486 - 2013-04-27 19:00:05 UTC
If it's that obvious, it should be easy for you to post fits. Come on, don't get all wobbly now... Blink
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#487 - 2013-04-27 19:00:38 UTC
Hagika wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
Hagika wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
If you think the Talos is a better 100 km sniper than the Naga, then you're madder than that notorious madman, Mad Jack McMad.


Better damage potential and better tracking at 100km. I am saying exactly that because it is.


Alright, post your fit, and I'll post a superior Naga. This should be entertaining.


What fit needs to be posted. The Talos gets more low slots, has higher damage potential and a huge tracking bonus to which the naga does not.

So if you add all that up and then top it off with a flight of ECM for SHTF moments, then its a no brainer.

Alll you are doing is trying to justify an inferior ship when its obvious the Gallente version at 100km is superior. That is also including hitting smaller and faster targets that would be on the way to intercept you.


I have no words to describe just how wrong you are Shocked
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#488 - 2013-04-27 19:22:37 UTC
Now back to our regular scheduled program of Caldari battleships.

The Raven could use a tank buff, not a nerf. Either add another launcher slot to compensate for dps. As it stands, the phoon with its new bonus will be applying more damage than the Raven and will have a superior tank as well.

For those who say wait for the Torp changes, what ever benefits the new torps give will benefit the ships evenly and the Phoon will still be better.

I would have no issue for dropping the Raven range bonus for a similar bonus or another launcher to add damage since it would not get a bonus like the phoons.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#489 - 2013-04-27 19:33:03 UTC
Nikuno wrote:
Hagika wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
Hagika wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
If you think the Talos is a better 100 km sniper than the Naga, then you're madder than that notorious madman, Mad Jack McMad.


Better damage potential and better tracking at 100km. I am saying exactly that because it is.


Alright, post your fit, and I'll post a superior Naga. This should be entertaining.


What fit needs to be posted. The Talos gets more low slots, has higher damage potential and a huge tracking bonus to which the naga does not.

So if you add all that up and then top it off with a flight of ECM for SHTF moments, then its a no brainer.

Alll you are doing is trying to justify an inferior ship when its obvious the Gallente version at 100km is superior. That is also including hitting smaller and faster targets that would be on the way to intercept you.


I have no words to describe just how wrong you are Shocked


So are you saying that a ship with higher dps,a huge tracking bonus, faster speed and drones for ECM use is worse than a ship that is slow,has a range bonus and low potential for damage?

Its rails guys, they are long range weapons. 100km is easy for either ship to obtain yet the gallente ship with better bonus and benefits is worse..

Funny, last time i checked, I see more talos used for close up and for range than the naga being used for range.

Words can not describe how ridiculously hard you are trying to make the naga seem better.

In which this is the battle ship forum.

Get back to battleships. Oh wait, you are the same couple who have been pushing against buffing them..
Closet minnie pilots are we?
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#490 - 2013-04-27 19:52:31 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Naomi Knight wrote:
It doesnt matter what he did with the extra bandwidth. Changes nothing then why do it? It actually changes ,it is another unneded nerf for caldari.

Honestly, raven will need a lot of nerf to compensate for the cruise missiles buff they just received. Not that it need for all the buff to be compensated, but it still end a LOT higher than it was.




Alot of nerf for a ship with a weak tank that just became weaker a loss of drone bandwith and when the Phoon gets a bonus to apply damage better while still maintaining the same number of launchers,smaller sig radius,more drone capability and a far better tank while applying similar dps?

What drugs are you on? Seriously....
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#491 - 2013-04-27 19:53:30 UTC
Hagika wrote:


So are you saying that a ship with higher dps,a huge tracking bonus, faster speed and drones for ECM use is worse than a ship that is slow,has a range bonus and low potential for damage?

Its rails guys, they are long range weapons. 100km is easy for either ship to obtain yet the gallente ship with better bonus and benefits is worse..

Funny, last time i checked, I see more talos used for close up and for range than the naga being used for range.

Words can not describe how ridiculously hard you are trying to make the naga seem better.

In which this is the battle ship forum.

Get back to battleships. Oh wait, you are the same couple who have been pushing against buffing them..
Closet minnie pilots are we?

Yeah the naga does more dps at 100km due to its optimal bonus, so they are right the naga is better at that range.
Not that it matters at all, the naga i so rare bird in caldari lineup , as it is very close to the other races ships both in dmg and speed ,not like the rest of the caldari ships.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#492 - 2013-04-27 20:06:31 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
Hagika wrote:


So are you saying that a ship with higher dps,a huge tracking bonus, faster speed and drones for ECM use is worse than a ship that is slow,has a range bonus and low potential for damage?

