Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
dibblety
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 06:53:00 -
[1]
As soon as the game comes back up, my new typhoon should be ready for me to pick up. I am a bit of a newb, but i have been spending all day(wishing i could play) tinkering with fittings based on what I had read on the forums before. As the Typhoon is, it requires a lot of skill to master, needing guns, drones and missles at a high level and then having bonus's split between half your weapons. That being said, I chose a Phoon anyway because of the large drone bay. So I thought why do they not go with that. I am sure I am not the first person to think of it, but it just makes perfect sense, even more so with the big hole in the front of the ship. Get rid of both current bonuses and go with what makes the Phoon unique, second largest drone bay and speed.
10% bonus to drone HP,damage and mining yield per level 10% reduction in Ab and MWD cap usage or 5% speed per level
You could then fit whatever guns or launchers you want without worrying about bonus's, you'd be the second best drone carrier and be downright fast. Since the Gallente have assisted the Minnies before(read Mammoth) its not a stretch to think they couldn't have help refit the Minmatars Phoons into a good drone ship, and Minmatar already do speed very well. It would then be like a great big drone carrying Stabber What do you guys think?
|
Hakera
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 07:07:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Hakera on 12/05/2006 07:08:05
your basically making it into a domi, drone bonuses dont belong on minmatar ships :p Though soon with all these new teirs being released sometime I think every race will have every niche covered soon.
go for the cruise/torp/heavy nos/neut route - the new bonuses whenever ccp patch put it firmly in that niche.
|
dibblety
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 07:13:00 -
[3]
Gallente aren't the only race to have ships with drone bonus's, but Perhaps a different drone boost would be better. Something like a bonus to drone range and speed. A ship with really fast long range webber drones fitted with artillery could be foul.
|
Evil's Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 07:32:00 -
[4]
Personally, I like the 'Phoon. I use it for ratting and tanking spawns for mining, and it does quite well. the problem with it, like some other Minmatar ships (don't get me started on the Bellicose!), it is too versatile for it's own good. Drones, missiles, and turrets are basically equally mixed on the Typhoon.
The coming Missile ROF bonus will be a nice boost though. I'd lose the projectile bonus and make it an explosive damage bonus for drones. I think that would be useful. I might even use it for PVP if that happened (and not get laughed at).
|
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 08:14:00 -
[5]
The change from twice half a bonus to projectiles to half a bonus to projectiles and half a bonus to missiles makes the Typhoon even more bastard than it is right now.
The next step up would be three 1/3 boni to projectiles, missiles and drones ... All for its versability. --*=*=*-- Megadon CCP wanted a well known artist and celebrity to test the new font so it's approval would be well known. They got Ray |
Twin blade
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 09:10:00 -
[6]
Next they plan to add a smart bomb bonus and a TP bonus.
|
Crellion
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 13:26:00 -
[7]
I understand Phoon has grid problems ... but so has the Domi...
Cant you set up a phoon with 4x425 or 650 a/cs 4x tech II cruise cap booster armour tank and a full compliment of drones?
Wouldnt that be a very competitive pvp ship and even more versatile than a Domi... Just wondering as I cant fly Mini but it looks very good to me especially in gang...
|
Rexy
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 14:05:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Rexy on 12/05/2006 14:07:14 HIGH-SLOTS : ~~~~~~~~~~~~ > [1485 | 28] Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II > [1485 | 28] Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II > [1485 | 28] Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II > [1485 | 28] Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery II > [1181 | 49] Cruise Missile Launcher II > [1181 | 49] Cruise Missile Launcher II > [1181 | 49] Cruise Missile Launcher II > [1181 | 49] Cruise Missile Launcher II
MED-SLOTS : ~~~~~~~~~~~ > [ 688 | 50] 100MN Afterburner II > [ 1 | 22] Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I > [ 1 | 32] Faint Warp Prohibitor I > [1750 | 40] Heavy Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I
LOW-SLOTS : ~~~~~~~~~~~ > [ 1 | 44] Armor Explosive Hardener II > [ 1 | 44] Armor Kinetic Hardener II > [ 1 | 44] Armor Thermic Hardener II > [2300 | 55] Large Armor Repairer II > [ 173 | 28] Medium Armor Repairer II > [ 0 | 0] Empty Slot > [ 0 | 0] Empty Slot
42.2pg ,79 cpu left, with lower AWU skill use an RCU. if you want siege's you'll need an RCU to get a large repper on.you'll run into cpu issue's with siege's as well.
that's around 300 dps without drones( but my missile skills are rubbish)
|
Wizie
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 14:15:00 -
[9]
Rexy, calculate how much dps you do now with that setup.
