These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#621 - 2013-05-07 10:51:43 UTC
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
7 launchers + 25% Rof means 8.75 effective Launchers.. now lets have a look on the new Hyperion, which gets 9 effective turrets, at the fitting costs of 6...


No, 7/0.75 = 9.333r launchers.
Connall Tara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#622 - 2013-05-07 11:18:12 UTC
Quote:
Considering this, 8.75 launchers wouldn't be too much for the only combat-oriented missile boat on caldari site.. yet, the Raven remains at 7.5 effective launchers... don't know what to say.. If 1k DPS is too huge for a long range plattform using T2 Ammo (with 7 bonus'ed launchers with 4 Faction CN BCU's that is).. is a question I can't answer, that's up to the devs.



heh... yeah... no.

we can answer this quite easilly... allow me to get a run up to this...

*ahem*

HELL NO Big smile

think it through, 1000 dps is gank brutix firepower, the only ships who see this kind of punch are CLOSE RANGE BRAWLERS. the goal of the teirice is balance, can you imagine what chaos a 1000 dps gank ship can cause with more range than everyone else's snipers? O_o

the new raven will get 681 dps from 3 BCU's and navy cruise on all skills V'd for damage. its going to have a 10.5km/sec flight time from a raven. this is going to be a phenomenally dangerous and as far as dps goes unmatchable ship in the 60+km range with only attack battle-cruisers getting close to this kind of performance.

the flight time is going to stop being a massive hindrance and become the only thing keeping the raven in check as a whole. try it out, look at all the other battleships available and try to find something which does 800 dps out to 100km while maintaining a 120k EHP tank with a propmod and some pointing ability. Don't worry... i'll wait for you :D

no other ship except possibly the new typhoon will be able to pull off this kind of insanity and that's still not going to compare perfectly well.

look at the improved fitting numbers and the slot layout. the new typhoon has 7 lows, certainly but it has to share those lows with its ability to tank. the new raven has 5 lows... with nothing else to put in there but ballistic controls and a damage control unit :D

sure the typhoon has its drones to make up the difference but the raven's missiles will hit harder, a lot harder, while still maintaining a stiff selection of mid slots to buff its tank up to respectable levels, while also maintaining its speed better than the plated and Armour tanked typhoon. even when you consider torpedo fits, the raven can bring more raw missile damage to the party with less delay before missile impact and enough fitting to bring along a fairly beastly tank ND a target painter to make up the difference

battleship vs battleship? the raven strikes me as the clear victor here. 800+ dps from any range you like with a half way respectable flight time...

battleship vs cruisers and down? that's where the typhoon has its distinct advantage. its once again the caldari fleet boat vs the minmatar roamer. same thing we see comparing the drake to the cyclone.

why are we complaining? we're being handed the fist of god :D

Naomi Knight - "You must be CCP Rise alt , that would explain everything"
Zetak
State War Academy
Caldari State
#623 - 2013-05-07 11:18:58 UTC
Umm guys when you throwing effective weapons, count in the drones. hyperion has 125mbit, the phoon has 100mbit maelstrom has 100mbit, tempes has 75mbit. while the raven has 50mbit. I'm not saying i need more, I'm perfectly happy with my 5 med/5 light drone, just count in those too. it can be a pretty huge chunk of the damage you do, especially at close range pvp, or doing long range with sentries. my med drones does more than 200+ dps with two drone damage module
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#624 - 2013-05-07 11:24:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Josilin du Guesclin
Zetak wrote:

I understand that, but as i see it ccp wants players to be able to use more modules. lowering the max weapons does that in some way, and with more med/ low slots we might do exactly that. As you well know even one extra module can be a game changer. Meaning less weapon lets us fit more maybe because you will have the extra slot, maybe because you will have now the grid or cpu. Either way I believe it is a great thing all in all. with less, you can do more.