Its rails guys, they are long range weapons. 100km is easy for either ship to obtain yet the gallente ship with better bonus and benefits is worse..

Funny, last time i checked, I see more talos used for close up and for range than the naga being used for range.

Words can not describe how ridiculously hard you are trying to make the naga seem better.

In which this is the battle ship forum.

Get back to battleships. Oh wait, you are the same couple who have been pushing against buffing them..
Closet minnie pilots are we?

Yeah the naga does more dps at 100km due to its optimal bonus, so they are right the naga is better at that range.
Not that it matters at all, the naga i so rare bird in caldari lineup , as it is very close to the other races ships both in dmg and speed ,not like the rest of the caldari ships.


Cal navy lead putting the Naga just over 100 km range will maximize the dps for that range, add 3 mag stabs. You can do the same for the Talos, which puts you just under 100km, but you have room for 2 track enhancers to put on the lows. Even if you switched to a slight shorter range ammo for the naga to put it higher, you can compensate by doing the same for the talos, dropping a TE to add a 4th Mag and just put on a tracking computer for optimal.

In which the Naga will not meet the dps, and still lacks in all other categories that I mentioned.

Creativity is a pita. =)
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#493 - 2013-04-27 20:12:30 UTC
Hagika wrote:

Cal navy lead putting the Naga just over 100 km range will maximize the dps for that range, add 3 mag stabs. You can do the same for the Talos, which puts you just under 100km, but you have room for 2 track enhancers to put on the lows.


Ahaha not quite, CN Lead will give a Naga an optimal of 140 km... now try using the correct ammo for 100 km, Plutonium...
Kenshi Hanshin
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#494 - 2013-04-28 02:39:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenshi Hanshin
We are here to discuss the problems CCP Rise is causing to our BS not the BCs. Now people shall we stay on task?! If you kids can't manage that (you know who you are) then go form a new topic to discuss.

Regardless of the changes to CMLs, which sucked btw for PvP before, the Raven isn't being buffed. If it can't be sufficiently fitted with a tank than it doesn't matter. The glass cannons of the game are supposed to be the "Tier-3" BCs: Naga, Talos, Tornado & Oracle. Last I checked the Raven is not a BC...Raven needs a shield buff! Also stop giving Caldari ships stupidly large sig radius too. It adds insult to injury for our already ****** ships which you keep nerfing.

Oh and we want our old standard drake back...so then we have three (3) decent PvP ships. Against the freaking winmatar horde...kinda reminds me of the huns. Btw, that is not a compliment CCP Rise with regards to your work on Caldari Battleships. For that matter I also mean to include Amarr and to some extent Gallente Battleships as well. Thing I like about this "Odyssey" expansion are the new Faction BCs. That only cause it is about...time.

Hope you CCP guys had fun going pub-crawling over the weekend...please wait till your sober before working on the expansion. Smile
Parcheesie Sauce
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#495 - 2013-04-28 05:21:12 UTC
okay I kind of understand lowering the resists on the rokh since they are doing the same to the abbadon, but from prior experiences with the rokh it's cap was too pathetice to even use active shield hardeners while attempting to maintain any sort of active tank not to mention the rather weak dps it gets with rails....seems a little unfair not to give it something in exchange for the slightly lowered resists, and that raven; tiericide? whats going on with the overall ehp? and speed increase is definatly long due, but with only six launchers and a range bonus it's still fairly weak in dps with cruise missiles, especially compared to some of the other battleships. *xigh* "makin it real hard to wanna stay caldari"
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#496 - 2013-04-28 09:21:56 UTC
Hagika wrote:

Cal navy lead putting the Naga just over 100 km range will maximize the dps for that range, add 3 mag stabs. You can do the same for the Talos, which puts you just under 100km, but you have room for 2 track enhancers to put on the lows. Even if you switched to a slight shorter range ammo for the naga to put it higher, you can compensate by doing the same for the talos, dropping a TE to add a 4th Mag and just put on a tracking computer for optimal.

In which the Naga will not meet the dps, and still lacks in all other categories that I mentioned.

