These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.1] Command Ships

First post First post First post
Author
Eldrith Jhandar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1341 - 2013-08-14 00:24:55 UTC
Dav Varan wrote:
Eldrith Jhandar wrote:
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
I am loving the new deimos. It's gone from being a lightweight retreat ship to a real heavy assault ship. A swarm of these will be deadly.


Yeah, they are very effective. The combination of smallish sig and a rep bonus gives the deimos an amazing tank, even if it's lacking ehp compared to similarly fit Commands. I look at the deimos now as a slightly lower dps, higher tank, lower ehp, much faster/smaller Brutix.

P.S. I just watched Mournful Conciousness tank a couple vindis and a malestrom for a rather extended period of time in his deimos, ships doing pretty well Cool


It's rather hilarious that a deimos has the same tank as an Astarte or eos... I'd like to see the tank of the eos and Astarte better, but with te Astarte insane dps I can't justify it, but with the eos you can, as with 7 lows, and having an equal tank the eos has less gank still, or you can fit it with even less dps but more survivability,

A 5/5/7 eos can survive a decent amount of dps in a small gang, but will still melt to neuts

2 cap boosters and tri rep eos would have survivability but not the dps to become a solo pwn mobile
And is too large and slow to do some of the silly things the Deimos candiru it's mobility and sig radius

And I'm curious how well an xl+l asb fit claymore/sleipnir/vulture (idk if a nighthawk could fit them) would do tank wise
I know my xl+l asb cyclone is pretty awesome without crystals even, gonna get on the test server to play with those =]


Theses numbers without gang bonuses

Just did some tests on sisi

Both ships
2 links
med injector / mwd / scram / web
dual mar / dual eanm / dcu / explosive hard
anti em / aux nano


That's 77% exp lowest resist
562 ehps into that resist

Eos
5 Ogre II ( 466.5 dps ) + 4 neut blaster ( fnam 200 dps ) = 666.5 dps

Astarte
2 Ogre II ( 124.4 dps ) + 5 neut blaster ( fnam 491 dps ) = 615.4 dps
2 Ogre II ( 124.4 dps ) + 5 neut blasters ( void 547.9 dps ) = 672.3 dps


That's nice damage from the eos there given the better projection of drones even for a brawler setup

For an 7km orbit ( with linked scrams ) the dropoff of neuts is going to leave there contribution at about 75% navy and 50% void
This makes the Eos clearly better at the 4km - 10km brawler range.
Astarte has to be point blank to get better damage than the EOS.

EOS is fine.
Astarte could do with another 2 cpu to avoid downgrade of meta 4 scrams and webs to lower meta's

My skills not maxed , lvl 4 blaster spec and lvl 4 gal drone spec



You needs to look at maxed skills for one
And I'll do the calculations briefly for maxed skills
No implants etc (which favor the Astarte)

Eos with 4 neutrons void 702 dps
Fnam 678.6

Astarte with [hammerheads] and void 785
Fnam 718
Hams (2) add 84 dps more
And implants can add 50-70 dps more for the Astarte, which if u can use An Astarte ill imagine you have atleast +3% damage implants

Adds up to a 931 dps Astarte with no damage mods
931 or 702? Which would you pick?
Which is subpar
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#1342 - 2013-08-14 00:48:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Goldensaver
Eldrith Jhandar wrote:

You needs to look at maxed skills for one
And I'll do the calculations briefly for maxed skills
No implants etc (which favor the Astarte)

Eos with 4 neutrons void 702 dps
Fnam 678.6

Astarte with [hammerheads] and void 785
Fnam 718
Hams (2) add 84 dps more
And implants can add 50-70 dps more for the Astarte, which if u can use An Astarte ill imagine you have atleast +3% damage implants

Adds up to a 931 dps Astarte with no damage mods
931 or 702? Which would you pick?
Which is subpar


I'm liking the amount of cherry picking going on here. You use the Void Astarte with HAMs and implants. Now tell me who in their right mind will put 2 HAMs on their Astarte instead of links?

