These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#1181 - 2013-05-21 19:57:27 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Johnson Oramara wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
The only reason you aren't seeing everyone hating on the new CNR is because you have your eyes closed.

-Liang


So testing it on SiSi is eyes closed. That's rich, you're just starting to get butt hurt because you imagine CCP taking one of your toys away.

The CNR is fine, get over it.

If you are fine with both the proposed CNR and possible slightly altered version as you said, then why are you still here?
You are fine with the current proposed CNR in your own limited usage scenario and like it, everyone already got this many pages ago.

However, your opinion is not our opinion and many of us in fact agree that it could still use some work. As it stands, it's even cpu starved.


I'm still here because i want CCP to know some of us like what they are doing and that we won't be drowned out by people who seem to want overpowered ships. So while i'd have no qualms using the new curse buffed +RoF + explosion radius CNR monster, I don't think it's right for the CNR or the game. I like the new Navy Drake and Navy Raven idea (even if they do present me the problem of not having that utility spot for a cloak which is very helpful in null sec).

Some of you act like CCP is committing a crime against humanity, and as long as you keep riding that train, I'll keep riding the "nope, CNR is fine by me" train. Because it is fine.

Try making REASONABLE counter proposals to CCP and you'll have my support (for what it's worth).

I have made my own suggestions before, you are the one who lacks the reading ability. Or simply choose to ignore them while screaming your *OPOPOPOP" on everything.

It is hard to take you seriously anymore.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#1182 - 2013-05-21 19:57:27 UTC
For me the basic issue is that whilst the CNR has very good application - it's just not at the races in the overall DPS stakes.

100% of not a lot is inferior to 75% of a stupidly high amount.

I think, with some of my current implants, a TFI can reach around about 1700dps AND with pretty decent application - the CNR is just never going to compete with that.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#1183 - 2013-05-21 19:58:48 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

lemme guess, you put torps on it....

But I'm sorry, no, it's not crap, it' works fine and I prefer it to the Floon because of it's mid slots and much more useful bonuses (not even 50 km for the Floon and you're counting salvos again, which sucks).

Time and the odyssey market will tell, but you're just overreacting.


I love how when we talk about cruise you guys are all "But it'll be awesome with Torps!". And then when we talk about Cruise you guys are like "But it'll be awesome with Cruise!". The truth is that it's awesome with neither. The ship is completely obsolete by other faction and T1 battleships, regardless of whether you want to fit torps or cruise.

The ship needs rethink.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#1184 - 2013-05-21 20:04:22 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

No mention of the speed increase and sig radius decrease. See, your focusing on what you want to see, AND the CNR gives an extra mid to recover EHP...while being "smaller" and faster.
And yet no mention of the fact that it gets the equivilent fo a free rigor rig and BS5, which pushes it above with any other missile chucking BS has as a hull bonus (those flare like bonuses of the Golem and Floon just aren't as good).

That last part is just flat out wrong with regards to to Scorp navy and the regular Typhoon for highest end PVE you can't make those ships do with a CNR can do, and the Floon and Golem won't do certain things as well. For PVP you may have a point but you pvp types can hash that out.

I don't fly crap ships but this sucker i've been flying on SiSi this weekend is aces compared to the CNR i've been pushing around for 5 years.. It only seems to suck for you because it doesn't do quite what the old one does with torps i guess. Change is sometimes hard to accept, but I really don't see CCP going back on this (in the same way they aren't going back in the Navy Drake).


I agree that the new CNR is smaller and faster than the old one, unfortunately that's not really a niche we can do a lot with. It's still outright inferior to the Typhoon and Typhoon Fleet in those areas - on top of being inferior in EHP, damage, damage application, rate of fire, drone damage, utility high slots, and more. Yeah - tell me more about how you won't be able to do these sites with the smaller, faster, and more damaging typhoon family. Roll

Honestly, the only reason you're saying the CNR is better than the one you've been flying for five years is because cruise is better than it's been for five years. But cruise isn't just better for the CNR - it's better for everything. The new CNR simply does not have a role.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Jason Sirober
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1185 - 2013-05-21 21:05:57 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

No mention of the speed increase and sig radius decrease. See, your focusing on what you want to see, AND the CNR gives an extra mid to recover EHP...while being "smaller" and faster.
And yet no mention of the fact that it gets the equivilent fo a free rigor rig and BS5, which pushes it above with any other missile chucking BS has as a hull bonus (those flare like bonuses of the Golem and Floon just aren't as good).