You just have to think about the marauders or the nightmare. they can fit in a style none ship can and that means plenty ewar wep, not compromising tank or cap.
Oh, sure, it's great for those ships, and I'm not against the Marauders having that bonus - that's for a specific type of ship (just as Stealth Bombers get special bonuses). What I'm not a fan of is specific ships within a class getting it when others don't. For example, the Hyperion has been given a huge bonus (as has the Drake, for the same reason) and has had its number of turrets reduced, and it profits greatly from it. But them we have the Rokh, the Apoc, and the Abaddon, each with eight slots and the massive fitting costs (and reduced numbers of mids and lows), which at this point in time feel like you're being punished for choosing them because they take so many slots to do what others do with 6-7 highs.

To put it another way - an eight weapon battleship is a 'low tech' solution - high costs, inflexible fitting. Doing the same with 6-7 weapons is 'high tech' - cheaper, easier to fit, and more flexible fitting choices.

For example, Odyssey lets you build a rail Hyperion with the same rail DPS and reach as a Rokh, similar EHP, more speed, lower sig, better agility, and you can afford a drone link augmenter so that your five heavies/sentries have that much more reach (whilst the Rokh has maybe five mediums). Reducing turret count and buffing the ship's skill bonus to compensate is too good.
Zetak
State War Academy
Caldari State
#625 - 2013-05-07 11:57:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Zetak
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Zetak wrote:

I understand that, but as i see it ccp wants players to be able to use more modules. lowering the max weapons does that in some way, and with more med/ low slots we might do exactly that. As you well know even one extra module can be a game changer. Meaning less weapon lets us fit more maybe because you will have the extra slot, maybe because you will have now the grid or cpu. Either way I believe it is a great thing all in all. with less, you can do more.

You just have to think about the marauders or the nightmare. they can fit in a style none ship can and that means plenty ewar wep, not compromising tank or cap.
Oh, sure, it's great for those ships, and I'm not against the Marauders having that bonus - that's for a specific type of ship (just as Stealth Bombers get special bonuses). What I'm not a fan of is specific ships within a class getting it when others don't. For example, the Hyperion has been given a huge bonus (as has the Drake, for the same reason) and has had its number of turrets reduced, and it profits greatly from it. But them we have the Rokh, the Apoc, and the Abaddon, each with eight slots and the massive fitting costs (and reduced numbers of mids and lows), which at this point in time feel like you're being punished for choosing them because they take so many slots to do what others do with 6-7 highs.

To put it another way - an eight weapon battleship is a 'low tech' solution - high costs, inflexible fitting. Doing the same with 6-7 weapons is 'high tech' - cheaper, easier to fit, and more flexible fitting choices.

For example, Odyssey lets you build a rail Hyperion with the same rail DPS and reach as a Rokh, similar EHP, more speed, lower sig, better agility, and you can afford a drone link augmenter so that your five heavies/sentries have that much more reach (whilst the Rokh has maybe five mediums). Reducing turret count and buffing the ship's skill bonus to compensate is too good.



I don't see a problem with that, because the said ships became better with that modification. If ccp would realize the benefit of the changes, meaning the added flexibility, and they would apply it to most ships, then the root problem of the ships would be fixed. Meaning it would tear down the role barrier most ships have. They would truly become attack and combat battleships. They could be fitted in numerous ways while retaining the key characteristics of the faction. those characteristics would be centered around chosen weapon platform tanking speed. not around key bonuses like optimal range the rokh has. it is too restricting.it forces the sniper role on it in pvp for instance.

Before you say with similar bonuses they become homogenized and blah blah blah, think about this: how much would a shield tanked rokh different from an armor tanked hyperion? well quite much, due to the modules they fit. I admit, i don't have much experience with hybrid weapon platforms, but i understand the basics and I think resourceful players would tweak the ship for their liking. and flexibility gives the freedom to use a ship to several very good roles. think about the good old domi. it has literally no restrictions and quite relaxed slot layout and how much role it was invented for it? a lot. did it lost the essence of what it is? no

think about that
Bi-Mi Lansatha
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#626 - 2013-05-07 12:16:30 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:

Yeah, the Raven's problems aren't ones of DPS, they're ones of survivability, mobility and the existence of ABCs. Throwing more DPS at it may make a lot of mission runners happy, but it won't solve the actual problems.
Exactly, I am a mission runner and more 'gank' makes my task a lot easier, as I have enough tank for rats (even with a CNR). But for PvP... six launchers and something tanker, smaller and quicker would seem to be the need.