Now the implants are worth talking about, with Medium Hybrid Turret 5% implants costing around 10m on market right now, but anything higher than a 3% gunnery is ridiculous to assume, adding 90m/130m to a pod loss... which you will lose if you lose the ship in a bubble.

Also, he made a decent point about the Eos really out-ranging the Astarte. Once you get out of knife fighting range and nearer to web/scram range (unlinked) you'll be getting better damage out of the Eos. At around linked web/scram range (you have the option of fitting one, it's bonused!) the Eos will probably be doing much better off than the Astarte.



Edit:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Claymore is a disaster on Sisi.
Just tried fitting one.

Forget it.

Needs about 85 more CPU to fit a shield buffer with 3 command links, 4 HAM's, and 3 T2 BCU's.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=269052&find=unread

Perhaps you could use some meta modules? And also not try to fit the biggest of everything all at once and expect easy mode fitting. You've got a full complement of highs, maximum tank with an MWD, and you don't want any issues at all? a Co-Processor in place of one of the BCU's should fix that fine. 2 BCU's are still acceptable, and you don't lose any tank.

Eldrith Jhandar wrote:

A 5/5/7 eos can survive a decent amount of dps in a small gang, but will still melt to neuts

2 cap boosters and tri rep eos would have survivability but not the dps to become a solo pwn mobile
And is too large and slow to do some of the silly things the Deimos candiru it's mobility and sig radius


Perhaps you could fit 2 injectors, an MWD and a point and you don't run the risk of having a solo pwn mobile because of full tackle with that tank and damage? Besides, what do you need the web for? Your gang should have tackle fine. And if you're talking about having a web for solo work, for solo work a dual rep fit with a single injector and maybe a NOS in one of the highs should work just fine for keeping the reps going. Besides, it's not like you're using those highs for links if you're flying solo.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1343 - 2013-08-14 00:54:07 UTC
After a bit of Astarte testing today (200+ kills between myself and a couple others), I can gaurantee that it's superior to the eos in almost every imaginable way.

Eos needs some help for sure. Being a worse astarte is not a "role".
Mournful Conciousness
TOHA Heavy Industries
Blades of Grass
#1344 - 2013-08-14 01:00:08 UTC
Acidictadpole wrote:
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Acidictadpole wrote:


No, I'm not asking for them to be left alone completely. Right now there's about as much reason to fly a command ship as a HAC. T3 do better links and are better at surviving with a decent fit.



I dno about you but i've found the new CS to be about as effective as you can get for solo/small scale. While this is not the pigeonholed fleet brick links ship many of the powerblocks are pushing for, there is most certainly a reason to fly them...

I'm not saying that there is not room for improvement, or anything wrong with dedicating 1 of the 2 racial ships to "fleet boosting" but... You are very much Over exaggerating their uselessness.


And that's about as much a reason to fly a HAC, if I recall. They're decent upgrades per pilot, but not quite worth their isk in abilities.

But in the same vein, why wouldn't you just bring T3s instead of the command ships? They're smaller, perform similarly in damage, and often have a tank that rivals the CS. If the answer is price, then that's about the same for HACs.


Having flown the deimos for an evening I'm not so sure that T3's are that much, if any, better any more. I watched in amazement this evening as my deimos soloed a 100mn tengu.

This is a welcome development. It means that there will be more than 1 class of ship seen fighting in wormhole space at last.

This I am sure will make for more interesting fights and new tactics. "Bait" need no longer be a 100mn loki. It can be a HAC or command ship (or an industrial, now that you can fit a dual-asb iteron 4 which will happily tank a cruiser for 3000m3 of cap boosters).

Eve got better today.

Engaging ships is no longer something you'll be able to do without thinking through an exit plan. That's a good thing for the game.