That last part is just flat out wrong with regards to to Scorp navy and the regular Typhoon for highest end PVE you can't make those ships do with a CNR can do, and the Floon and Golem won't do certain things as well. For PVP you may have a point but you pvp types can hash that out.

I don't fly crap ships but this sucker i've been flying on SiSi this weekend is aces compared to the CNR i've been pushing around for 5 years.. It only seems to suck for you because it doesn't do quite what the old one does with torps i guess. Change is sometimes hard to accept, but I really don't see CCP going back on this (in the same way they aren't going back in the Navy Drake).


I agree that the new CNR is smaller and faster than the old one, unfortunately that's not really a niche we can do a lot with. It's still outright inferior to the Typhoon and Typhoon Fleet in those areas - on top of being inferior in EHP, damage, damage application, rate of fire, drone damage, utility high slots, and more. Yeah - tell me more about how you won't be able to do these sites with the smaller, faster, and more damaging typhoon family. Roll

Honestly, the only reason you're saying the CNR is better than the one you've been flying for five years is because cruise is better than it's been for five years. But cruise isn't just better for the CNR - it's better for everything. The new CNR simply does not have a role.

-Liang


Sounds to me like you would like CCP to nerf the Minmitar ships Shocked
Lugalzagezi666
#1186 - 2013-05-21 21:11:31 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
The new CNR simply does not have a role.

Oh, of course it has a role, here you go :
Malcanis wrote:
CNR is going to be the "easymode" ship, where the pilot has to make the least effort and needs the fewest SP to apply this DPS


Once pilot learns "function key control" to at least level 3 (ability to control 4 F keys at once), he will do better in golem. Sadly caldari ship designers, because of focusing on user friendly design for carebears and noobs, dont provide us with any viable ship, "where piloting skill and fitting ability will count" (aka hardmode ship). So pilots who have "function key control" trained to l5 (ability to control 5+ F keys) have to look for such ship in winmatar bs lineup.

Thats how it goes in the universe, noob race gets noob friendly ships, master race gets hardmode ships tailored for hardcore capsuleers.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#1187 - 2013-05-21 21:38:23 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
We've seen it with the change to the Domi (making it a super sentry boat) and Armageddon (turing it into The amarrians own Domi like pocket carrier) and omg the complaining is epic.

Well there weren't a lot of complaints in amarr thread about GedDomi drone bonus, but about his second bonus there were some.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#1188 - 2013-05-21 21:52:23 UTC
Jason Sirober wrote:
Sounds to me like you would like CCP to nerf the Minmitar ships Shocked


Nah, I'd say that the Fleet Typhoon is far too powerful and needs scaled back to a 5/5 layout. The Fleet Pest and CNR changes are not very good and should be rethought. The Typhoon is fine, I think, but will be a better cruise platform than the Raven.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#1189 - 2013-05-21 22:11:26 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:


So no, there arent any viable reasons to use cnr over golem and give up isk/h increase that 3 utility highs provide through salvaging and looting, while not lowering your killspeed at all.


OMG someone go to iceland and assassinate CCP because a TECH TWO SPECIALIZED PVE SHIP is better at some aspect of PVE than a navy battleship!

I mean, how dare they follow their own design plan! That's why everyone was flying Fleet Tempests instead of Vargurs, right?

Raven (T1) -> Navy Raven(T1.5)-> Golem(T2) is a natural and proper progression.

Raven -> Navy Raven OR Golem isn't.

(although the CNR is still better in some hihgh end PVE sites, but still, what ccp is doing it good).



You fail to mention the fact that the Matar Fleet Phoon makes the T2 Vagur look bad...Hey only caldari navy ships must be less effective than the T2 variant right?
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#1190 - 2013-05-21 22:14:20 UTC
drake duka wrote:
Hagika wrote:
EXIA MIKOSZ wrote:
Well Im using My CNR only in PVE and currently with this setup:

[Raven Navy Issue, RAVEN]
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Signal Amplifier II

Pithum A-Type Medium Shield Booster
Pith A-Type Shield Boost Amplifier
Pith A-Type Kinetic Deflection Field
Pith A-Type Thermic Dissipation Field
Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Core A-Type 100MN Afterburner

Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Auto Targeting System II

Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II
Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II
Large Warhead Flare Catalyst I

