These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1461 - 2013-06-09 02:25:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Josilin du Guesclin
Johnson Oramara wrote:


It's really embarrassing for 700+ million navy ship to perform so poorly compared to it's regular T1 version...

There's this minor fact that easy missions without a salvage alt are a fairly small segment of the game, so even if the Raven is somehow 'as good' as the CNR there, it proves very little.


An equivalently fitted Raven, set up for WH fleet ops (so a 70% resist omni buffer tank) has 27% less tank than a CNR, and it's low enough that it's soft for a battleship - a Drake has a noticeably stronger tank while being smaller and faster, and that means the Raven makes for more work for the logis than it should. It also has less DPS, and considerably less applied DPS (especially on small ships), a liability in PvP and some PvE as well.

Is the CNR worth the extra 400-500M? That's a question that's up to each individual to answer. I think it is, because I'd expect to lose Ravens too fast to make them worthwhile, let alone fun to fly.
Akimo Heth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1462 - 2013-06-09 03:22:47 UTC
TehCloud wrote:
Akimo Heth wrote:


Are you really adding falloff to optimal in defense of 916 dps?


Are you really that dense?

I wrote:
Quote:

Guess what, Optimal Range + Tracking Bonus allows you to use Conflag. 20k Optimal + 10k Falloff without any mods, Tracking Computer in the mids and you can hit up to 40k with Conflag.


Yes it's in Falloff, but since the Apoc is fast and agile, you shouldn't have problems to keep enemies within your firing range, And if you do, swap crystals.

But I'm quite sure you'll claim another stupid thing next, like "the ship isn't fast because it can't goo 500m/s without a propmod" :3


Yes I'm that dense...because ad hominem is an effective way to get your point across.

If you're pulsing your MWD to get within 27km of every target, A) you'll be running out of cap soon B) the mission will take forever. Like the other guy said, you're better off using Scorch and therefore can't quote the 916 dps number as you did, you'd quote the Scorch number and can't use the "what 914 dps isn't enough for you in a L4 you must be a baddy" line of defense. If most of the mission rats are within Scorch anyway, it's my opinion that you're better off in an Abaddon or better yet N-Geddon. Do you have a personal attack to refute this?
TehCloud
Guardians of the Dodixie
#1463 - 2013-06-09 11:14:31 UTC  |  Edited by: TehCloud
Again you put words in my mouth that I never said. I never said you mwd in range of every target, I never said you have a constant 916 dps and I never claimed you had a 40k optimal with conflag.

Fact is, the NApoc is very well capable of running Missions, and can still use conflag at ranges where the Abaddon and Navy geddon already have to rely on Long Range Ammo.

But it's obvious that arguing with you is useless, you always twist the words others wrote and claim something without even being capable of understanding what the new Apoc can do :)

My Condor costs less than that module!

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1464 - 2013-06-09 12:30:00 UTC
Johnson Oramara wrote:
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
Johnson Oramara wrote:

Well here's your first, it's just poor now. I'm meeting people really happy about their CNR doing more damage than before until i suggest them to check out how Raven, Phoon or TFI compares and they go in denial, rage or just stay silent looking at the numbers.

Heck i did mission with one guy who had CNR and i had regular Raven and was killing stuff just as fast and tanking just as well.
Needless to say he was totally confused because he had cruise spec L5 and missile damage implant. And a cheap Raven performed just as well.

[stupid forums ate post - let's try again]

Okay, if the regular Raven performed as well as the CNR, the mission wasn't hard enough for it to matter what you were flying.

The CNR has a considerably better tank, is faster and more agile, has better lock time, higher sustained DPS (because it needs to reload its launchers less often), and better applied DPS on anything smaller than battleships (and on BS as well if you use Fury on them). The CNR also has a bigger drone bay and more bandwidth, as an added little bonus.

TL;DR: You are wrong.

I'm wrong if i manage to perform on par with CNR on my Raven? Ok... those differences CNR has on paper don't really show up on real use though.... except laughing at the CNR slow boating to check the wrecks while i was using my trusty tractor beam and making more profit.


See the problem here is that you're making **** up.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1465 - 2013-06-10 14:04:45 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

See the problem here is that you're making **** up.

Or i just know how to fit and fly the ships properly. And actually test them in game while you just call bull**** in here.

How ignorant can you be?
Akimo Heth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1466 - 2013-06-10 14:35:27 UTC
Johnson Oramara wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

See the problem here is that you're making **** up.

Or i just know how to fit and fly the ships properly. And actually test them in game while you just call bull**** in here.

How ignorant can you be?


Anecdotal evidence of how you did a random L4 just as easily as a Raven won't convince anyone. You need to provide actual numbers and scenarios describing how the normal Raven performs as well as the Navy version. Until then you're not going to get a kind response, especially if you keep replying like this.
Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#1467 - 2013-06-11 00:39:02 UTC
Johnson Oramara wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

See the problem here is that you're making **** up.

Or i just know how to fit and fly the ships properly. And actually test them in game while you just call bull**** in here.