+1 Happy Customer

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Eldrith Jhandar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1345 - 2013-08-14 02:13:37 UTC
Goldensaver wrote:
Eldrith Jhandar wrote:

You needs to look at maxed skills for one
And I'll do the calculations briefly for maxed skills
No implants etc (which favor the Astarte)

Eos with 4 neutrons void 702 dps
Fnam 678.6

Astarte with [hammerheads] and void 785
Fnam 718
Hams (2) add 84 dps more
And implants can add 50-70 dps more for the Astarte, which if u can use An Astarte ill imagine you have atleast +3% damage implants

Adds up to a 931 dps Astarte with no damage mods
931 or 702? Which would you pick?
Which is subpar


I'm liking the amount of cherry picking going on here. You use the Void Astarte with HAMs and implants. Now tell me who in their right mind will put 2 HAMs on their Astarte instead of links?

Now the implants are worth talking about, with Medium Hybrid Turret 5% implants costing around 10m on market right now, but anything higher than a 3% gunnery is ridiculous to assume, adding 90m/130m to a pod loss... which you will lose if you lose the ship in a bubble.

Also, he made a decent point about the Eos really out-ranging the Astarte. Once you get out of knife fighting range and nearer to web/scram range (unlinked) you'll be getting better damage out of the Eos. At around linked web/scram range (you have the option of fitting one, it's bonused!) the Eos will probably be doing much better off than the Astarte.



Edit:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Claymore is a disaster on Sisi.
Just tried fitting one.

Forget it.

Needs about 85 more CPU to fit a shield buffer with 3 command links, 4 HAM's, and 3 T2 BCU's.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=269052&find=unread

Perhaps you could use some meta modules? And also not try to fit the biggest of everything all at once and expect easy mode fitting. You've got a full complement of highs, maximum tank with an MWD, and you don't want any issues at all? a Co-Processor in place of one of the BCU's should fix that fine. 2 BCU's are still acceptable, and you don't lose any tank.

Eldrith Jhandar wrote:

A 5/5/7 eos can survive a decent amount of dps in a small gang, but will still melt to neuts

2 cap boosters and tri rep eos would have survivability but not the dps to become a solo pwn mobile
And is too large and slow to do some of the silly things the Deimos candiru it's mobility and sig radius


Perhaps you could fit 2 injectors, an MWD and a point and you don't run the risk of having a solo pwn mobile because of full tackle with that tank and damage? Besides, what do you need the web for? Your gang should have tackle fine. And if you're talking about having a web for solo work, for solo work a dual rep fit with a single injector and maybe a NOS in one of the highs should work just fine for keeping the reps going. Besides, it's not like you're using those highs for links if you're flying solo.



It's funny how you talk about cherry picking things but then cherry picking a timy range of 8-10k
The things I'm talking about are all available to the Astarte if it wants but not the eos, it can't even compete with 2 links, or 3 links even
These ships should be balanced not Astarte is better than the eos, that's not balance
And at the moment it is better
It's an easy fix but the Astarte is in a good place while the eos is not yet there
And just because you use a commandship in a small fleet doesn't mean you will be using links you can have a fleet of commandships
After using both ships today I can definately say the eos is indeed subpar, I'm looking forward to testing the others tomorrow
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#1346 - 2013-08-14 06:08:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Goldensaver
Eldrith Jhandar wrote:


It's funny how you talk about cherry picking things but then cherry picking a timy range of 8-10k
The things I'm talking about are all available to the Astarte if it wants but not the eos, it can't even compete with 2 links, or 3 links even
These ships should be balanced not Astarte is better than the eos, that's not balance
And at the moment it is better
It's an easy fix but the Astarte is in a good place while the eos is not yet there
And just because you use a commandship in a small fleet doesn't mean you will be using links you can have a fleet of commandships
After using both ships today I can definately say the eos is indeed subpar, I'm looking forward to testing the others tomorrow

I'm hardly cherry picking a tiny range of 8-10km. I'm implying that at around that range is where it surpasses the Astarte. I'll admit it's tough to apply damage without webs and scram on targets, but you can still send your heavies out past that range. Or you could launch mediums at that point. Whatever you do is up to you. I know that you don't get that MWD velocity and tracking bonus to mediums, but they're still faster than heavies, and you have enough bay to have a full flight of heavies, 2 spares and keep a flight of mediums and lights. It doesn't matter, put in your bay whatever you want, it's your choice.