Then tell me how much dps will you do with that setup after the 25% bonus to rof.
|
Crellion
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 14:16:00 -
[10]
Looks respectable enough... with proper missles skills the launchers alone are 2/3s of the DPS of a Cruise Raven... On the two empty slots with a bit of tinkertink (like named ab etc) you can fit 1 gyroII and 1 bcuII and give your set up a 15%-20% dps increase. With drones (tech II) it should be quite sexy DPS and an a ship thats faster and more manoeuvreable than Mega Raven Domi \o/
|
|
Lucre
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 14:21:00 -
[11]
Silly if radical question:
Why is a bonus affecting half the weapons on one ship regarded as equivalent to one affecting all the weapons on another? Or put another way, why it is seemingly written in stone that all ships of a given class must have the same number of bonuses?
Why shouldn't (say) Minmatar or Khanid ships with genuinely split turret/missile armaments have an extra bonus so that both turrets and missiles are affected by the ship bonus? If you have (say) a bonus on your 4 turrets and a bonus on your 3 missiles, are you really much advantaged over someone with just one bonus but affecting all their 7 turrets?
|
Wizie
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 14:25:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Crellion Looks respectable enough... with proper missles skills the launchers alone are 2/3s of the DPS of a Cruise Raven... On the two empty slots with a bit of tinkertink (like named ab etc) you can fit 1 gyroII and 1 bcuII and give your set up a 15%-20% dps increase. With drones (tech II) it should be quite sexy DPS and an a ship thats faster and more manoeuvreable than Mega Raven Domi \o/
Well if the question is.. Is the Typhoon able to do much of value with that setup. The answer is Yes.
However, with this ROF bonus... You add approximately 60 dps to your overall missile dmg.
Right now, with siege II (and average missile skills), I do 180 dps. After the patch, I will do ~ 239dps.
A Typhoons majority dmg comes not from turrets or missiles, but from its drones (with ogre IIs). However, despite is largeish dronebay. In reality, you can fit 5 heavies, 1 backup heavy and 5 small.
After losing 2 heavy drones.. you will never do your max theoretical dps again until you go buy some more. Torps/projammo are either large in size, or used up too fast.
All in all, this so called boost.. is really useless. I would much rather they not give us a missile boost (I dont want the extra 60 dps). Give us a speed boost or a 5% per skill sig radius drop.
|
Triest
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 14:32:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Lucre Silly if radical question:
Why is a bonus affecting half the weapons on one ship regarded as equivalent to one affecting all the weapons on another? Or put another way, why it is seemingly written in stone that all ships of a given class must have the same number of bonuses?
Why shouldn't (say) Minmatar or Khanid ships with genuinely split turret/missile armaments have an extra bonus so that both turrets and missiles are affected by the ship bonus? If you have (say) a bonus on your 4 turrets and a bonus on your 3 missiles, are you really much advantaged over someone with just one bonus but affecting all their 7 turrets?
This is something I and many people keep bringing up, and CCP keep ignoring. I don't know why, they never persent any argument refuting it, the only response I've seen said they 'were aware of the much maligned split bonuses' or some such nonsense. It's obvious that a 5% bonus to 4 turrets and a 5% bonus to 4 launcher hardpoints is equivalent to a single 5% bonus to 8 turrets, and as such leaves the redone Typhoon with a worse bonus set than any other battleship in teh game. I'm not sure CCP cares, however; look at the description text for the Typhoon to see an obvious example of how much work they've put into it.
|
Thorndin MacMorrin
|
Posted - 2006.05.12 14:59:00 -
[14]
I like your idea dibblety, especially the speed boost.
It is frustraitign compairing the typhoon to other t1 battleships, as so much of the typhoon seems poorly though out on CCP's part.
Bonuses that did not emphasise the split weapon system design would be nice, and the drone and speed bonuses both make sense from looking at the ship, and Minmatar design.
|
dibblety
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 01:03:00 -
[15]
That was the whole idea Throndin. I was bored waiting to get back in game, and I thought why bother with the weapon bonus's for a Typhoon and its 50/50 weapons systems. Give it other bonus's and the problem is solved. Of course, there is little threat of CCP actually reading threads like this one, but i thought it would be fun to throw out the changes I would make. And to see what other people would do if they had their way. Personally I like drones and I think the typhoon would rule as a drone carrier. Domi's would still be better as a drone ship to a certain degree, as they have much larger drone bays. But a Phoon has 2 more high slots and the turrets and bays to use them, if you can get the grid to fit it. Plus I like the idea of a "fast" battleship. The Phoon may look like a tub, but it is still the fastest BS there is. Why not go with its strengths.
|
dibblety
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 01:04:00 -
[16]
Edited by: dibblety on 13/05/2006 01:05:11 Edited by: dibblety on 13/05/2006 01:04:58 double post
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |