Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |

Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 01:27:00 -
[301] - Quote
These new tier4 battlecruisers are cool but where are the real battleships? 
But really, now with the faction battlecruisers it's getting pretty cramped in there to balance everything without stomping on the shoes of others... |

Ranamar
Li3's Electric Cucumber Li3 Federation
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 01:38:00 -
[302] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:Just noticed the drone stats on the raven 50m3 bay 75mbit bandwidth. Is this a typo? I just can't imagine how all that bandwidth could be used up, unless I am missing something, I am not that heavy a drone user so I may be wrong.
Back when I ran L4 missions in a Raven, (... back before the rat AI change, too...) I would keep 1 flight mediums (Hammerhead) and 1 flight lights (Hobgoblin) in my 75 cubic meters of drone bay. It looks like this is codifying that and getting rid of the goofy 2H/2M/1L loadout that was the way to max out bandwidth and drone control limit. |

Toshaheri Talvinen
Ultimate Ascension
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 03:58:00 -
[303] - Quote
Johnson Oramara wrote:These new tier4 battlecruisers are cool but where are the real battleships?  But really, now with the faction battlecruisers it's getting pretty cramped in there to balance everything without stomping on the shoes of others...
Yeah, I get the feeling that there isn't going to be such thing as a battleship anymore. Now all they are nothing but slow battlecruisers with slightly higher HP. Whoop dee doo. I would think that battleships would be much better at tanking, but much worse at hitting smaller things. But then again, that would make too much sense, and take too much time.
- - Tosh |

Steve Spooner
Mordu's Military Industrial Command Circle-Of-Two
18
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 06:23:00 -
[304] - Quote
I wish oh I wish how the Raven's bonuses would be more applicable. I would love to see how being able to hit something with cruise missiles 190 KM away (double max raven targeting range without mods) is ever better than a damage, explosive radius, or RoF bonus. |

Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
465
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 09:30:00 -
[305] - Quote
Raven: More CPU Rokh: Hmmmmm, in this case, resistance nerf a bit harsh Scorp: Probably as good as it'll get Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
618
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 09:33:00 -
[306] - Quote
It would also help giving feedback on the Raven if we knew the current state of thinking on introducing missile "tracking computer" mods and the missile disruptor ewar (please god don't just give a missile disruption effect to tracking disruptors, even via a script). |

Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
257
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 11:02:00 -
[307] - Quote
The scorpion seems to be so useless, especially as its cost probably will be increased :(
did u find any soso fit for it? |

Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
257
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 11:06:00 -
[308] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:It would also help giving feedback on the Raven if we knew the current state of thinking on introducing missile "tracking computer" mods and the missile disruptor ewar (please god don't just give a missile disruption effect to tracking disruptors, even via a script). nobody can balance a ship where you dont know what weapons can it fit , ccp have to revisit raven typhoon after large missile fix
oh and i dont think there should be any missile disruption at all , just like there shouldnt be modules that directly boost missiles, makeing everything the same is bad
and still i think raven should have better sensor range , it has 75km laughable for a ship and race specialized in long range warfare |

Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
81
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 11:16:00 -
[309] - Quote
Commander Ted wrote:Alright, the scorpion blows, and I only have 1 suggestion which is kinda a long shot. Give the scorpion 4 launchers or 4 turrets or a mix and give it 8 high slots. Then give the Scorpion 5 lows and 6 mids. Then change the ECM module to be a high slot module.
Then redo the Falcon, Rook, Blackbird, Griffin, and tengu (ecm tengu lol) to also have lots of highslots.
Then the scorp can actually tank itself. Funnily enough, going way way waaaay back, ECM was a high slot module (before my time, can't find relevant link anymore).
Worth looking into IMO, as ECM still stands out from other EW as being fairly unique, high slot ECM would open some interesting possibilities.
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8617
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 11:51:00 -
[310] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Gypsio III wrote:It would also help giving feedback on the Raven if we knew the current state of thinking on introducing missile "tracking computer" mods and the missile disruptor ewar (please god don't just give a missile disruption effect to tracking disruptors, even via a script). nobody can balance a ship where you dont know what weapons can it fit , ccp have to revisit raven typhoon after large missile fix oh and i dont think there should be any missile disruption at all , just like there shouldnt be modules that directly boost missiles, makeing everything the same is bad and still i think raven should have better sensor range , it has 75km laughable for a ship and race specialized in long range warfare
Once upon a time, no one ever fitted Cruise Missiles on a Raven, only Torps. Please vote for me for CSM8-áhere
My recommended voting list |
|

Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
257
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 13:13:00 -
[311] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Naomi Knight wrote:Gypsio III wrote:It would also help giving feedback on the Raven if we knew the current state of thinking on introducing missile "tracking computer" mods and the missile disruptor ewar (please god don't just give a missile disruption effect to tracking disruptors, even via a script). nobody can balance a ship where you dont know what weapons can it fit , ccp have to revisit raven typhoon after large missile fix oh and i dont think there should be any missile disruption at all , just like there shouldnt be modules that directly boost missiles, makeing everything the same is bad and still i think raven should have better sensor range , it has 75km laughable for a ship and race specialized in long range warfare Once upon a time, no one ever fitted Cruise Missiles on a Raven, only Torps. so? how is that relevant at all?
|

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8621
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 14:33:00 -
[312] - Quote
I mean be careful about making sweeping statements about what the Raven is "designed" for.
The proposed new Raven will be a moderate improvement as a CML platform, and a huge improvement as a Torp platform. Whatever the Raven was designed for, it is going to be designed as a fast attack torpedo ship. And a very fine thing too.
I can only hope that they enact the proposed changes and migrate them to the Navy Raven as well. An extra slot for a Target Painter? Yes please! Please vote for me for CSM8-áhere
My recommended voting list |

SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
558
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 15:01:00 -
[313] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: The proposed new Raven will be a moderate improvement as a CML platform, and a huge improvement as a Torp platform. Whatever the Raven was designed for, it is going to be designed as a fast attack torpedo ship. And a very fine thing too.
When trying to improve the Raven, I always ask myself "At what job is it the best battleship ?".
And for now, all I could answer was "The Raven is always outclassed by at the very least one battleship, if not two."
It is indeed a huge improvement as a Torp platform. Considering how ****** it was, a huge improvement brings it to a "Almost good" level. |

Wrayeth
Inexorable Retribution
60
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 15:23:00 -
[314] - Quote
FINALLY!
I have been waiting for the raven to gain another midslot since sometime in 2005 (when -cough- I suggested it multiple times; albeit some of my other ideas were less than stellar). I also like the way it's gaining mobility.
For the scorp, the 7th low is definitely going to be a game-changer, making it either much more survivable or better able to jam, depending on how one wishes to fit it.
|

Plekto
Deathraven Industries The AirShip Pirates
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 16:01:00 -
[315] - Quote
I've been running the numbers on the Raven vs the Typhoon and come to the conclusion that the Typhoon is a better version of the Raven?
Typhoon: Slots: 7/5/7 (this is huge - those lows mean way more BCS or Power relays) HP: 6500/6000/6000 Weapons: 6 Launchers Bonuses: 5% ROF/5% explosion velocity (even more damage) Cap: 5400 Drone: 100/100
Raven: Slots: 7/7/5 HP:7000/5800/6400 Weapons: 6 Launchers Bonuses: 5% ROF/10% Velocity Cap: 5500 Drone: 50/75 (well at least it can still use 5 mediums still)
My question to the DEV is what will set the Raven apart from the Typhoon as a special role/bonus, given that it's the Caldari's main missile boat? To be honest, we don't need extra range for cruise missiles - they already easily are longer than the thing can possibly target. 200KM almost. Given the flight time, missiles aren't really, um... sniper weapons.
Please give the Raven some sort of bonus that makes it different in a meaningful way. I'd suggest dropping the Cruise Missile bonuses and making it a dedicated torpedo boat that makes torpedos a special option for it (say a 15% velocity mod to give it enough range to do missions)
Torpedos have no love as it is and they are relegated to station and bubble bashing. Their range even with mods is just barely over 30K, making them useless for missions as rats sit at 45km, typically (at least the larger ones that drones can't clear by themselves) |

Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
86
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 16:03:00 -
[316] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Raven:
Very sad to see the loss of the second utility high. I find it extremely useful but I may be in the minority in this opinion. I would have prefered losing the 5th low slot for a mid with a CPU/PG boost so that you don't HAVE to fit a fitting mod.
o_O There's nothing a million chinese guys can't do cheaper. |

Grunnax Aurelius
luna Oscura Clandestina Armada The Nightingales of Hades
42
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 16:13:00 -
[317] - Quote
Plekto wrote:I've been running the numbers on the Raven vs the Typhoon and come to the conclusion that the Typhoon is a better version of the Raven?
Typhoon: Slots: 7/5/7 (this is huge - those lows mean way more BCS or Power relays) HP: 6500/6000/6000 Weapons: 6 Launchers Bonuses: 5% ROF/5% explosion velocity (even more damage) Cap: 5400 Drone: 100/100
Raven: Slots: 7/7/5 HP:7000/5800/6400 Weapons: 6 Launchers Bonuses: 5% ROF/10% Velocity Cap: 5500 Drone: 50/75 (well at least it can still use 5 mediums still)
My question to the DEV is what will set the Raven apart from the Typhoon as a special role/bonus, given that it's the Caldari's main missile boat? To be honest, we don't need extra range for cruise missiles - they already easily are longer than the thing can possibly target. 200KM almost. Given the flight time, missiles aren't really, um... sniper weapons.
Please give the Raven some sort of bonus that makes it different in a meaningful way. I'd suggest dropping the Cruise Missile bonuses and making it a dedicated torpedo boat that makes torpedos a special option for it (say a 15% velocity mod to give it enough range to do missions)
Torpedos have no love as it is and they are relegated to station and bubble bashing. Their range even with mods is just barely over 30K, making them useless for missions as rats sit at 45km, typically (at least the larger ones that drones can't clear by themselves)
If you make the Raven a dedicated Torpedo boat its nothing but a shiney Typhoon and then you have two ships the exact same. Caldari is a ranged kitting missile race and should be treated as such.
Caldari as you know are the most advanced race when it comes to Shield and Missile systems, now what i find odd is that the Typhoon has a skill bonus that affects the way damage is applied by missiles, when this would clearly be a Caldari thing. I suggest giving the Typhoon a 5% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness per level or 5% bonus to Stasis Webifier propultion jam strength per level as that is the Minmatar's area of expertise, it will make taking on Battlecruisers easier than having a Explosion Velocity bonus.
This is the Raven and the Typhoon, the Raven is supposed to be a Kitting Missile Ship, and the Typhoon a Brawling Missile Ship.
Raven Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses: +5% bonus to Cruise and Torpedo Launcher rate of fire +10% bonus to Cruise Missile Torpedo Velocity Slot layout: 7H, 7M, 5L; 0 turrets , 6 launchers
Typhoon Minmatar Battleship Skill Bonuses: +5% to Cruise and Torpedo launcher rate of fire +5% Cruise Missile and Torpedo explosion velocity Slot layout: 7H, 5M, 7L; 5 turrets , 6 launchers
What I propose is that the Raven replaces its +10% bonus to Cruise Missile Torpedo Velocity per level, for the +5% Cruise Missile and Torpedo explosion velocity per level. This would notion that the Raven should be Cruise Missile fitted and apply its damage easier as well as the Typhoon. CCP Rise did confirm that Cruise Missiles are getting a revamp and increased damage so Cruise Missiles wont be a bad choice anymore making this change extremely relevant and being a Kitting designed ship it should notion fitting Cruise Missiles. Also it should be given 1 more Launcher slot to help compensate for damage, but this eaxtra launcher point will depend on the changes to Cruise Missiles. The Typhoon replaces its +5% Cruise Missile and Torpedo explosion velocity per level with either a 5% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness per level or a 5% bonus to Stasis Webifier effectiveness per level. Both these bonuses help Torpedo's on applying easier damage to target. I would personally like a Target Painter bonus but thats just me.
These changes bring both ships into a really nice category and don't conflict with each other as much in terms of arguments of one being better than the other.
CCP Rise please take this into consideration, they are not game breaking changes, they just small changes that bring both ships into line with each other with the defining feature of one being a brawling torpedo boat and one being a kitting cruise missile boat. Two Teir Carriers-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=207604&find=unread |

Plekto
Deathraven Industries The AirShip Pirates
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 16:27:00 -
[318] - Quote
I added a weapon comparison to my original post.
The Typhoon is a great ship. Let it do missiles. That explosion velocity is a massive game-changer. It's not about RANGE. It's about being able to stick 3 rigs on it and smack frigates for nearly full damage with precision cruises. That's a very relevant change.
But what does the Raven get? It clearly should be the torpedo boat. Since it doesn't have the extra lows for that third BCS any more, it has to switch from Cruises to another role (as in pure damage, the Typhoon will always out-slot it in damage mods).
I suggest the following: Raven Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses: +7.5% Torpedo Launcher rate of fire (to compensate for the loss of the BCS) +20% bonus to Torpedo Velocity (give it range to reach the target without rigs) Slot layout: 7H, 7M, 5L; 0 turrets , 6 launchers
Give it a defined role like this and it'll be a great ship. Note that sig and the ability to hit only large targets effectively remains unchanged. This just gives it comparable DPS to before and makes it able to hit bigger targets at an effective range. |

Shingorash
S T R A T C O M THORN Alliance
37
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 16:45:00 -
[319] - Quote
Wouldnt it make more sense to remote both the current bonus' on the Raven and replace them with an Explosion Velocity and a Explosion Radius bonus?
7 Mid slots is still not enough really for a ship using torps to effectively fit a tank and mods to help it do damage. At least with the bonus' above the DPS it does will be more likely to actually do something.
The paper DPS on torps is great but at present the ship doesnt even do half that torp damage against small targets unless they have 2 painters and 2 webs on them.
Thats the type of bonus I would like to see, if its a dedicated missile platform it should have bonus' to reflect that. |

Plekto
Deathraven Industries The AirShip Pirates
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 17:19:00 -
[320] - Quote
It gets even more silly when I looked at a level 5 typhoon with cruises vs a bigger ship like a destroyer.
It hits you for so much damage that if you're not already hitting warp, the second volley is only a bit over six seconds behind. (4BCS plus 2 launcher speed rigs on overload). You simply pop destroyers like candy.
The Raven has not enough lows now to be a real dedicated missile boat any more, and the drones are so low that it can't augment the missing torpedo damage with drones vs large targets, either.
Basically the Raven has been reduced to an EWAR platform. Ie - no defined role.
Now, I don't want to nerf the Typhoon. I hate nerfs. But the logical choice if the Typhoon is the de-facto Cruise Missile ship in the game, is to give the Torpedo role somehow to the Raven. That I could live with.
Raven Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses: +7.5% Torpedo Launcher rate of fire (to compensate for the loss of the BCS) +7.5% bonus to Explosion velocity (damage is fine, it heeds to hit faster targets since torps are slow) Slot layout: 7H, 7M, 5L; 0 turrets , 6 launchers
I think the DEVs figured the Raven would be a good shield ship. But they forgot that the basis of a shield ship is the low slot modules, as if the mids are filled with shields, you must put damage in lows. If you put even one damage or PVP related mod (painter or MWD of similart) in mid, you must put power relay modules in low to augment shields.
Alternatively: Raven Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses: +7.5% Cruise Missile and Torpedo Launcher rate of fire +7.5% bonus to targeting speed/scan resolution (however it's managed via bonuses) Slot layout: 7H, 7M, 5L; 0 turrets , 6 launchers
That also would work as it would now be a dedicated rapid launch platform. If they want it to be an EWAR type ship, give it EWAR type targeting bonuses. No damage mods like the Min ships, but super fast lock time. This would make the Raven a perfect cloaked missile boat as well. (ie - give it a role)
EDIT - Actually I like this better. |
|

Ed Bever
Aliastra Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 18:27:00 -
[321] - Quote
[quote=CCP Rise] The Rokh, like most of the former tier 3 battleships, is in a very healthy place currently. It hasn't been changed, except for a tweak to the resist bonus. This change is significant, and we are going to dedicate an entire thread to discussing the power of resistance bonuses later in the day. If you want to talk about this bonus here, in relation to the Rokh specifically, feel free. The general idea from our end is that the current bonus to resistance is one of the most powerful ship bonuses in the game. It adds to the power of local tanks (active and passive) as well as remote tanks, which has consistently positioned ships with this bonus at the center of some of the most powerful gameplay available. We feel that the Rokh is a good example of this powerful gameplay, and expect it to thrive despite this change.[/qoute]
Naturally, you have a point if you say resistance bonusses are powerful. This is why the active tanking bonusses are larger (7,5%/lvl to be exact) |