PS. My actual preference would be to adjust the Raven so that it is primary a Torpedo Ship. Target painter bonuses and a significant increase to Torpedo Velocity. The seven mid slots allow a couple of target painters. I am not sure if it would be viable though.




Connall Tara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#627 - 2013-05-07 12:33:40 UTC
Zetak wrote:



I don't see a problem with that, because the said ships became better with that modification. If ccp would realize the benefit of the changes, meaning the added flexibility, and they would apply it to most ships, then the root problem of the ships would be fixed. Meaning it would tear down the role barrier most ships have. They would truly become attack and combat battleships. They could be fitted in numerous ways while retaining the key characteristics of the faction. those characteristics would be centered around chosen weapon platform tanking speed. not around key bonuses like optimal range the rokh has. it is too restricting.it forces the sniper role on it in pvp for instance.

Before you say with similar bonuses they become homogenized and blah blah blah, think about this: how much would a shield tanked rokh different from an armor tanked hyperion? well quite much, due to the modules they fit. I admit, i don't have much experience with hybrid weapon platforms, but i understand the basics and I think resourceful players would tweak the ship for their liking. and flexibility gives the freedom to use a ship to several very good roles. think about the good old domi. it has literally no restrictions and quite relaxed slot layout and how much role it was invented for it? a lot. did it lost the essence of what it is? no

think about that



well true, however i would dispute that the rokh is forced into a sniper role. while its bonuses at face value certainly lean it towards being a capable sniper the advantages of the optimal bonus in relation to blasters should never be discounted.

the rokh stands as a phenominally dangerous blaster platform at ranges would wouldn't suspect, with an easy 1000 dps from its weapons loaded with caldari navy antimatter and a wing of medium drones. the power of a blaster rokh however becomes apparent once you load null ammunition to a rokh, 19km optimal and 18km falloff on a 716 dps weapon platform, guns alone (3X magstab because hey... its a rokh) is an excellent advantage to consider. it doesn't have the raw punch of a megathron or hyperion, but a rokh can hit at ranges frankly absurd for a blaster platform, throw in a wing of hammerhead II's and you're getting nearly 900 dps out of it, that's nothing to dismiss.

of course the hyperion and megathron have more firepower and versitility than the rokh but in an engagement the rokh has to fly less distance to start applying its fairly significant firepower. the optimal bonus is as good as a damage bonus once you get beyond 10 kilometres after all ^^

Naomi Knight - "You must be CCP Rise alt , that would explain everything"
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#628 - 2013-05-07 12:46:04 UTC
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:

PS. My actual preference would be to adjust the Raven so that it is primary a Torpedo Ship. Target painter bonuses and a significant increase to Torpedo Velocity. The seven mid slots allow a couple of target painters. I am not sure if it would be viable though.

Well it gets that - the range bonus with torps and CMs is from a velocity bonus. The problem is that even with that a Raven only gets 30km from torps. If Torps were buffed by giving them +50% velocity (putting them back in line with rockets and HAMs) Ravens would have 45km range with Torps (and Typhoons 30km), and such a fit might well be worthwhile.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#629 - 2013-05-07 12:47:56 UTC
Connall Tara wrote:

the rokh stands as a phenominally dangerous blaster platform at ranges would wouldn't suspect, with an easy 1000 dps from its weapons loaded with caldari navy antimatter and a wing of medium drones. the power of a blaster rokh however becomes apparent once you load null ammunition to a rokh, 19km optimal and 18km falloff on a 716 dps weapon platform, guns alone (3X magstab because hey... its a rokh) is an excellent advantage to consider. it doesn't have the raw punch of a megathron or hyperion, but a rokh can hit at ranges frankly absurd for a blaster platform, throw in a wing of hammerhead II's and you're getting nearly 900 dps out of it, that's nothing to dismiss.