Show your fits. I'm fairly sure you can't do what you're claiming for two reasons - firstly, you're assuming no meaningful tank at all, so anything that gets to the ship will kill it. A few light ECM drones won't cover that lack. Secondly, the Talos doesn't have the CPU to do what you're claiming, and adding CPU mods eats up those slots you're claiming makes it superior.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#497 - 2013-04-28 09:24:11 UTC
Parcheesie Sauce wrote:
okay I kind of understand lowering the resists on the rokh since they are doing the same to the abbadon, but from prior experiences with the rokh it's cap was too pathetice to even use active shield hardeners while attempting to maintain any sort of active tank not to mention the rather weak dps it gets with rails....seems a little unfair not to give it something in exchange for the slightly lowered resists, and that raven; tiericide? whats going on with the overall ehp? and speed increase is definatly long due, but with only six launchers and a range bonus it's still fairly weak in dps with cruise missiles, especially compared to some of the other battleships. *xigh* "makin it real hard to wanna stay caldari"


I think balancing of shield battleships is being done with the assumption that we're fitting XLASBs to them all.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#498 - 2013-04-28 10:07:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsio III
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
I think balancing of shield battleships is being done with the assumption that we're fitting XLASBs to them all.


Yeah. With seven meds the Raven can get a credible active tank now:

[NEW Raven, Cruise]
Internal Force Field Array I
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Prototype 100MN Microwarpdrive I
Heavy Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 800
X-Large Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 400
Warp Disruptor II or Sensor Booster II, depending on what you're up to.
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron

NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Large Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I
Large Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer I

681 DPS,1095 DPS tank on full overload. But 1125 m/s. The problem is why would you use this when the Naga exists? The Naga does more damage at 100 km and without flight time, it's faster and has a much smaller sig - and can MWD without continually chewing boosters. The additional EHP and the 1100 DPS tank are nice, but I'm struggling to see gamespace that isn't crowded out by more mobile Typhoons with logi support, Nagas or Rokhs. What?

Hmm, take the shield tank and jam the mids full or TDs and RSDs, maybe?
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#499 - 2013-04-28 17:28:15 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
I think balancing of shield battleships is being done with the assumption that we're fitting XLASBs to them all.


Yeah. With seven meds the Raven can get a credible active tank now:

[NEW Raven, Cruise]
Internal Force Field Array I
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Prototype 100MN Microwarpdrive I
Heavy Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 800
X-Large Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 400
Warp Disruptor II or Sensor Booster II, depending on what you're up to.
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron

NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
NEW Cruise Missile Launcher II, NEW Caldari Navy Mjolnir Cruise Missile
Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Large Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I
Large Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer I

681 DPS,1095 DPS tank on full overload. But 1125 m/s. The problem is why would you use this when the Naga exists? The Naga does more damage at 100 km and without flight time, it's faster and has a much smaller sig - and can MWD without continually chewing boosters. The additional EHP and the 1100 DPS tank are nice, but I'm struggling to see gamespace that isn't crowded out by more mobile Typhoons with logi support, Nagas or Rokhs. What?

Hmm, take the shield tank and jam the mids full or TDs and RSDs, maybe?



This is why the raven needs another launcher slot.

As for the naga, it is a better sniper at 100km, though not much better. I still feel the talos is a better ship and would keep it as that roll too.

Caldari BS, well 2 of them have issues that need to be looked into. Raven is sub par in terms of combat. As you pointed out, its pretty sad when a Naga can do better dps at that range.
The new cruise buff is nice but not enough if the raven doesnt get another slot.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#500 - 2013-04-28 17:41:52 UTC
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Parcheesie Sauce wrote:
okay I kind of understand lowering the resists on the rokh since they are doing the same to the abbadon, but from prior experiences with the rokh it's cap was too pathetice to even use active shield hardeners while attempting to maintain any sort of active tank not to mention the rather weak dps it gets with rails....seems a little unfair not to give it something in exchange for the slightly lowered resists, and that raven; tiericide? whats going on with the overall ehp? and speed increase is definatly long due, but with only six launchers and a range bonus it's still fairly weak in dps with cruise missiles, especially compared to some of the other battleships. *xigh* "makin it real hard to wanna stay caldari"


I think balancing of shield battleships is being done with the assumption that we're fitting XLASBs to them all.


Which I really hope isnt the case, since I like to buffer fit mine. Even though the XLASB's are great, Missile bay loaded and then the charges on top of that, Either we sacrifice ammo for charges or vise versa..

Another trade off with caldari. It really gets old. The Rohk can manage it because hybrid ammo is small. Of course its getting a tank nerf now..