Van Mathias
Dead Space Collective
15
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 19:25:00 -
[322] - Quote
Ugh, is there any point to battleships as they stand anymore with the Faction BC's that are coming out? They are cheaper, and are about as powerful, but can hit more things on the field. I mean, honestly. First the tank nerf, then this! It's like CCP thinks the way to balance BS's is to make them unplayable. Post your advanced battleship ideas here! |

Plekto
Deathraven Industries The AirShip Pirates
19
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 19:58:00 -
[323] - Quote
They just need specific roles. Since the Min BS is the new DPS missile boat, the Caldari Missile BS needs to be either speed or range focused. Given the extra mid slot, I'd say either would work. Possibly both in exchange for no damage mods.
200km lock range? Oh lord, sign me up! |

Toshaheri Talvinen
Ultimate Ascension
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 20:50:00 -
[324] - Quote
Van Mathias wrote:Ugh, is there any point to battleships as they stand anymore with the Faction BC's that are coming out? They are cheaper, and are about as powerful, but can hit more things on the field. I mean, honestly. First the tank nerf, then this! It's like CCP thinks the way to balance BS's is to make them unplayable. That's what I'm saying, the raven is going to have less HP than a faction battlecruiser. And all battleships are going to be touching elbows with battlecruisers in general. The HP gap needs to widen in my opinion. It makes little to no sense to fly battleships due to the fact that battlecruisers hit slightly under that of battleships, while tanking the same, if not more than a battleship. Good job on this one CCP. |

Wolfe Malar
Lone Wolves of Malar
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 21:12:00 -
[325] - Quote
Caldari:
Rokh -In combat turret line as expected. -High slot layout is nice and meshes with other combat turret ships overall. 8 turrets and 0 utility -Non-drone ship bandwidth needs to either be made consistent across ship line according to race or across all racial non-drone ships. Prefer to limit bandwidth on non-drone Caldari ships to 75 or 50. -Like the 4missle hardpoints for extra options and possibilities.
Raven -In attack alt (missile) line. The ship would be fit in well if put into either the combat or attack line, though to me it would feel better in the combat alt(missile) line as Caldari are not known for there speed. -Mirrors the other attack alt (missile) ship in high slot layout, yet provides something very different. -Non-drone ship bandwidth needs to either be made consistent across ship line according to race or across all racial non-drone ships. Prefer to limit bandwidth on non-drone Caldari ships to 75 or 50. -Would like 4 turret hardpoints for extra options and possibilities.
Scorpion -In disrupt line, expected. Would also fit in the attack or combat line with a ewar bonus like the Armageddon. -Warning: Oddball if no other disruption ships are introduced. -High slot layout fits the disrupt role and mirrors the Blackbird well. -Non-drone ship bandwidth needs to either be made consistent across ship line according to race or across all racial non-drone ships. Prefer to limit bandwidth on non-drone Caldari ships to 75 or 50
I have expressed my thoughts on the overall battleship design in the "Introducing Myself....." thread and it contains more detailed reasons for my comments on the specific ships above:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2871021#post2871021 |

Van Mathias
Dead Space Collective
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 21:22:00 -
[326] - Quote
See, here is the thing. When you propose cutting resists in order to make BS's more losable, and then you release faction BC's that cost 80% as much and provide 90% of the tank, it blows the whole reduce resists to preserve meta argument out of the water. The new faction battlecruisers will completely ruin any current BS meta anyway.
I have given a bit more thought to it, and here is what needs to be done:
All BS ehp needs to be boosted about 33% more. All BS cargoholds need to be doubled in size. No resist nerf for any ship. Double all battleship base material costs. All battleship need to be buffed a bit utility wise. This has mostly been covered by the proposed changes. Give the Rokh 25m3 more drone bay. A modest cap buff for all BS's Fix large missiles. More speed for the raven. Buff large blaster optimal a bit (500-1500m), the TE nerf is not really targeted at this weapon.
and
Split omni Invulns into size classes, and increase the cycle cost of the BS sized invuln by 50%, increase the cycle cost of the meduim sized one by 25%, and leave the small size one as it is. One of the big reasons that active resists boosts are so powerful is because they are so cheap cap wise, so running a dual-invuln is easy. Making 2 invulns cost 3 cap wise will go a long way to reducing the attractiveness of that fitting option. If you want cap cheap omni tank, you should have to really pay for it slot wise. And there should be a resist penalty to the target of remote reps for the duration of the rep and a few seconds afterward. Furthermore there should be a penalty of some sort for all directly applied (Not fleet booster or OGB) buff effects. Post your advanced battleship ideas here! |