of course the hyperion and megathron have more firepower and versitility than the rokh but in an engagement the rokh has to fly less distance to start applying its fairly significant firepower. the optimal bonus is as good as a damage bonus once you get beyond 10 kilometres after all ^^

This is true, however the Rokh is pretty slow and clumsy, making closing difficult at times. They are awesome for gate/wormhole defence, though - the enemies start right on top of them.
Zetak
State War Academy
Caldari State
#630 - 2013-05-07 12:51:25 UTC
Connall Tara wrote:
Zetak wrote:



I don't see a problem with that, because the said ships became better with that modification. If ccp would realize the benefit of the changes, meaning the added flexibility, and they would apply it to most ships, then the root problem of the ships would be fixed. Meaning it would tear down the role barrier most ships have. They would truly become attack and combat battleships. They could be fitted in numerous ways while retaining the key characteristics of the faction. those characteristics would be centered around chosen weapon platform tanking speed. not around key bonuses like optimal range the rokh has. it is too restricting.it forces the sniper role on it in pvp for instance.

Before you say with similar bonuses they become homogenized and blah blah blah, think about this: how much would a shield tanked rokh different from an armor tanked hyperion? well quite much, due to the modules they fit. I admit, i don't have much experience with hybrid weapon platforms, but i understand the basics and I think resourceful players would tweak the ship for their liking. and flexibility gives the freedom to use a ship to several very good roles. think about the good old domi. it has literally no restrictions and quite relaxed slot layout and how much role it was invented for it? a lot. did it lost the essence of what it is? no

think about that



well true, however i would dispute that the rokh is forced into a sniper role. while its bonuses at face value certainly lean it towards being a capable sniper the advantages of the optimal bonus in relation to blasters should never be discounted.

the rokh stands as a phenominally dangerous blaster platform at ranges would wouldn't suspect, with an easy 1000 dps from its weapons loaded with caldari navy antimatter and a wing of medium drones. the power of a blaster rokh however becomes apparent once you load null ammunition to a rokh, 19km optimal and 18km falloff on a 716 dps weapon platform, guns alone (3X magstab because hey... its a rokh) is an excellent advantage to consider. it doesn't have the raw punch of a megathron or hyperion, but a rokh can hit at ranges frankly absurd for a blaster platform, throw in a wing of hammerhead II's and you're getting nearly 900 dps out of it, that's nothing to dismiss.

of course the hyperion and megathron have more firepower and versitility than the rokh but in an engagement the rokh has to fly less distance to start applying its fairly significant firepower. the optimal bonus is as good as a damage bonus once you get beyond 10 kilometres after all ^^


True and true. The merits of the optimal range bonus is undisputable. I would add though that you yourself said that now the mega and hyperion with the added flexibility can be retrofitted to match the rokh-s bonus. now wouldn't be better for your precious chosen ship to do the same, or even more? Remember, you would retain the same speed, tank and power of the ship, but become in a way more? The rokh will be always a great sniper due to its shield tanking, and the mega will be always a better blaster boat due to its armor tanking(more tackle+speed+cap capability).
Connall Tara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#631 - 2013-05-07 13:47:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Connall Tara
Zetak wrote:


True and true. The merits of the optimal range bonus is undisputable. I would add though that you yourself said that now the mega and hyperion with the added flexibility can be retrofitted to match the rokh-s bonus. now wouldn't be better for your precious chosen ship to do the same, or even more? Remember, you would retain the same speed, tank and power of the ship, but become in a way more? The rokh will be always a great sniper due to its shield tanking, and the mega will be always a better blaster boat due to its armor tanking(more tackle+speed+cap capability).


heh not quite, I said that they have better damage and more versatility, i never said they could match the rokhs bonus, might want to reread ^^

and what the rokh has over both the megathron and the hyperion is unmatchable combination of durability AND damage projection. the rokh is tougher than both the megathron and the hyperion, even with its reduced resist bonus; thanks to the inherant advantages of a shield tank. while both the mega and hyp CAN match the rokh in its range and firepower they must forfeit significantly more in order to achieve that. a rokh can hit out over 220km with spike on its bonus alone, the mega and hyp have to fit modules specifically for this purpose allowing the rokh to use its midslots for more ability to tank.

in turn, in a blaster role a megathron or hyperion would have to compromise significant amounts of firepower to match the rokhs ability to project its damage, hence why they are better suited for charging at the enemy and use webs to bring their opponents into combat in the face of their potent weaponry, something the rokh has significantly less issue with thanks to having a colossal edge in optimal range.

the ships are most certainly similar, but their purposes are quite a bit different, the rokh fights in the line of battle while the hyperion and megathron charge valiantly into the frey. the mega and hyperion forfeit range and durability for their better ability to face multiple targets, the rokh trades its versitility for being a specialised "ship of the line"

Naomi Knight - "You must be CCP Rise alt , that would explain everything"
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#632 - 2013-05-07 14:23:41 UTC
Connall Tara wrote:

in turn, in a blaster role a megathron or hyperion would have to compromise significant amounts of firepower to match the rokhs ability to project its damage, hence why they are better suited for charging at the enemy and use webs to bring their opponents into combat in the face of their potent weaponry, something the rokh has significantly less issue with thanks to having a colossal edge in optimal range.

Actually, it doesn't work like that because tracking computers use mid slots and boost range. A couple of those and a Hyp has the same DPS as range as a Rokh, and possibly more in close.
Quote:

the ships are most certainly similar, but their purposes are quite a bit different, the rokh fights in the line of battle while the hyperion and megathron charge valiantly into the frey. the mega and hyperion forfeit range and durability for their better ability to face multiple targets, the rokh trades its versitility for being a specialised "ship of the line"
'Ship of the line' is not normally used to mean 'sniper'. Also, much of this sniping ability is now obsolete because the modern scanning rules allow very rapid warp-ins in combat, so you don't snipe from much over 100km. Thus being able to snipe from the hard limit of grid range is useless. What matters is damage application at 80-120km, and a Hyperion with a Rokh-like tank can apply similar damage out there (and rather more inside drone range, which due to that utility high can mean 80km).

Oh, and the Hyp is smaller, more agile, faster, and has far longer cap-life. The Rokh won't even be able to fire its guns for more than a few minutes, while the Hyp is quite likely to be cap-stable.

In the current meta the Hyp out-Rokhs the Rokh (and the Typhoon out Ravens the Raven). Welcome to the Brave New World.
Airto TLA
Acorn's Wonder Bars
#633 - 2013-05-07 14:34:33 UTC
I have a general question at this point, I have not gotten to deep into this, but in some cases CCP is compressing down the high slot weapons (basically making 6 work like 8 for example), this means the ships in question in effect have more slots. But they have locked all battle ships to 19 slots (adjusted for Droneships).

So how are they correcting for this? Lets face if you let any race take their 8 gun ship, double up the guns then move two slots to other levels and keep two auxilery slots hi slots, most would be thrilled even if it ate one of their bonuses.

So I guess what I am saying does 19 realy equal 19, when 6 of your high slots are 33% better than mine?
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#634 - 2013-05-07 14:48:09 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Hagika wrote:
Yes but thats with the enemy ship standing still, while moving .... no.. the smaller sig battleships will not be hit for full damage even while standing still.


No, CN cruise will have an explosion radius of 247.5 m. No BS has a sig even close to that.


With fury bud.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#635 - 2013-05-07 15:07:39 UTC
Bi-Mi Lansatha wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:

Yeah, the Raven's problems aren't ones of DPS, they're ones of survivability, mobility and the existence of ABCs. Throwing more DPS at it may make a lot of mission runners happy, but it won't solve the actual problems.
Exactly, I am a mission runner and more 'gank' makes my task a lot easier, as I have enough tank for rats (even with a CNR). But for PvP... six launchers and something tanker, smaller and quicker would seem to be the need.

PS. My actual preference would be to adjust the Raven so that it is primary a Torpedo Ship. Target painter bonuses and a significant increase to Torpedo Velocity. The seven mid slots allow a couple of target painters. I am not sure if it would be viable though.







