|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
16
   |
Posted - 2013.05.13 23:52:00 -
[1] - Quote
Any particular reason why you don't want to make the Dominix have 20 fitting slots like every other Navy BS? Would be kinda nice to have 8 low slots since it's a split weapon platform AND supposed to be armor tanked... |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 00:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:MeBiatch wrote:MinutemanKirk wrote:Any particular reason why you don't want to make the Dominix have 20 fitting slots like every other Navy BS? Would be kinda nice to have 8 low slots since it's a split weapon platform AND supposed to be armor tanked... drones. apparently drone utility negates a fitting slot for some reason. Because drones can imitate a target painter, web, jammer, dampener, reps, or dps, so ships that specialize in high drone payloads receive one less slot.
An armor tanked ship isn't going to NEED drones for EWAR with 6 mids. As the domi only has 6 turrets, 90% of the time drones are used for DPS. As the navy variant will be keeping the turret bonus, it will promote needing to use magstabs in addition to drone damage augs thus meaning a smaller tank. As drones have expressly been stated as needing work, saying that the flexibility of drones = 1 low slot is hardly right. If that were the case the Mega would need to lose a low as it has plenty of drone options as well. |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
16
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 00:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
[quote=Grath Telkin
I'm not sure if anybody has bothered to tell you this yet in life, but I'll go ahead and be the first::
Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make it wrong or factually incorrect.
[/quote]
Har, har, funny man. I'm fairly sure this thread is for the feedback of what was proposed, which is what I gave. "Life lessons" is in the other thread |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 00:52:00 -
[4] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:No. You guys need to get over the "8" number for the turrets. As its been said quite a few times, less turrets = less ammo and more importantly, less cap. As long as the damage is working out the same, then by all means, CCP, cut the amount of turrets for cap-using weapons. Give me a compelling reason to buy a Navy Megathron then. Because right now, there really isn't one. As it stands, more buffer isn't worth ~300m ISK. The extra drone DPS is situational at best.
Agreed.
In this case, the "8 turrets" intention is not meant to get the same DPS as before, it's to get more DPS than it's T1 counterpart. |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 13:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
mynnna wrote:
930 DPS with Gardes (realistically, use sentries with longer range, but it's still a lot of dps), 150k EHP, aligns in 10 seconds, moves at 1033m/s, has a heavy neut if things try to go to zero on you, and only needs booster 150s at a minimum to be cap stable.
It's kinda good. Might be slightly disadvantaged in solo/small gang compared to the Vindicator, but it's a fine fleet ship.
You realize that the T1 version can do all of that (with a nearly identical setup) with the only differences being two less sentries, less buffer and no neut right?
Certainly not enough to warrant the additional 300-400 mil of the navy variant.
I also don't understand why people are trying to compare it with the vindi. It can't get anywhere near the DPS of a Vindi without an 8th turret (even by sacrificing tank for many magstabs) and has no web bonus. The whole reason why I'm upset the suggested navy mega is because there is such little difference from it's T1 counterpart. |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 14:10:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:MinutemanKirk wrote: The whole reason why I'm upset the suggested navy mega is because there is such little difference from it's T1 counterpart. 50m3 more bandwidth, 2 flights of lights, a heavy nuet, and a bunch more ehp is little difference? come now... I don't think you're really being objective here...
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Navy geddon
"Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 375(+200)"
Why?
If 50 m3 bandwidth is such an improvement, how come you asking why on the geddon and not simply rejoicing at such a clearly huge buff?
Again though, it's not JUST that the difference is so little, it's the additional cost. When in demand, 400 extra mil is almost an additional plex, and I can't believe that you would think those small differences would be worth that much more. If almost the cost of my subscription for not a lot of gain isn't "objective" enough I guess I don't know what is. |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 21:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
mynnna wrote:
I've looked at the normal mega. Fleet fit it gets way less EHP, 75m3 drone bay means you can run warriors and EC-600s or three sentries instead of a full flight of sentries and EC-600s, it's slower, and worst of all, it's currently immensely difficult to fit. It may be the same ship writ large and thus not "sexy", but it's undeniably a lot stronger.
And the navy variant will probably cost 200-250m more, not 300-400m more.
So in talking about this, a blaster boat, the best "upgrade" is in it's drone bay? If that's the case the new navy geddon needs a new line of argument. Same with being "slower", as it's an ARMOR ship, speed is really not my first concern when wanting "upgrades". Is the neut useful? Of course, but especially in small gangs (5-10) and small fleets (10-40) having that one neut is less useful than having an extra 150 DPS, or having another mid for EWAR and cap issues (as hordes of Guards won't be following me).
As for the price you are way off. As of writing this, sell prices in Jita are 138mil for a mega and 504 mil for the Navy version (a 366 mil difference found here: http://eve-central.com/) . If I understand correctly, mineral costs to build them are going up. Not only that, I've heard rumors that LP prices might change because of the new Navy BC's. If that happens and they cost more LP than currently, you can easily expect that to grow to 400 mil. |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 21:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
The prices are soaring right now for the navy battleships due to the announced changes. Prices soared for the tech one battleships as well, but has dropped again. The tech one megathron is lower than it was before.
So prices are soaring because the demand is going up for a ship that has thus far been rated by the majority as "meh", "bad" or "lacking" in it's changes? Makes perfect sense... 
EDIt: Also as a point of note, if you look at the market history in game, the price has gone up since March 1st and has been at at the 480+ mark since April 3rd. |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 16:36:00 -
[9] - Quote
Zetak wrote:Roime wrote:What is the intended use for a Navy Mega?
It doesn't seem to have mnay strengths compared to other ships here.
What does "attack battleship" mean?
Well, it has 130m/s speed for starters. Take it from someone who used really slow ship (raven navy) all the time, 455m/s max speed is really good with an AB. You can have 5 sentry with this ship, while you are able to carry 5 med drone or 10 light drone. You can have an extra high slot of your choosing. 1 drone link for instance. you have +3000 base armor hp. whats not to like here?
What's not to like is that people keep on saying how great the extra drone options are when it's a turret ship. If you want extra drones from a Gallente ship go with the Navy Domi (even though it's getting shorted a slot). I would much rather have a 5th mid and/or an 8th turret and have no drones at all. If you really need to have that extra little DPS for cruiser sized targets from a Mega, a second web or TP would fit the ship much better, not to mention that if you referring to fleet roles you would (or at least should) have designated ships to counter smaller ships.
EDIT: don't get me wrong, more drones are great but if we are trying to get to the heart of what this ship is supposed to do, more drones should not be how it gets buffed. |
MinutemanKirk
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Samurai Pizza Cats
20
|
Posted - 2013.05.25 19:56:00 -
[10] - Quote
Samas Sarum wrote:
Welcome to all Amarr BS's (can we retire the unlimited ammo meme, no one uses T1 crystals).
So because Amarr have cap hungry guns that justifies Gallente having them also?
Gallente have enough cap problems as it is since we have to burn prop mods longer just to be able to use our preferred guns. Not being able to maintain as much cap, not to mention the ineffectiveness this would lead to that utility/neut high slot everyone keep talking about, would make the mega that much less desirable. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|