| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
   |
Posted - 2009.09.12 13:39:00 -
[1]
[Machariel, New Setup 2]
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Tracking Computer II, Tracking Speed
Sensor Booster II, Scan Resolution
Sensor Booster II
Medium Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets
1200mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion L
1200mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion L
1200mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion L
1200mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion L
1200mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion L
1200mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion L
1200mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Fusion L
Large Remote Armor Repair System II
Large Ancillary Current Router I
Large Projectile Ambit Extension I
Large Projectile Ambit Extension I
Bouncer II x4
lots of cpu left
24093.89/24681.25 pg
690 dps @ 36 + 86.8km (210 being drones)
~110k EHP
...
[Megathron, RR]
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Adaptive Nano Plating II
Adaptive Nano Plating II
Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Quad LiF Fueled I Booster Rockets
Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
Prototype I Sensor Booster, Targeting Range
Target Painter II
350mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Thorium Charge L
350mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Thorium Charge L
350mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Thorium Charge L
350mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Thorium Charge L
350mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Thorium Charge L
350mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Thorium Charge L
350mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Thorium Charge L
Large Remote Armor Repair System II
Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Large Trimark Armor Pump I
Bouncer II x5
i'll stick to the megathron then; 700mil or so cheaper - granted, a lot less falloff but hey...
(yes projectiles suck that hard - but it'd be the first acceptable "falloff sniper"  )
raise the damage bonus on projectile ships from 5% to (at least) 7.5% / lvl
cynabal = vaga with agility (!), lots of pg (?) and an extra rig slot -.-
i doubt the mid slot can make up for the desirable t2 resistances though
4 turrets with 10% bonus < 5turrets with 5% when looking at damage only. less fitting requirements, however, make me look at that pg again....? are you trying to suggest arties on this...? muninn can't even compete with a zealot unless you unrealistically theorycraft drones and missiles into the equation....
without speed mods but all-lvl-5 skills, mwd speed is 321+2523m/s, total speed with 2 overdrives (no need for nanofibres on this light-weight): 3600m/s
still thinking about falloff-arties...?
not sure if 5 medium drones on such a fast ship aren't too game breaking but i guess it's supposed to make up for the little dps. time for EC-600s i guess -.-
- btw, your cap/s values lack the derived x2.5 for peak recharge which the rest of eve always looks at
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 14:47:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Dibsi Dei
CCP:
Jesus Christ you might want to look into the balance of these ships. Eight (8) bonused turret Vindicator with marauder 90% web? Ashimmu neuting, 90% webbifying, 4 turret 100% damage bonus? Vigilant a 5 turret 75% damage bonus blaster boat with 90% webs?
90% webs should be restricted to Marauders and possibly Rapier/Hugginn only. Simply because they are overpowered.
oh and wholeheartedly this
5% web strength bonus would be... acceptable (resulting in -75% webs) but 10% is reserved for huginn/rapier. not because i want minnies to be spethial but because we went away from 90% webs for (quite a few) a reason(s): +900% tracking must only be allowed on (easily jammable) carebear boats that are marauders
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 14:56:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Roemy Schneider on 12/09/2009 15:03:51
Originally by: Meissa Anunthiel
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium
Cynabal:
While the meager (15 extra m/s) speed increase is fine, the agility is a bit lacking, anything that can be done about it?
The dramiel is fine.
The machariel, well... read the thread... What role do you envision for that ship, because right now I have issues seeing it filling any...
the lower the agi mod the better - and it linearly works with weight; yes, these two get multiplied in the warp-align-time calc [ mass*weight / 1,000,000 * -ln(0.25) ] :
this cynabal would show 5.15s align time in EFT w/o skills or mods - vaga ends up with 8.03s
edit: ...which for some reason isnt the same value as in EFT but you get the idea -.-
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 15:58:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Roemy Schneider on 12/09/2009 15:59:20
Originally by: TheLibrarian
Why should marauders only get the web bonus? Just because you feel they only deserve the web bonus doesn't mean its true. There is no reason they shouldn't be allowed to get the bonus.
i did post one of the reasons. 90% webs is overpowered under any kind of bonus-philosophy. usually it's about effectively having one more module after stacking-penalty: two painters working like three regular ones, two dampeners working like three etc.
same for those RR subs on T3 cruisers
three 60% webs result in ~12% speed left over. one of those super webs is stronger than that; actually even stronger than four regular ones. i'm sure you get how ridiculous it gets with two -90%. just because we had it during the nano age doesn't mean it was any good. it merely survived that long because we had little else vs MWDs except maybe neuts. that's a lot different now, isn't it. except for NPC which just dont care. hence marauders got it.
again, anything slashed to a tenth of its transversal means ten times better tracking for you and everybody else. a full squad just received 30 free, virtual tracking comps.
so yes, i oppose these webs on marauders aswell but as long as those only find their way into pvp during tournaments, i can accept their existance... far off reality.
but with faction ships having extra sensor strength, it is indeed game breaking.
as much as i want afterburners to work in null-sec, too - and as much as i'd like to club this seal of idea completely - i'm still willing to talk about a 5% strength bonus, resulting in a quite powerful -75% web. two of those will inhibit a target by 91% - voila compromise in it's purest form
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 16:37:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Stealthbug
theres no issue with the webs.
These are PIRATE FACTION SHIPS. They aren't supposed to play nice. People are just annoyed that they cant kill them as easily now. These changes are great, they give these ships back their "oh ****" factor.
The only change i could see would be giving the rattlesnake a damage bonus as opposed to a range bonus. but other than that this is great. Why would you care if they out perform mauraders? those things are almost solely PvE considering you can jam them by aiming a strobe light at them >_>;;
it's not like now you're going to see a mass amount of Vindicators and Bhaalgorns floating around causing mayhem. At least now, they are actually worth the price tag placed on them.
http://www.a-kills.com/related.php?id=274390
sry but i don't do well with "maybe sometime in the distant future" and especially not "ah they're expensive, they'll never get used". do not underestimate the power dyspro moons, GTC selling, corp/alliances thefts, scamming, jita market manipulation etc.
remember when (super) capitals were big, expensive ships only very few, very dedicated alliance would field...?
and as i said; it doesnt have to be a gang of those webbers; one guy with 2 of those webbers will be sufficient for the whole gang to not fit regular webs or warp scramblers. in fact, you don't want to for the off-chance he lights up his christmas tree MWD -.-
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 17:06:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Stealthbug
The fact of the matter is, if someone is fielding multibillion ISK ships, they probably dont want it to be a ship that 3 people can just gang up on and destroy. As i said, these are pirate ships. They're supposed to be incredibly powerful.
that's your only argument?
before invention ruined prices for both t2 and most of the best named mods [read: when supply+demand were more or less functioning market forces], there was a rule of thumb saying that anything improving you and/or your ship by 5% would cost you five to ten times more. may sound vague but this is still basis for balance when it comes to hardwiring costs and sometimes best-named items if they're noticeably better; damage controls, neuts, you get the idea.
iow, your dream of a pwn ship that can take on entire bs squads will have to cost you more than a raven state issue, whatever it's called these days / whatever sfshootme wants for it -.-
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 18:42:00 -
[7]
/me suspects a CCP experiment to show us what insanely overpowered ships are required to please us -.-
and then there's the machariel
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 02:58:00 -
[8]
post-dominion alliance tourneys will be sooo boring... 8[
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 12:17:00 -
[9]
ok, so the macha graphically "cannibilizes" launcher hardpoints.
how many polygons are on the vindi/mega model?  
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 18:54:00 -
[10]
hummm i use 1200mm on the macha regardless - i "abuse" the speed argument: instead of bringing my damage to an optimal of in-your-face i take it to my distant optimal range plus a bit of falloff and dictate that. arties have enough (rigged) falloff to allow for short(est) range ammo to be used where beams (or rails) are forced to use longer+weaker lenses, unless it's an apoc :o
it's gonna be the first ship to sustain the falloff argument, really, as it only produces acceptable dps at optimal + 1/2 falloff, contrary what popular graphs may tell you -.-
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 09:42:00 -
[11]
-90% webs is too much
5% bonus/lvl would be -75%
two of those would be -91.3%
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.10.01 17:59:00 -
[12]
yop. _dramiel_ is angel
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
| |
|