|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
531
   |
Posted - 2013.04.08 15:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
This rebalanced Typhoon looks good.
Torps/Cruise will still need some love, but in their current state and on this modified Typhoon, it should be workable.
The rebalanced Tempest is good. The current Tempest is already a very good shield platform (Even if it's going through tough times against tier 3s) and will become even better.
Armor Tempests are getting more breathing space with the PWG buff, good job. |
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
537
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:50:00 -
[2] - Quote
Thank you CCP Rise.
The Typhoon being compared with the Raven has to do with the fact that the Raven is super fat shield tanker while the Typhoon is a super fast armor tanker.
I feel like they're quite close to each other right now.
Thank you for the Tempest. I think that some changes to the slot layout would immensely help the Tempest toward shield tanking. So that we have one Armor Attack BS (Typhoon) and one Shield Attack BS (Tempest).
|
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
544
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 10:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
Seishi Maru wrote:
It seems would be plenety jutifiable to make a tempest 7/6/6 or 7/5/7 On the same trend you used in gallente to solve their issues.
Or you could simply increase tempest speed a bit further (base speed, to something like 125 to make the ATTACK battleship from the FAST RACE be really faster than the COMBAT battleship form the SECOND FASTEST RACE. See the problem I pointed?
A 7 - 6 - 6 setup would be good for a Combatish - Attack Battleship.
5 mids would look like a Typhoon. 6 is just fine. |
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
556
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 08:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
Everyone getting mad at changes.
Are rebalancing threads retirement homes ?
Yes, the Typhoon won't be what it always have been.
Yes, it will probably get the same treatment the Cyclone had.
Is it necessarily bad ? Depends.
If you can't adapt/don't want to, then it's probably bad for you.
If you're looking for new things to try, new challenges and new fits to build, then it's probably good for you.
Simple as that.
That said, The current proposed changes seem alright. The Raven still needs to be looked at, but I would be okay to fly the current proposed Typhoon.
Looks like a solid armor brawler as well as a fun shield kiter.
I don't really see what's wrong with changing things. It brings you new stuff to try, ain't that cool ? |
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
556
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 08:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
Sunuva Gunn wrote:Without it the Republic will be left without a Tri-system battleship.
Considering Tri-system ships are inferior to regular dual-system ships, it probably wouldn't be a bad thing  |
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
558
|
Posted - 2013.04.11 13:08:00 -
[6] - Quote
Sunuva Gunn wrote:I never had an issue with it. (Edit: The projectile/missile/drone split, that is)
Sure, you can still throw loads of weapons on a ship and get some DPS out of it. What I mean is that, first, you need a massive amount of SPs and second, you need to mix damagemods (or have low-DPS weapons)
The Minmatar Republic just thought it would be better to overhaul the Typhoon into a missile platform, so that the pilots aren't forced to train for everything at once.
Sunuva Gunn wrote:I'd rather they just look at the Raven, rather than turn the Phoon into a cookie-cutter of it.
Previously, there were no armor/missile boat. Now there's one. Not a bad thing tbh.
Sunuva Gunn wrote:Simply that, whilst giving you the new ship with one hand, they're taking away the old one with the other.
That is called "Changing things".
Quote:One remarks: for whose who say : if you want to go for missiles use a raven, we do not need an armor raven ... well i need to tank armor and to launch missiles, my personnals stats, and others (from jalmon as example) shows it is more than a viable option ...
Indeed. We need an armor ship that throw missiles. Maybe not "We need", more like "It would be fun to".
Tbh, the problem with the Typhoon being worse than the new Armageddon comes from the Armageddon itself. Less damage should come from its highslots. As in, reduce how many highslots it has. |
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
Verge of Collapse
592
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 12:36:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
-mwd's use too much cap at battleship level to be particularly useful for long
Exactly. Every battleship is FORCED to fit a heavy capbooster. Even when using cap-less guns and a buffer tank. There is no other way around. If you're going to move around, a Heavy Capbooster is MANDATORY. Else you'll just sit there after 6/8 MWD cycles, half of those dedicated to getting up to top speed.
Also, CCP Rise, do you think it's mathematically possible to reduce the Mass value of ships without actually changing their behavior ingame ? And by reducing the mass value, I actually mean reducing the mass value while changing other parameters so that the ship behaves the same.
If so, then you can bring much joy in wormholes. Wormhole residents can't use battleships because of the very, very high mass battleships have. All those new toys that you'll be giving us won't be usable in wormholes, so if there is a way to reduce Battleships' mass, that would be awesome. |
SMT008
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
Verge of Collapse
592
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 22:43:00 -
[8] - Quote
That's a great news ! |
|
|
| |
|