I wouldnt mind the Raven being a primary torpedo ship, but it needs to be able to apply the damage for them. Right now it hits like a wet paper napkin.
Supposedly we have a torp buff in the works but there has been no word, and no doubt it will be awhile from now because CCP has their hands full with the metric ton of crap they just put out.

So in order to make the Raven a torp boat, it needs to apply the damage drastically better.
As it sits, the phoon applies damage better with both weapons, so the Raven will need to be compensated with extra dps in order to make up for it.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#636 - 2013-05-07 15:22:03 UTC
Hagika wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
Hagika wrote:
Yes but thats with the enemy ship standing still, while moving .... no.. the smaller sig battleships will not be hit for full damage even while standing still.


No, CN cruise will have an explosion radius of 247.5 m. No BS has a sig even close to that.


With fury bud.


You need to stop expecting Fury to be the default ammo, to be used in all situations. This isn't how Void, Conflag or Hail are used, so I don't understand why you expect it of Fury. The role of all T2 high-damage ammo is to give an option for additional DPS against large or well-tackled targets. As such it's entirely appropriate that smaller attack BS do not receive full damage from Fury. Quote figures for CN instead.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#637 - 2013-05-07 15:25:36 UTC
7 launchers seems fair to me, given the Raven does not apply the damage well and has a very weak tank after changes.
Less tank should equal more gank.

Also get over the idea that T2 missiles should only be used for capital ships or Pos hitting. Every other race can use their T2 ammo on sub caps, so why make caldari be the exception? Thats is ridiculous. They only offer a little more damage over the faction ammo. Now if the damage increase was major, then I could see but its not and caldari should not have to be the exception just because CCP and their infinite wisdom Roll Decided to make a bastard child out of them.
Connall Tara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#638 - 2013-05-07 15:36:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Connall Tara
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Connall Tara wrote:

in turn, in a blaster role a megathron or hyperion would have to compromise significant amounts of firepower to match the rokhs ability to project its damage, hence why they are better suited for charging at the enemy and use webs to bring their opponents into combat in the face of their potent weaponry, something the rokh has significantly less issue with thanks to having a colossal edge in optimal range.

Actually, it doesn't work like that because tracking computers use mid slots and boost range. A couple of those and a Hyp has the same DPS as range as a Rokh, and possibly more in close.
Quote:

the ships are most certainly similar, but their purposes are quite a bit different, the rokh fights in the line of battle while the hyperion and megathron charge valiantly into the frey. the mega and hyperion forfeit range and durability for their better ability to face multiple targets, the rokh trades its versitility for being a specialised "ship of the line"
'Ship of the line' is not normally used to mean 'sniper'. Also, much of this sniping ability is now obsolete because the modern scanning rules allow very rapid warp-ins in combat, so you don't snipe from much over 100km. Thus being able to snipe from the hard limit of grid range is useless. What matters is damage application at 80-120km, and a Hyperion with a Rokh-like tank can apply similar damage out there (and rather more inside drone range, which due to that utility high can mean 80km).

Oh, and the Hyp is smaller, more agile, faster, and has far longer cap-life. The Rokh won't even be able to fire its guns for more than a few minutes, while the Hyp is quite likely to be cap-stable.

In the current meta the Hyp out-Rokhs the Rokh (and the Typhoon out Ravens the Raven). Welcome to the Brave New World.



but are you sure on that? or making assumptions? i recommend actually checking, the rokh, even compared to a dual tracking computer hyperion, still outranges its gallente counter part with nought but its bonus alone. in addition to that, the rokh needs not share its tanking slots with its damage slots, so even if the hyperion brings enough tank to match the rokh (which, it should be stated requires 2 1600mm plates, a damage control and at least 2 enams on top of armour rigging) and brings, as you say twin tracking computers, the rokh STILL out preforms the hyperion at these ranges as its 50% bonus to raw optimal is superior to the effect of twin tracking computers with optimal range scripts by a significant degree, the the point that a rokh can hit targets effectively with caldari navy antimatter within optimal all the way out to 62 kilometres the hyperion with dual tracking computers can only reach 47 kilometres, 15 kilometres is a fairly big difference wouldn't you agree?