Hobgoblin I x5

DPS: 916
Volley: 5873
Sig. Radius: 235 m fury
ROF: 6,41 sec

after Patch and new changes to CNR,rate of fire of lunchers and cruise missiles i shouls have:

[Raven Navy Issue, RAVEN]
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Signal Amplifier II

Pithum A-Type Medium Shield Booster
Pith A-Type Shield Boost Amplifier
Pith A-Type Kinetic Deflection Field
Pith A-Type Thermic Dissipation Field
Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Core A-Type 100MN Afterburner
FREE SLOT ( i will decide after patch what i can still put here) but with ease i can put more tank or Cap Recharger II

Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile

Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II
Large Bay Loading Accelerator I

Hobgoblin I x5

DPS: 1228,25
Volley: 8389,6
Sig radious: 246,75m fury
ROF: 6,83 s


In the End im loosing 15% explosion velocity Bonus from Rig and almost 12m sig radious from changes
Thats Nothing with that amount of boosted DPS



Life doesnt revolve around just PVE. Also you are using Furies and damage application on this is drastically worse.
It irks me that a carebear pops on and says.. Hey look everything is fine !

Basing ships around your play style ruins mine.


You do have a point about CNR getting shafted. IMO it makes a great torp boat but the only problem is torps will be irrelevant considering how hard cruises are getting buffed. If torps also got a redesign to reflect their limited use in PvP, then the cnr would be a great ship.. It could still have some niche roles in PvP as it is but you're right the fleet phoon makes a better cruise platform.

The fact that it can use furies where other cruise boats need faction could prove useful, and the exp radius bonus will help nullify the damage application penalties. Also, the 125 drone bw for the phoon isn't that practical at cruise ranges though it does help and adds versatility for sure. While damage may be more useful for cruises, velocity is more important than just range. Also, doing 900 dps at 200+ (with rigs ofc) would be quite interesting. It has the ability to use furies at rokh ranges which is quite scary.


What ever buff they do to missiles, buffs the phoons as well. So regardless of the changes to them, the Ravens will be lacking compared to them.
Not only did CCP screw the CNR, they also screwed the T1 Raven and of course made the standard phoon better than it as well.. Imagine that.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#1191 - 2013-05-21 22:25:22 UTC
Jason Sirober wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

No mention of the speed increase and sig radius decrease. See, your focusing on what you want to see, AND the CNR gives an extra mid to recover EHP...while being "smaller" and faster.
And yet no mention of the fact that it gets the equivilent fo a free rigor rig and BS5, which pushes it above with any other missile chucking BS has as a hull bonus (those flare like bonuses of the Golem and Floon just aren't as good).

That last part is just flat out wrong with regards to to Scorp navy and the regular Typhoon for highest end PVE you can't make those ships do with a CNR can do, and the Floon and Golem won't do certain things as well. For PVP you may have a point but you pvp types can hash that out.

I don't fly crap ships but this sucker i've been flying on SiSi this weekend is aces compared to the CNR i've been pushing around for 5 years.. It only seems to suck for you because it doesn't do quite what the old one does with torps i guess. Change is sometimes hard to accept, but I really don't see CCP going back on this (in the same way they aren't going back in the Navy Drake).


I agree that the new CNR is smaller and faster than the old one, unfortunately that's not really a niche we can do a lot with. It's still outright inferior to the Typhoon and Typhoon Fleet in those areas - on top of being inferior in EHP, damage, damage application, rate of fire, drone damage, utility high slots, and more. Yeah - tell me more about how you won't be able to do these sites with the smaller, faster, and more damaging typhoon family. Roll

Honestly, the only reason you're saying the CNR is better than the one you've been flying for five years is because cruise is better than it's been for five years. But cruise isn't just better for the CNR - it's better for everything. The new CNR simply does not have a role.

-Liang


Sounds to me like you would like CCP to nerf the Minmitar ships Shocked



Considering how much dps the Phoon fleet is capable of dishing out and far more than the CNR while having the ability to apply the damage, yes it needs to be nerfed. People are already calling it over powered and are raving about how they are going to fly the ship and aside from 2 people on here, both being carebears, they are the only ones who are saying its great while the math and game say other wise. Then you have Mal hoping on here posting how its great but its not allowed to put out 1000 dps at 100km, yet the minnie ships are.

The math has been done, the Minnie ships are superior to their T2 BS variant and caldari pilots are told their is not allowed to be.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#1192 - 2013-05-21 22:31:52 UTC
TehCloud wrote:
I still haven't heard a decent explanation why the new CNR should be bad. Additional Slots and more damage, even on moving targets.
Rage Torps actually hitting subcaps, Cruise Missiles getting buffed.

I'd really like to know why there is all that crying over the new CNR.


Rage torps can hit a cruiser, the damage is pure suck.

Rage torps can be used against a BS, but faction torps do more damage...

The CNR took a dps nerf and it can hit slightly better but the added bonus does not nearly make up for the DPS loss.

All the while CCP says hey.. We are making the Phoon and fleet phoon superior in every way but range.

Their justification? The navy ships are supposed to be weaker than the T2 BS and you all cant have 1000 dps over 100km..

Yet the Fleet phoon does well over that and their navy ships beat their T2 BS..

Biased much?
TehCloud
Guardians of the Dodixie
#1193 - 2013-05-21 23:22:53 UTC  |  Edited by: TehCloud
Hagika wrote:

Rage torps can hit a cruiser, the damage is pure suck.

Guess what the new bonus on the CNR is for?
Hagika wrote:

Rage torps can be used against a BS, but faction torps do more damage...

I'm calling bullsh!t on this one
Hagika wrote:

The CNR took a dps nerf and it can hit slightly better but the added bonus does not nearly make up for the DPS loss.

I'm calling bullsh!t on this one aswell, reasons: The CNR got its stats turned down a bit because of the new CM Buffs and the additional medslot it got. The theoretical DPS in EFT went down but what you actually apply in game went up, except with torps against structures and capitals, other than those 2 aspects, dps went up.
Hagika wrote:

All the while CCP says hey.. We are making the Phoon and fleet phoon superior in every way but range.
Their justification? The navy ships are supposed to be weaker than the T2 BS and you all cant have 1000 dps over 100km..

Yet the Fleet phoon does well over that and their navy ships beat their T2 BS.


Fleet Phoons gets an extreme buff, that is correct. But just because it is better in some areas doesn't mean the CNR got nerfed.

Feels like talking to a rogue in vanilla wow, "rogues got nerfed because they buffed warlocks"

My Condor costs less than that module!
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#1194 - 2013-05-21 23:37:21 UTC
TehCloud wrote:
...


Just in case you missed it the first time:
Liang Nuren wrote:

You know, there's been like 20 pages devoted to this topic. But no, it's cool, we'll spell it out for you again:
- Less EHP which you have to spend a mid slot getting back
- Less raw DPS with Torps that the damage application bonus doesn't make up for.
- Equivalent Cruise DPS, only because of the cruise missile buff
- The cruise missile buff applies to everyone, so other ships T1 and faction come out of the cruise missle buff even better than the CNR
- No utility high slot

The new CNR is significantly worse than the Typhoon Fleet and Golem and usually worse than the T1 Typhoon and and Scorp Navy. It is a ship without a role or use case. It is garbage.


And no, the explo radius does not in fact outweigh the loss of raw damage and it takes some pretty absurd situations (like AB cruisers) before it starts to even out.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1195 - 2013-05-22 02:26:31 UTC
Hagika wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:


So no, there arent any viable reasons to use cnr over golem and give up isk/h increase that 3 utility highs provide through salvaging and looting, while not lowering your killspeed at all.


OMG someone go to iceland and assassinate CCP because a TECH TWO SPECIALIZED PVE SHIP is better at some aspect of PVE than a navy battleship!

I mean, how dare they follow their own design plan! That's why everyone was flying Fleet Tempests instead of Vargurs, right?

Raven (T1) -> Navy Raven(T1.5)-> Golem(T2) is a natural and proper progression.

Raven -> Navy Raven OR Golem isn't.

(although the CNR is still better in some hihgh end PVE sites, but still, what ccp is doing it good).



You fail to mention the fact that the Matar Fleet Phoon makes the T2 Vagur look bad...Hey only caldari navy ships must be less effective than the T2 variant right?


nope, all of them should, which is why (if the floon is OP, and I think it is) it should be brought into line. How about speaking for yourself intead of trying to put words into my mouth?

The CNR is fine, the Floon is quite possibly op, and it's funny (and shameful) to see some posters askign for the CNR to be op just because the new floon is ridicules.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1196 - 2013-05-22 02:32:13 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

lemme guess, you put torps on it....

But I'm sorry, no, it's not crap, it' works fine and I prefer it to the Floon because of it's mid slots and much more useful bonuses (not even 50 km for the Floon and you're counting salvos again, which sucks).

Time and the odyssey market will tell, but you're just overreacting.


I love how when we talk about cruise you guys are all "But it'll be awesome with Torps!". And then when we talk about Cruise you guys are like "But it'll be awesome with Cruise!". The truth is that it's awesome with neither. The ship is completely obsolete by other faction and T1 battleships, regardless of whether you want to fit torps or cruise.

The ship needs rethink.

-Liang


Seriously, i'd have thought you were better than that, before now I had a great deal of respect for your knowledge of the game.

I'm an individual Liang and you know that, yet you so little confidence in what your saying you have to lump me with others and pretend that words aren't even mine somehow apply to me? When, exactly, did i say anything concerning torps being awesome for the new CNR?

Bloody incredible.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1197 - 2013-05-22 02:37:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Liang Nuren wrote:

I agree that the new CNR is smaller and faster than the old one, unfortunately that's not really a niche we I can do a lot with.


fixed

Quote:
It's still outright inferior to the Typhoon and Typhoon Fleet in those areas - on top of being inferior in EHP, damage, damage application, rate of fire, drone damage, utility high slots, and more. Yeah - tell me more about how you won't be able to do these sites with the smaller, faster, and more damaging typhoon family. Roll

Honestly, the only reason you're saying the CNR is better than the one you've been flying for five years is because cruise is better than it's been for five years. But cruise isn't just better for the CNR - it's better for everything. The new CNR simply does not have a role.

-Liang


#1 you cannot seperate the Ship from it's primary weapon any more than you can sperate a Nightmare from Tachyons (apologies to you Pulsemare wackos).

#2, no, a typhoon hull can't do some of the things a CNR can do because you need a serious shiled tank to do it

#3. as has been pointed out, you're looking in the wrong direction, the Phoons might need looking at, the CNR is imo (and apprently in CCPs opinion so far) perfectly ok.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#1198 - 2013-05-22 02:56:50 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Hagika wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Lugalzagezi666 wrote:


So no, there arent any viable reasons to use cnr over golem and give up isk/h increase that 3 utility highs provide through salvaging and looting, while not lowering your killspeed at all.


OMG someone go to iceland and assassinate CCP because a TECH TWO SPECIALIZED PVE SHIP is better at some aspect of PVE than a navy battleship!

I mean, how dare they follow their own design plan! That's why everyone was flying Fleet Tempests instead of Vargurs, right?

Raven (T1) -> Navy Raven(T1.5)-> Golem(T2) is a natural and proper progression.

Raven -> Navy Raven OR Golem isn't.

(although the CNR is still better in some hihgh end PVE sites, but still, what ccp is doing it good).



You fail to mention the fact that the Matar Fleet Phoon makes the T2 Vagur look bad...Hey only caldari navy ships must be less effective than the T2 variant right?


nope, all of them should, which is why (if the floon is OP, and I think it is) it should be brought into line. How about speaking for yourself intead of trying to put words into my mouth?

The CNR is fine, the Floon is quite possibly op, and it's funny (and shameful) to see some posters askign for the CNR to be op just because the new floon is ridicules.



So you finally admit that it is and this whole time we have been screaming how underpowered the CNR is in comparison..
How existential.

Now it was already pointed out that the CNR lost dps and is slightly over the T1 Raven which by the way puts it into T1 Phoon range which Liang has already pointed out.. So we spend almost 500 million isk for a ship marginally better than the standard raven and this is supposed to be a navy ship..

So that is fine in your eyes? Well now isnt that just dandy..We get a navy ship that has less tank, less dps, less applied dps all because a few devs want to keep their minnie golden children happy then show complete hypocrisy in the matter.

If we go by T2 variants being superior then the Floon is in need of a harsh nerf and even the TFI needs a slight reduction in damage.

So now that you feel the Phoon is over powered how about make a post on here to Rise,Fozzie and Mal how you even think it is. Make it nice and big and be very verbal about it so they get the picture.

Considering the fact you are one of two people who actually feel the CNR is fine which its not, I would now expect you to tell them the Floon is in need of a nerf.

Get too it !
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#1199 - 2013-05-22 03:15:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Hagika
Jenn aSide wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:

I agree that the new CNR is smaller and faster than the old one, unfortunately that's not really a niche we I can do a lot with.


fixed

Quote:
It's still outright inferior to the Typhoon and Typhoon Fleet in those areas - on top of being inferior in EHP, damage, damage application, rate of fire, drone damage, utility high slots, and more. Yeah - tell me more about how you won't be able to do these sites with the smaller, faster, and more damaging typhoon family. Roll

Honestly, the only reason you're saying the CNR is better than the one you've been flying for five years is because cruise is better than it's been for five years. But cruise isn't just better for the CNR - it's better for everything. The new CNR simply does not have a role.

-Liang


#1 you cannot seperate the Ship from it's primary weapon any more than you can sperate a Nightmare from Tachyons (apologies to you Pulsemare wackos).

#2, no, a typhoon hull can't do some of the things a CNR can do because you need a serious shiled tank to do it

#3. as has been pointed out, you're looking in the wrong direction, the Phoons might need looking at, the CNR is imo (and apprently in CCPs opinion so far) perfectly ok.


According to CCP, everything they do is ok..Yet all you need to do is got to almost every thread of changes and find that the huge majority of the people think otherwise.

The phoons do need looking at. Will they do it? Of course not.. Winmatar as even the devs have called them, have been the flavor for the last 2 years. Everyone and their mother has b!tiched about it. Do you honestly think they are going to nerf the ships they usually fly? Of course not.

The CNR is fine in your opinion, and according to this thread, you are one of a couple people who think that while most others think differently.

Every heard the expression that if 1000 people think you are wrong and you are the only one who thinks you are right... You just might be wrong? This applies to you.

They just did a blanket nerf to shield/armor ship resistances which pretty much everyone thought was a bad idea, all because they have an issue with how reps affect them. It was a blanket lazy fix. What did they also do on that nerf? They just made the alpha fleet even more powerful for the users of Maelstroms.

So even if they bothered to look at the phoons, how long do you think they will take to get around to it? Years? Going with their track record, its atleast that.

Hell missiles have been borked for 5 years or so now, and when they finally decide to buff 1 of the missile systems, they nerf the caldari ship that uses them and over power the minnie ship that gets them.

I feel for caldari pilots, matar is better at their own weapon system and their ships are substantially better as well.

but hey, why should they complain, they have easy mode now according to Mal.. Isnt that great !!!! Roll
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#1200 - 2013-05-22 03:29:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Hagika
Jenn aSide wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

lemme guess, you put torps on it....

But I'm sorry, no, it's not crap, it' works fine and I prefer it to the Floon because of it's mid slots and much more useful bonuses (not even 50 km for the Floon and you're counting salvos again, which sucks).

Time and the odyssey market will tell, but you're just overreacting.


I love how when we talk about cruise you guys are all "But it'll be awesome with Torps!". And then when we talk about Cruise you guys are like "But it'll be awesome with Cruise!". The truth is that it's awesome with neither. The ship is completely obsolete by other faction and T1 battleships, regardless of whether you want to fit torps or cruise.

The ship needs rethink.

-Liang


Seriously, i'd have thought you were better than that, before now I had a great deal of respect for your knowledge of the game.

I'm an individual Liang and you know that, yet you so little confidence in what your saying you have to lump me with others and pretend that words aren't even mine somehow apply to me? When, exactly, did i say anything concerning torps being awesome for the new CNR?

Bloody incredible.


Want to know what is bloody incredible? The fact that not only Liang but others have posted the math and shown the inferior numbers of the CNR and you still are the only hold out on thinking the ship is fine.

You act like my brother in this way. He will argue against someone and disagree with them just for arguments sake, knowing full well he is in the wrong after being showed evidence that he was wrong.
At this point, its like you are just doing it just because you can.

The T1 Raven and SNI pretty much match the CNR only the SNI actually gets a more powerful tank. Why use the CNR which was the torpedo doom ship and would have been the cruise ship of doom as well when you can get the same performance out of the 200 mil Raven, well aside from the marginally more powerful tank.

Yet why bother with any of that when you can use a T1 Phoon and pretty much match the DPS output of the CNR and be superior to the raven or you can drop some isk and buy the Floon and have a ship that makes all other obsolete including the Minnie T2 BS..


Edit-
The CNR only gets 500 more hull while the Floon gets faster speed and a battlecruise sig radius....Gee, wonder whos tanking better as well.....