Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sentenced 1989
Quantum Anomaly Corporation
118
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 17:02:21 -
[1] - Quote
So, was trying several fits lately and found that not all of them are viable, so did little digging
Powergrid battleships
So, testing out with max fitting skills and max PG on ship, without any rigs, so just ship
Amarr T1 versions with Tachs? Forget about it without rigs to help you out... Navy versions with Tachs? Apoc can do it and has decent left over so you can actually fit tank or prop mod, but not both Pirate hulls? No problemo, Bhaalgorn has enough leftover to provide PG for an Rattlesnake with burned out grid...
Caldari (Torps are used as they require more fitting) T1 versions with Torps? No problem Rokh with Rails? No problem Navy versions with Torps? No problem, Raven might need to watch if he want's prop mod and tank at same time Pirate versions with Torps? No problem
Gallente T1 with Rails? Unless you are in an Domi, it's no problemo Navy versions with Rails? Domi might have issues to put prop mod and tank at once Pirate versions with Rails? No problemo
Minmatar T1 with Arty? You can put arty on it, and thats pretty much it... no buffer, no prop mods Phoons with Torps? No problemo Navy with Arty? Not bad Pirate versions with Arty? Forget about it
So weapons by themselves have different ranges, damage types, tracking, etc, how come every single ammar ship has issues with PG and tachs unless you get pirate hull, then you can put what ever you want on it? Minmatar ships can barely fit, but Machariel can't even get full rack online? Rails are generally ok, and torps are way to easy on PG all together by comparing stats.
Is there any plan by CCP to look at these numbers in near future and bring them more in line to be a bit more similliar and enable wider selection of fits? BS took decent hit for PVP with warp slow changes, why not give them a bit more versatility regarding weapon selection?
The Incursion Guild
QA Combat Analyze
Incursion Layout Builder
|
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
176
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 17:14:24 -
[2] - Quote
There's been quite a bit of clamor lately for a general re-balance of battleships and battleship sized weapons. Many people here say, and evidence seems to suggest that the ship teiricide and warp speed changes have left them underpowered. If they do get rebalanced, I wouldn't be surprised to see grid and cpu numbers to large sized weapons and hulls change a little bit. |
Havenard
Rubicon Spears Some Say
5
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 17:32:50 -
[3] - Quote
I agree. You can confortably fit Pulse lasers though, that have the disvantage of range, but are more efficient all around. Beams have a very superior range but with the disvantage of requiring a lot more capacitor and doing less damage. I see no reason to have this prohibitive Powergrid requirement.
If we compare with the Hybrid equivalents (Blasters versus Railguns) we see they also share similar balancing, except for this nonsense Powergrid. PG for both Blasters and Railguns are pretty much the same. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
245
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 18:46:15 -
[4] - Quote
Its on the list of things I was working on in the general battleship thread I am working on. Do you mind if I use the spreadsheet you put up as part of it?
Other known fittings issue is that at least the CNR is pretty low on CPU for a navy ship with 8 launchers and a slot layout which screams shield tank.
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
451
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 18:49:50 -
[5] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Its on the list of things I was working on in the general battleship thread I am working on. Do you mind if I use the spreadsheet you put up as part of it?
Other known fittings issue is that at least the CNR is pretty low on CPU for a navy ship with 8 launchers and a slot layout which screams shield tank.
And the Rattlesnake on cpu with drone stuff on her.
signature
|
Sentenced 1989
Quantum Anomaly Corporation
118
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 18:52:05 -
[6] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Its on the list of things I was working on in the general battleship thread I am working on. Do you mind if I use the spreadsheet you put up as part of it?
Other known fittings issue is that at least the CNR is pretty low on CPU for a navy ship with 8 launchers and a slot layout which screams shield tank.
Nah, go ahead, there is one typeo you might wanna correct, actually 4 out of 8 amarr ships can do tachs, but rest numbers are correct. However I only have image there, didn't save the spreadsheet :/
The Incursion Guild
QA Combat Analyze
Incursion Layout Builder
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
245
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 18:58:42 -
[7] - Quote
Sentenced 1989 wrote:James Baboli wrote:Its on the list of things I was working on in the general battleship thread I am working on. Do you mind if I use the spreadsheet you put up as part of it?
Other known fittings issue is that at least the CNR is pretty low on CPU for a navy ship with 8 launchers and a slot layout which screams shield tank. Nah, go ahead, there is one typeo you might wanna correct, actually 4 out of 8 amarr ships can do tachs, but rest numbers are correct. However I only have image there, didn't save the spreadsheet :/ Yeah. and you missed that the oracle can fit tachs without any problem because of how the percentage PG reduction works, which is an important side note, but overall, the thing is still a great summary of some of the fitting problems currently apparent in battleships.
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |