|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
268
   |
Posted - 2013.05.16 08:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
I haven't read the entire thread yet and I know some people have nodded to it but I'm repeating it:
Raven CPU - WTF? Just WTAF?!
It's already a ridiculously tight fit, we have to eek another launcher on there AND a mid?!?!
If anyone suggests fitting mods, go and sit in a corner and reflect on your badness. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
270
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
Mmm I'm looking at my CNR, and I will be able to add an extra CML II launcher in without using implants/mods. It's tight though, and I'm using a Large booster, not an XL.
I have also raised the issue of torp launcher fitting costs with CCP Rise and he agreed that they're out of synch with the way that SR/LR turret fittings work. Whether this will translate into a change in the immediate future will be for him to tell us.
One of my pet peeves about missiles is that there are no low-tier options to enable fitting compromises.
Was that including the extra mid too?
With the best will in the world, a navy boat shouldn't need faction pimp or fitting mods simply to get basic, cookie cutter stuff to fit.
I can eek a launcher in my fit, but nothing really into the mid. The only thing I could to is go to launcher rigging V from IV because everything else, CPU wise, is perfect and that's with all faction BCUs and meta4 painter (RF wont fit right) 
It's a pure mission boat, currently running variations of the below (variants include DDA/sensor boost amp/something else I forget and a tractor) basically stuff needs swapped out though depending on mission.
[Raven Navy Issue, Current ASB]
7x Cruise Missile Launcher II (Mjolnir Fury Cruise Missile)
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Kinetic Deflection Field II
Thermic Dissipation Field II
X-Large Ancillary Shield Booster (Cap Booster 400)
2x Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron
4x Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
Drone Damage Amplifier II
3x Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I
5x Hobgoblin II
3x Garde II
I could faction more, but I shouldn't need to in order to even get the damned thing to fit. After the changes I'll have a princely 61.03 CPU left, which I need to sacrifice 58.96 of, to get a launcher in there. As I say, all that I can improve is rigging V...and really, that's not making that big a difference. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
270
|
Posted - 2013.05.17 18:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Hey guys
Posting to let you know that we are going to make two small adjustments to the Armageddon Navy Issue.
First, we're going to lower the drone bay to 200m3. We gave it the giant bay as a way to connect it to the new tech 1 Geddon, but as you've pointed out, it just seems weird.
Second, we're going to lower the signature radius of the Armageddon to 400. The original increase was because of trying pull a lot of the core metrics closer together for the ships within a role (like I did with sensor strength or lock range etc) but in this case it was a totally unnecessary nerf to performance when nothing else on the ship was changing substantially.
The OP will be updated to reflect these changes.
Raven CPU....please, it's /ridiculous/ at the moment. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
270
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 14:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
The more I look at it, the more I see that 'phoon is just an absolute monster. Looks like my venerable old CNR is going to be retired in favour of it. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
270
|
Posted - 2013.05.19 17:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
mama guru wrote:You've cluttered over 20 pages worth of whining on the CNR's loss of rate of fire. Enough is enough.
Ships are not balanced around tractorbeams and amamake.
Heaven forfend people should point out that there's no point in the CNR anymore, and that its stupidly hard to fit. I mean, they gave it an extra launcher but not the CPU to actually fit one and remain neutral. It's not like it was swimming in CPU to start with - its just ill thought through.
Besides that, that phoon can bring ~1700 DPS to the table, a respectable enough tank (as if it needs it, with that kind of damage) and will have near-zero damage application issues to boot. It's an abomination. Why would anyone fly anything else, where PvE is concerned is beyond me. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
274
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 19:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
Deerin wrote:Gimme more Cynos wrote:Deerin wrote:
Raven is the vanilla shield missile ship, Phoon is the new vanilla armor missile ship. They are different by nature.
Same goes with CNR and FPhoon.
Shield tankers will use the shield ships while armor tankers will use armor ships.
Wait till odysee, and you will see plenty of shield-tanked TFI's, obliterating any other missile plattform just because of it's pure damage with missiles, drones and a pair of guns.. in other words: your post is just a piece of crap.. Because on paper EFT DPS is all that matters right? You didn't even read my post and proposed fphoon change did you?