and in turn, lets consider the changes to the hyperion, yes it has recieved the much loved 10% damage and 6 turret fix, but unlike the other vessels which have received this bonus the hyperion has infact lost firepower from its guns, not gained with this change.

at the present moment the hyperion has a 5% hybrid damage bonus and 8 turrets meaning it effectively fights with 10 turrets, after these changes it will be fighting with an effective 9 turrets. this has of course been compensated for elsewhere, with the addition of the much vaunted 125m3 drone bandwidth allowing the hyperion to fly a full wing of heavy drones. the application of these drones in combat however, is questionable. if we are indeed only considering the 80-120km mark the effect of a wing of ogre II's would be problematic at best considering the extreme distance such drones would have to fly at a MWD speed of 1 kilometre/second.

alternatively of course we could point to sentry drones but now we have other issues, in order to properly employ sentry drones at the suggested ranges you require mid slots to effectively extend their range, which you have said are used for tracking computers to allow the railguns to hit out further. bouncer drones are the closest sentry drone for this purpose but even they would be suffering from attacking within fall off range at the proposed ranges

this is the point i'm trying to make, the hyperion can most certainly outrange, out damage or out tank a rokh. but NEVER all of them at once, not without resorting to faction or even deadspace modules to compensate.

the rokh can outrange, out tank and out dps a hyperion with a standard fit, railgun to railgun with 3 magnetic stabilisers and a tracking enhancer in its lows, its mids can be brought up to a powerful 136k EHP with 2 LSE's, 2 invulns, a damage control and shield rigging. the hyperion requires at least 1 addition slot to achieve this which, even with 7 lows, means that it has to compromise a magstab for simmilar effect.

the rokh is not at threat from the hyperion as a sniping platform and i will attest still combined the best balance of durability and damage projection available for a hybrid weapons pilot. other ships can exceed it in some areas, but in all three? it stands strong ^_^

Naomi Knight - "You must be CCP Rise alt , that would explain everything"
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#639 - 2013-05-07 19:13:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Hagika
Connall Tara wrote:
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Connall Tara wrote:

in turn, in a blaster role a megathron or hyperion would have to compromise significant amounts of firepower to match the rokhs ability to project its damage, hence why they are better suited for charging at the enemy and use webs to bring their opponents into combat in the face of their potent weaponry, something the rokh has significantly less issue with thanks to having a colossal edge in optimal range.

Actually, it doesn't work like that because tracking computers use mid slots and boost range. A couple of those and a Hyp has the same DPS as range as a Rokh, and possibly more in close.
Quote:

the ships are most certainly similar, but their purposes are quite a bit different, the rokh fights in the line of battle while the hyperion and megathron charge valiantly into the frey. the mega and hyperion forfeit range and durability for their better ability to face multiple targets, the rokh trades its versitility for being a specialised "ship of the line"
'Ship of the line' is not normally used to mean 'sniper'. Also, much of this sniping ability is now obsolete because the modern scanning rules allow very rapid warp-ins in combat, so you don't snipe from much over 100km. Thus being able to snipe from the hard limit of grid range is useless. What matters is damage application at 80-120km, and a Hyperion with a Rokh-like tank can apply similar damage out there (and rather more inside drone range, which due to that utility high can mean 80km).

Oh, and the Hyp is smaller, more agile, faster, and has far longer cap-life. The Rokh won't even be able to fire its guns for more than a few minutes, while the Hyp is quite likely to be cap-stable.