How ignorant can you be?


Amazing. you use a ship wrong (ie "slow boating to wrecks", the New CNR is a blitz ship), get mad because it's suppsoedly not as good as it's lesser version (which is not as good a blitz boat) and think everyone else is wrong.

That's incredible lol. I guess everyone else is just crazy except you and are buying 700 mil ships like hotcakes (the ones I hoarded are already gone) because they are dumb.....

OR it's just that everyone else has adapted to the changes (the cruise buff + the cnr changes are pure gold) and are getting on with having fun with a fun ship while you're crying in your soup. Either way it sounds like a personal problem.

Don't worry, you can always buy a noctis. i'll contract some bookmarks to you and you can gather up all the junk I leave on the field because blitzing is way better isk/hr than using 1 tractor beam.....
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Top Belt for Fun
#1468 - 2013-06-11 02:01:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Jenn aSide wrote:
Don't worry, you can always buy a noctis. i'll contract some bookmarks to you and you can gather up all the junk I leave on the field because blitzing is way better isk/hr than using 1 tractor beam.....


And you know what's even better ISK/hr? Not using a CNR at all.

-Liang

Ed: Besides, aren't you the person that was raving on and on and on about how the new CNR doesn't require painters and you can FOF everything down? Are you sure you're a good person to be talking to about efficiency?

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#1469 - 2013-06-11 04:11:14 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Don't worry, you can always buy a noctis. i'll contract some bookmarks to you and you can gather up all the junk I leave on the field because blitzing is way better isk/hr than using 1 tractor beam.....


And you know what's even better ISK/hr? Not using a CNR at all.

-Liang

Ed: Besides, aren't you the person that was raving on and on and on about how the new CNR doesn't require painters and you can FOF everything down? Are you sure you're a good person to be talking to about efficiency?


Do show me the part where I said anything about FoFing CRUISE missiles in empire solo. I meantioned FoFs for tight situations in guristas space when scrammed AND jammed (a Golem's FoFs are more susceptible to Defenders) and needing to gtfo because neuts enter. I assure you, the 4 accounts I plex every month+ all my other assets I've gotten from shooting red Xs for the last 6 years speak to my ability and efficency.

It's not surprising anymore that you don't understand what's being said, I've noticed you tend to do that when people disagree with you.

As I've said before, i'm sorry you two or 3 posters don't like the new CNR. Most of us think it's very cool combined with the cCruise missle buff and many are preferring it over the ships you were just SURE were superior. That either means everyone is stupid and not on your level of superior EVE playing, or everyone isn't stupid and you simply refuse to understand why (most) others like a ship you don't. Either way, like I told the other guy, that's a personal problem.
Peter Ska
True Faces Hungary
Goonswarm Federation
#1470 - 2013-07-10 19:58:15 UTC
when I started playing, gallenteans told me we are the drone-using faction. Domi and myrmi are still the kings of drones, but nothing else, while amarr gunboats have better gunnery potential AND better drone options than the gallente gunboats... are all gallentean technicians enslaved by amarr or what??? justice for gallente, freedom for drones!!!
Shiera Kuni
Electric Machete
#1471 - 2013-07-10 20:26:45 UTC
Confirming that I have Gallentean slaves in my Armageddon.

CCP Falcon:  This thread is terrible.

Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#1472 - 2013-07-10 21:29:16 UTC
Confirming that other races with weapon systems not balanced with drones in mind now have better drone ships then Gallente do.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#1473 - 2013-07-10 21:59:22 UTC
More drones available perhaps, but Gallante get more combat capability out of the flight they do carry.

When flying Gallante using damage drones are usually your most sensible option.

Flying Amarr you may often find you are better served switching between other types of drones (particularly EW).

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Sarkelias Anophius
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1474 - 2013-07-10 22:42:32 UTC
Posting to express my surprise and amusement at this thread still being alive.
Caleb Seremshur
Naked Oiled Bodybuilders
Parasitic Legion.
#1475 - 2013-07-11 00:04:16 UTC
I'm confused as to why people are saying the CNR is bad for missions? I've found it to be very competent especially when compared to gunboats like the hyperion.

Whether it is the best mission runner I don't know but calling it *bad* isn't really true.
Funky Lazers
Funk Freakers
#1476 - 2013-07-11 14:48:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Funky Lazers
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
I'm confused as to why people are saying the CNR is bad for missions? I've found it to be very competent especially when compared to gunboats like the hyperion.

Whether it is the best mission runner I don't know but calling it *bad* isn't really true.


Compared to AC ships like Vargur, Mach or even Mael and Hybrid ships like Kronos, Vindi the CNR performs worse.

By worse I mean ships above complete missions faster and "cheaper". Cheaper means you don't need to use T2 ammo to deal some good damage.
Painters, Defenders, ABs and small sigs reduce performance a lot of any missile ship.

This leads to conclusion CNR is bad for missions in comparison to other ships.
Saying that it doesn't mean CNR can't complete missions and it takes ages to do that. It's just that, others do it better.

Whatever.