I have /absolute/ faith in the phoon I intend to roll in having minimal/zero issues getting the damage off paper and into space. And the best bit? It does SO MUCH damage I could lose a shedload and STILL tear it up. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
275
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 19:57:00 -
[7] - Quote
For me the basic issue is that whilst the CNR has very good application - it's just not at the races in the overall DPS stakes.
100% of not a lot is inferior to 75% of a stupidly high amount.
I think, with some of my current implants, a TFI can reach around about 1700dps AND with pretty decent application - the CNR is just never going to compete with that. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
278
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 20:17:00 -
[8] - Quote
Deerin wrote:I really want to see some fits where FPhoon completely obsolotes other ships. It is a hard to fit ship.
People claiming Fphoon having higher DPS than competition should try to make a meaningful fit to it. More than 2 BCS on lows nerfs its armor tank. If you are shield tanking it and filling lows you'll get CPU and damage application issues.
Here you go - from a PvE standpoint anyway. Obviously as cost comes down, fit gets tighter, sacrifices are made. The real cost are the Faction BCUs, but its nigh impossible to fit a CNR today any other way so I guess people need to suck it up.
pimped
[Phoon Fleet Oddessy, ML - test]
6x Cruise Missile Launcher II (Inferno Fury Cruise Missile)
Dread Guristas X-Large Shield Booster
2x Caldari Navy Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron
4x Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
3x Drone Damage Amplifier II
3x Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst
5x Garde II
Omni can be swapped for painter - not run math. The omni gives the gardes 39+12 and having used them in that exact fit (single omni) before, the tracking is perfectly fine, unless you're being stupid.
Allowing for 30% cruise buff, we're looking at.....just over 1600dps
more conservative i.e. cheaper:
[Phoon Fleet Oddessy, ML - test]
6x Cruise Missile Launcher II (Inferno Fury Cruise Missile)
Dread Guristas X-Large Shield Booster
2x Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
2x Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron
4x Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
3x Drone Damage Amplifier II
3x Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst
5x Bouncer II
Change of drones to mitigate range without omni. 1546 DPS
ninja edit: all numbers are without heat @ all V and no DPS implants
If you're prepared to lose a DDA (~50dps) and add a co-processer II, you can start adding all sorts of fun stuff in those empty highs.
And as I've mentioned in another post - CMLs, two painters and rigors are how I roll today, albeit on a CNR and I can assure you there are no application issues whatsoever, unless I ping fury at...frigates. Which would make me an idiot, which I'm not.
The Phoon is simply batshit crazy come odessy. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
278
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 20:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
Not run math, its based on my current CNR using and needing them to avoid excessive swapping of ammo for smaller targets (I'm lazy). To be fair supports aren't quite all V yet, it may be slightly sub optimal.
99% sure I've not screwed math up. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
278
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 08:58:00 -
[10] - Quote
Deerin wrote:Stoic I respect you but those fits are....biased to show DPS numbers only.....I really find the low tank and absence of prop mod on those fits disturbing....and using 2 AC's just to buff DPS numbers on cruise setups is also quite biased, especially with the lack of a prop mod.
I posted a cheapish PvE fit (only cost was faction BCUs but as I say, to make a CNR work right, you need them there too - so its parity), nothing padding the DPS artificially either, empty highs. Prop mods are NOT needed for most BS PvE fits.
Deerin wrote:The funny thing is: Even the current Fphoon is not so far off from these numbers, yet no one uses it like this. A 3 slot tank with no prop mod will just not cut it....and even if it does, it erquires to be shield tank, it requires crystals, godly skills (all drone, projectile and missile skills), extensive knowledge of spawn points, volley amounts etc.....which can be only be done by a small niche of players, which are NOT the focus of ship rebalancing. To claim that those fits are functional just supports Malcanis' claim of Fphoon being a "Hardmode" ship.
The current phoon lacks a mid to get the necessary projection - its also missing a launcher and the huge cruise buff as well as the fact it got its damage bonus increased.
Deerin wrote:Please stop using "Hardmode" EFT fits to please trolls like Naomi and use more functional fits that cater to a wider community.
So...what're the issues with mine? As I say - it is absolutely a PvE fit, but as an extremely frequent mission runner I can say with certainty it will be an utter beast. I note you didnt like the use of a co-processor - doing so opens some very interesting uses for those highs. I actually considered dropping a DDA for a co-processor because it allows the addition of DLA...which gives the thing a serious range envelope at a ~50 dps drop. I'm undecided so far - it probably depends on if 1 TP and 1 omni is effective enough or if I'm better served by 2x painters.
In essence the odessy phoon will be fit basically as I fit my CNR today, just with a huge cruise buff, a hull buff, extra sentries and space for DDAs.
I'm not complaining, it's going to be sweet 
Edit: People will say it has application issues - to this I say...yes, but these are the exact same issues the CNR I roll with today has and I've absolutely no issues getting that bird to get the damage out, none whatsoever. A well fit CNR doesnt really need the application bonus for strictly PvE purposes. |
|
|
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
279
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 10:55:00 -
[11] - Quote
@Deerin
It is a bit iffy on cap - it relies on DPS for tank. Again this is based on my CNR - it runs with an ASB and save for worlds collide it basically doesn't even need to pulse it. I had experimented a while back about going absolutely minimal tank to get two painters on it and it works [obscenely well. The phoon I have planned has so much more DPS I honestly don't envision cap/tank being a material issue unless I'm a bit silly (it happens more than I care to admit).
I could be wrong, but certainly I'm going to give it a spin.
The current phoon cant get two painters/painter|omni combo and keep a sane tank - the two painters are really needed. Plus in all honesty, I was quite happy with my current CNR so didnt go looking to trade out. Also what really tips it in odessy is the cruise buff - without that it'd be a very different proposition. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
279
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:12:00 -
[12] - Quote
To be fair, if the CPU on the CNR gets fixed, it's far from a bad boat - it's not really the problem child - the phoon is. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
280
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:23:00 -
[13] - Quote
yes, but thats a T2... |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
284
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 19:36:00 -
[14] - Quote
Lets not lose sight of the fact that the CNR is in /dire/ need of more CPU. DIRE. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
284
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 21:09:00 -
[15] - Quote
Or we accept that "PvE doesnt matter" and let it be - its not possible to fit such ridiculous gank/no tank in a valid, viable PvP fit on it. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
284
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 06:45:00 -
[16] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Morrigan LeSante wrote:Or we accept that "PvE doesnt matter" and let it be - its not possible to fit such ridiculous gank/no tank in a valid, viable PvP fit on it. If we accept that PVE doesn't matter than the CNR is even more obsolete. Consider a Phoon Fleet vs a CNR: - Less sig - Faster - More EHP - More missile damage - More drone flexibility - More drone damage - Utility highs Consider a Phoon Fleet vs a Pest Fleet: - Less Sig - Faster - Very similar EHP - More damage - More drone flexibility - More drone damage - More utility highs Shall we go on? ;-) -Liang
By all means, I'm not a great fan of the "new" CNR incarnation 
Beside, you can't deny for the price tag, the CNR is relatively obsolete in today's PvP combat - its not bringing enough to the table.
In the main though, it was a swipe at the "huuurrrr PvE doesnt matter" crowd  |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
286
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 15:37:00 -
[17] - Quote
I suppose it's too late now but again, please give the raven more CPU. |
Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
290
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 20:20:00 -
[18] - Quote
Cage Man wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:
There are reasons the Typhoon Fleet Issue is still 300 mil in Jita and the Navy Raven costs twice as much.
That reason is that people are stuck in the old ways\EFT warriors... get one, shield fit it and try it is all I can say..
Yes.
The phoon is incontrovertibly /better/ however it is also harder work.
It's a case of you get out what you put in. I use the raven when I can't be bothered.
/shrug. |
|
|
| |
|