Also, despite the fact you say that the Eos can't compete with 2, or even 3 links, I'd definitely disagree there. With 2 or 3 links it has a much higher chance of outlasting whatever it's fighting. It'll outrep the Astarte in that scenario by at least 33%.

Also, are we covering every single scenario here, or are we talking solopwnmobile? Gang? What is being discussed? I would definitely disagree that the Astarte is better in 100% of scenarios. The Astarte is only good if it has the means to get in range. The Eos is at least acceptable outside of its blaster range.

Edit: Oh, and the Eos probably could still use some work, maybe some moderate tweaks to bring it up, a change to some of the bonuses, even. But I really don't think that making it a 5/5/7 is the way to go. That's just ridiculous.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1347 - 2013-08-14 08:58:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Dav Varan
... broken post.
Snape Dieboldmotor
Minotaur Congress
#1348 - 2013-08-14 08:58:53 UTC
I tested the Claymore on Singularity. I tried various PVP and PVE fittings.

For my purposes, the power grid to CPU ratio seems out of balance for an advanced ship. To fix, I would slightly lower the power grid and slightly increase the CPU.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1349 - 2013-08-14 09:11:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Dav Varan
Eldrith Jhandar wrote:

Adds up to a 931 dps Astarte with no damage mods
931 or 702? Which would you pick?
Which is subpar


Its 785 v 702.
You need links in the fits to be taken seriously.
Not empty highs on the EOS.

Keep your lol HAMs
I'll take 25% more tank on the EOS and 30% more speed to control the engagement.

Links can add 25% more ehp and reps to either fit.
+ more reps
or more tackle range
or more speed

Don't quote implant boosted stats v non implants.
What is going in that empty implant slot ?
more grid enabling more tank ?boosted armor ? boosted reps ?


So 785 v 702 I would choose either.
given the 785 is going to fall off fast past 3km.

You have highlighted one change that can be made though.

Astarte -2 launcher slots.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#1350 - 2013-08-14 10:49:05 UTC
I still believe Creodron should be slapped really hard, the EOS reassigned to the roden shipyards. I mean they messed up the eos pretty hard a couple years ago, why not give it HAMs? (Totally not because I'd personally love that *shizzle*)

Claymore is pretty damn funny, with a large SB and two operational solidifiers, all the other stuff (2 BCUs, 2 nanos, 2 med cap booster, invuln, def web, 5 hams, 2 skirmishlinks) fits nicely. Can't wait to fly the pimped out variation with deadspace/faction/storyline equip on TQ and get rid of those fitting inconveniences ♥

Command ship zipping around at 2.7km/s (OH mwd)... Say yes to linking yourself!
Vulfen
Project Valhalla.
Goonswarm Federation
#1351 - 2013-08-14 10:51:04 UTC
@ CCP Fozzie

I can understand the reluctance to add any additional slots to the CS but they do need one.
Otherwise a Navy BS can match it for usefullness in a fleet.

So here's my idea;

Allow Command ships to fit 3 rigs, and give it 450 Calibration.

This means your not going to mess up the amount of utility on the ship to make it the out and out best.
bloodknight2
Revenu.Quebec
#1352 - 2013-08-14 11:25:18 UTC
I do not understand the whole "2 free high slot" for all CS. Like i said earlier, make one boosting CS and one dps CS.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1353 - 2013-08-14 11:40:38 UTC
FOZZIE !!!

are you still reading this or what??

cargobays need sorting out..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1354 - 2013-08-14 12:15:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Veshta Yoshida
bloodknight2 wrote:
I do not understand the whole "2 free high slot" for all CS. Like i said earlier, make one boosting CS and one dps CS.

Ditto.

Could probably get away with just adding a primary weapon mount on the dps varieties and nothing else, they could still do twin links but would have to sacrifice potential damage .. only supplemental change that might be needed would be to roll back the 2nd adjustment to Astarte (the 11 gun vs 10 gun change).
Vulfen
Project Valhalla.
Goonswarm Federation
#1355 - 2013-08-14 12:30:54 UTC
bloodknight2 wrote:
I do not understand the whole "2 free high slot" for all CS. Like i said earlier, make one boosting CS and one dps CS.

So what your saying is.., dont change CSs from current?... erm no by doing this it allows cleaver people to mix thier links in with the rest of the gang and each of these ships have different fleets in mind; Ie;

Absolution is still the upfront power house but as a trade off you can bring Damnations which will have more EHP but a slightly lower DPS so by creating a fleet where absos are supported by some damnations your links on the field are mixed in and you cant just neut them out on field as obvious

Selphnir would make a great artillery platform when you combine the new bonuses and the increase in damage from medium projectiles and you could run a fleet with just these (except logi) in them as you have all the links you need without another ship.

the eos would make a great balanced utility ship aswell with 4 mids it can work in some ewar/ assistance mods while still giving a decent amount of contribution to DPS.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1356 - 2013-08-14 13:47:33 UTC
Dav Varan wrote:

Its 785 v 702.
You need links in the fits to be taken seriously.


Dude, if anything running links on grid should not be taken seriously... As long as there is the option of OGB, that's going to continue to be the proper way to provide links.

So please don't sit here and tell people that fitting these ships w/o links is not serious because it does not make any sense.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1357 - 2013-08-14 13:58:04 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
FOZZIE !!!

are you still reading this or what??

cargobays need sorting out..


+1! Big smile
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1358 - 2013-08-14 14:08:45 UTC
Vulfen wrote:
@ CCP Fozzie

I can understand the reluctance to add any additional slots to the CS but they do need one.
Otherwise a Navy BS can match it for usefullness in a fleet.

So here's my idea;

Allow Command ships to fit 3 rigs, and give it 450 Calibration.

This means your not going to mess up the amount of utility on the ship to make it the out and out best.


Keep in mind that the damage bonuses the CS get is equivalent to an extra highslot. These ships don't need an extra slot to compete, and I have no problem with a Navy BS being of similar value to a no-link CS in many situations.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1359 - 2013-08-14 14:11:47 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Claymore is a disaster on Sisi.
Just tried fitting one.

Forget it.

Needs about 85 more CPU to fit a shield buffer with 3 command links, 4 HAM's, and 3 T2 BCU's.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=269052&find=unread


Fitting what you want on a ship is intended to take creativity and require tradeoffs.

In your case I advise checking out meta modules. Switching the LSEs and DC to meta 4 and dropping to two BCUs allows your fit to work without any fitting mods or implants, even with T2 links. Add Genolution CA-1 and CA-2s and a 3% cpu implant it works with 3 BCUs.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Vulfen
Project Valhalla.
Goonswarm Federation
#1360 - 2013-08-14 14:39:17 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Vulfen wrote:
@ CCP Fozzie

I can understand the reluctance to add any additional slots to the CS but they do need one.
Otherwise a Navy BS can match it for usefullness in a fleet.

So here's my idea;

Allow Command ships to fit 3 rigs, and give it 450 Calibration.

This means your not going to mess up the amount of utility on the ship to make it the out and out best.


Keep in mind that the damage bonuses the CS get is equivalent to an extra highslot. These ships don't need an extra slot to compete, and I have no problem with a Navy BS being of similar value to a no-link CS in many situations.


Sorry foozie, i ,meant a "NAVY BCs" not BS can match the CSs and i dont have any issues with the damage on any of them but i think they could do with a utility slot extra on them all. or the extra rig to allow people to seal up those pesky resistance holes that can arrive because you have nerfed the gang links sumwhat