In the current meta the Hyp out-Rokhs the Rokh (and the Typhoon out Ravens the Raven). Welcome to the Brave New World.



but are you sure on that? or making assumptions? i recommend actually checking, the rokh, even compared to a dual tracking computer hyperion, still outranges its gallente counter part with nought but its bonus alone. in addition to that, the rokh needs not share its tanking slots with its damage slots, so even if the hyperion brings enough tank to match the rokh (which, it should be stated requires 2 1600mm plates, a damage control and at least 2 enams on top of armour rigging) and brings, as you say twin tracking computers, the rokh STILL out preforms the hyperion at these ranges as its 50% bonus to raw optimal is superior to the effect of twin tracking computers with optimal range scripts by a significant degree, the the point that a rokh can hit targets effectively with caldari navy antimatter within optimal all the way out to 62 kilometres the hyperion with dual tracking computers can only reach 47 kilometres, 15 kilometres is a fairly big difference wouldn't you agree?

and in turn, lets consider the changes to the hyperion, yes it has recieved the much loved 10% damage and 6 turret fix, but unlike the other vessels which have received this bonus the hyperion has infact lost firepower from its guns, not gained with this change.

at the present moment the hyperion has a 5% hybrid damage bonus and 8 turrets meaning it effectively fights with 10 turrets, after these changes it will be fighting with an effective 9 turrets. this has of course been compensated for elsewhere, with the addition of the much vaunted 125m3 drone bandwidth allowing the hyperion to fly a full wing of heavy drones. the application of these drones in combat however, is questionable. if we are indeed only considering the 80-120km mark the effect of a wing of ogre II's would be problematic at best considering the extreme distance such drones would have to fly at a MWD speed of 1 kilometre/second.

alternatively of course we could point to sentry drones but now we have other issues, in order to properly employ sentry drones at the suggested ranges you require mid slots to effectively extend their range, which you have said are used for tracking computers to allow the railguns to hit out further. bouncer drones are the closest sentry drone for this purpose but even they would be suffering from attacking within fall off range at the proposed ranges

this is the point i'm trying to make, the hyperion can most certainly outrange, out damage or out tank a rokh. but NEVER all of them at once, not without resorting to faction or even deadspace modules to compensate.

the rokh can outrange, out tank and out dps a hyperion with a standard fit, railgun to railgun with 3 magnetic stabilisers and a tracking enhancer in its lows, its mids can be brought up to a powerful 136k EHP with 2 LSE's, 2 invulns, a damage control and shield rigging. the hyperion requires at least 1 addition slot to achieve this which, even with 7 lows, means that it has to compromise a magstab for simmilar effect.

the rokh is not at threat from the hyperion as a sniping platform and i will attest still combined the best balance of durability and damage projection available for a hybrid weapons pilot. other ships can exceed it in some areas, but in all three? it stands strong ^_^


Let us not forget that sniping in eve is almost a lost cause considering a prober can point you down within seconds and they would be right on top of you. Everyone and their mother has a prober or carrying a probe launcher with them these days.

So sitting 150km or more out will usually end in death. So from 130km and below is really the only safe bet and a Hype/Mega can shell out easily to those ranges with substantial fire power.

Until probing time is severely nerfed, then this whole range bonus and talks of sniping in a BS is suicide at this point. Once that range is gone, the Rokh becomes a kill mail.
Jill Antaris
Jill's Open Incursion Corp
#640 - 2013-05-07 21:34:52 UTC
Even at lower ranges you can use the higher optimal bonus to use more powerful ammunition at the same range with the rokh than with the Hyperion and sentry drones are not all this helpful if you need to move around the grid a bit. One thing most people actually overlook is the lock range of the hype, what costs the hype 1-2 additional slots compared to the rokh at 100km+ ranges.

Gallente vs Caldari rail performance is much more a problem with the design of rails, that unfortunately didn't get addressed in the hybrid changes a while back. If rails had less range and caldari higher optimal bonuses the lack of the optimal bonus would result into more different performance at 100-120km engagements. On the flip side, with higher tacking and a bit more dps, gallente would be able to perform very good at medium range(20-80km), while staying mobile. It would also help medium rails quite a bit, where the biggest issue is tracking in a kitting setup(something frigs solve by using rails in web range) outside super long range sniping.

As Gypsio put it, the raven will be more likely the better fleet ship, by her bonus and the better tank the phoon the better solo/small gang platform, since it basically can fit all the tackle to deal good torp dps and would be a better nano CM ship. I would still wait for the torp changes to come, since they might have a significant impact on the hull. I hope something like a nano torp raven could slightly outdo CM performance at medium ranges against mwding and single painted targets.