Mirel Dystoph
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
40
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 00:10:00 -
[327] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: I hate to do the soonTM thing, but Fozzie should be making a post soon (I'm not sure if that means today or tomorrow or what) about the Rokh/Abaddon resistance bonus tweak, so just watch for that.
Still no new thread up... "Nothing essential happens in the absence of noise."-á |

LarpingBard
Str8ngeBrew RAZOR Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 00:11:00 -
[328] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Welcome to the Tech 1 Battleship rebalance, fasten your seatbelts!
Rokh:
The Rokh, like most of the former tier 3 battleships, is in a very healthy place currently. It hasn't been changed, except for a tweak to the resist bonus. This change is significant, and we are going to dedicate an entire thread to discussing the power of resistance bonuses later in the day. If you want to talk about this bonus here, in relation to the Rokh specifically, feel free. The general idea from our end is that the current bonus to resistance is one of the most powerful ship bonuses in the game. It adds to the power of local tanks (active and passive) as well as remote tanks, which has consistently positioned ships with this bonus at the center of some of the most powerful gameplay available. We feel that the Rokh is a good example of this powerful gameplay, and expect it to thrive despite this change.
Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses: +10% to large Hybrid Turret optimal range +4% Shield resistances per level (-1% per level)
Slot layout: 8H, 6M, 5L; 8 turrets , 4 launchers Fittings: 15000 PWG, 780 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 8500 / 7000 / 7500 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / recharge per second) : 6000 / 1250s / 4.8 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 89 / .136 / 105300000 / 19.85s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 50 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 90km / 75 / 7 Sensor strength: 24 Gravimetric Signature radius: 500
I know this might make blob doctrines happy but that's about it. In every situation other than the blob the Rokh is really weak. Micro Jump Drives has made it even weaker. And it's stupid to PvE in a Rokh, might as well rat in a dread (and no, that is a really bad idea)
Rokh needs its 5% resis (even if the hp on shields goes down to 7000) for those who do not use it in fleets above 25+ If not, is it possible to give the Rokh 75/75 drone capability? |

Van Mathias
Dead Space Collective
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 00:25:00 -
[329] - Quote
7000 is a bit much, 8000 / 7500 / 7500 would be more resonable. Same total base HP, but a bit of EHP shaved off. Post your advanced battleship ideas here! |

Pan Dora
Stardust Enterprises
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.12 03:19:00 -
[330] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Once upon a time, no one ever fitted Cruise Missiles on a Raven, only Torps.
Unfortunately people started to use Cruise Missiles on Ravens not because some adjustment made then better, but because a big reduction in range and increase in fitting made Torp Ravens not viable for some uses.
CCP Rise wrote:I see a lot of discussion about large missiles overall. I can't give you guys a whole bunch of details right now, because honestly we don't have them quite pinned down yet, but I'll tell you two things now which will hopefully be encouraging: cruise missiles will get a buff (most likely related to their damage), and at least some of the work for battleship missiles will make it into Odyssey.
Unfortunately, this its really not much. CM receiving a buff related to their damage its probably what everyone its expecting, and, like others had pointed, Raven/Typhoon/Armageddon changes can't be considered done without the large missile changes (not some changes, all the necessary changes).
Im also cusious: May we expect changes to Stealth Bombers, Golem, Raven Navy and Rattlesnake with the large missile change or those will need to wait until ship re-balancing initiative reach then?
_____________________________________________________ -CCP would boost ECM so it also block the ability of buthurt posting. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |