|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
637
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 22:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
hmmv50cal wrote:That math is wrong, CCP. 50% faster ROF does not double times fired in a period of time, a 100% ROF bonus would do that. 50% isn't doubling something (2x), it's a 1.5x multiplier. Thus, the argument of "lel twice as many shots in same time!" is actually 1.5 times as many shots in given unit of time, and, obviously, not twice the damage. Your explanation is completely flawed. I thought you guys were programmers?? CCP's ROF bonuses are not applied like that. ROF bonuses are actually a reduction to cycle time, thus a 50% ROF bonus means 50% cycle time and 2x the shots fired. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
637
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 23:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
Akirei Scytale wrote: That isn't similar damage, it is significantly less with the loss of a magstab.
How does the loss of a magstab compare with the gains from a switch to an ROF bonus from the damage bonus? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
637
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 23:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Akirei Scytale wrote: That isn't similar damage, it is significantly less with the loss of a magstab.
How does the loss of a magstab compare with the gains from a switch to an ROF bonus from the damage bonus? Losing a heavy drone, while switching to ROF means no change (actually, it's an ever so slight loss in DPS). Losing a Magstab on top of that however, means it's actually a significant loss. Basically: 7 guns, 5% dmg bonus = 8.75 turrets + 2 mag stabs (+47%) = 12.9 7 guns, 5% RoF = 9.33 turrets + 1 mag stab (+23%) = 11.5 Thanks for confirming, seemed like less DPS after the change but wasn't sure the exact numbers. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
637
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 00:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
Akirei Scytale wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:Hi Rise, Got an even simpler solution for you, for the Megathron, really very very simple but first the numbersGǪ IGÇÖm going to use my stock Ion II setup as a basis (I always use 3% ROF/Large Hybrid damage on my setups) Stock Ion II setup with two Mag stabs: 913.2 gun dps + 316.8 drones = 1230 totalChange to 7.5% ROF, still switching -1 L/+1 M, still losing -25m3 drone bandwidthResultStock Ion II setup with one Mag stab: 978 gun dps + 253.4 drones = 1231 total Megathron saved, Threadnought averted *bows* You forgot the part where it doesnt need a mid and remains a flimsy battleship. A mid it doesn't need while still retaining much of the tank and DPS it had before isn't a loss. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
637
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 02:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
Akirei Scytale wrote:It is when the ship's biggest flaw on live is its lack of respectable tank. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the complaint then. The solution for the mega you responded to basically built the missing magstab into the bonus to make up for the relocated low slot, so unless you were fitting a 7 low slot tank how is the ship really missing out in that case? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
637
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 23:35:00 -
[6] - Quote
fukier wrote:smoking gun81 wrote:
I get it and no ship should be at its best using a single drone type.
why not? some ships are the best with blasters. some with beams some with pulse some with arties... why not make a ship that good with sentries? anywho those bonus i already said would be op on a tech I ship... but not on a revamped Sin. Do you feel a single type of drone retains comparable advantages and versatility to a single type of turret? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
637
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 02:35:00 -
[7] - Quote
Helena Khan wrote:The mega's old proposed slot layout is 8-5-6. That is as flawed as a BS' slot layout can get - just ask today's Hyperion. Doesn't the tempest also have that layout? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
637
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 02:49:00 -
[8] - Quote
Akirei Scytale wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Helena Khan wrote:The mega's old proposed slot layout is 8-5-6. That is as flawed as a BS' slot layout can get - just ask today's Hyperion. Doesn't the tempest also have that layout? And I ask you - when is the last time you saw someone using a Tempest seriously for PvP? The best I've seen a Tempest do is a really light artillery platform. It is absurdly niche and not even the best in that role. Freaking Muninns do it better. I don't PvP much so my answer wouldn't be terribly relevant, but I'm not seeing near the complaints of the ship being just plain terrible that I'm seeing of the proposed megathron or current hyperion. If the layout was such a strong contributing factor why wasn't there such strong negative feedback for it?
Was it there and I missed it? Was it because the Maelstrom still provided a viable fleet worthy alternative? Was it that the ship really isn't bad but isn't a fleet go to (which for being an individual ship in the BS line isn't a failure)? |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
637
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 03:05:00 -
[9] - Quote
Akirei Scytale wrote: 1) The Mael was the fleet ship for Minmatar (which could also do small gangs), meaning the other two BSes could do whatever. They often found niche roles, like smartbombing platforms, were used in small gangs for whatever role, and were used in PvE. Nothing was riding on it.
2) The Hyperion is the only tier 3 Gallente BS. Because it has the **** layout, it wasn't viable for any of the things every other tier 3 BS could do. The only fleet viable BS Gallente has currently is the Megathron (it has a good layout), but because of the tier system, its stats were WAY below par. Tiericide is an opportunity to fix this. They decided to make the problem worse instead, by LOWERING the relevant stats on the Megathron while simultaneously giving it the gimptastic layout. Hence page 49.
I won't dispute the idea that given the envisioned roles the Megathron makes the best candidate for a fleet BS, but per the original question, if the role fits why such angst about the layout? Even in your response, though you downplay it you acknowledge the tempest found a role and still left the role of fleet BS filled by the mael. That being the case the layout is situationally workable if not benificial.
But of course that won't be the case for a line BS, but I don't think that was what they were going for on this pass with the megathron. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
638
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 21:42:00 -
[10] - Quote
Borachon wrote:Boston Bradley wrote:Issue: Dominix Change
You just boosted a perfect drone boat with a useless bonus that was already handed by an omnidirectional tracking link.
Good to know that free midslots aren't scarce or valuable. Or just use the omni's anyways to allow gardes II's to work at 60+km. |
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
638
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 20:00:00 -
[11] - Quote
NVM, comment I responded to was edited |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
640
|
Posted - 2013.04.17 22:57:00 -
[12] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:The Armageddon is better ATM No, it isn't. The dominix was the only T1 drone BS, and he now have a brother. Dominix is not alone anymore in its class. It will be hard for the dominix lovers to see it share some place with a little brother. The fact that there are 2 ships occupying the same role makes this claim possible rather than invalidating it. Realistically the 2nd bonus on the Domi is more situational and harder to take advantage of than the geddon's bonus. Considering the similarity between them now it's a fair comparison. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
640
|
Posted - 2013.04.18 06:09:00 -
[13] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:ShahFluffers wrote:The problem is that the Armageddon overshadows the Dominix at close range (better tank, tactically more flexible, neut bonus, etc). And other ships overshadow the Dominix in the role it's being "encouraged" into (sentry sniping). In fact, the tank difference is meaningless, and the dominix is the most flexible of the two, because of the mid slots. Gun dps is rather balanced : the dominix have one more turret hardpoint, which mean better use of weapon damage module, but the geddon have more weapon slots wich offset this. As for the sentry thing, that was already something the dominix do a lot, and while sentries have inherent drawback, they don't overlap with turrets more than missiles for example. Without the damage bonus aren't you better off with DDA's? If so the advantage there loses a good portion of its practicality. As for the rest, are dominix fleet doctrines really something likely to become prolific in the face of carriers for drone alternatives or turreted ships which don't leave their dps behind when they move? That is the only real full use of the bonus. |
|
|
|