Of course, no promises in terms of order or anything - but the short list includes things like medium rails, hacs, eafs, beams, some other t2 classes like inties/maurders, and some other mods which i don't want to name atm incase they get pushed back awhile. =)

There's a great reason: Torps are doing well in their intended role.

Cruises are getting buffed because they lag far behind Torp performance on TQ currently. If they turn around and buff Torps (to match? I dunno), then you're just replicating the same problems found on live currently with a bunch of power creep tossed in. No thanks.

The Fleet Issue Typhoon is getting 9.6 turrets worth of damage, whilst the Fleet tempest gets 9.975 (Maelstrom 10) - that's before bonused cruise/torps and 125/200m3 drone bay. I'd cry nerf, but most of the ships are already at that level tbh.

I could buy into that if the CNR wasn't becoming just a ****** Golem.

-Liang

Old CNR:

http://scr.hu/4s/uu30c

New CNR:

http://scr.hu/4s/ldtjp




And plenty of CPU with 3xRigor missile stats:

http://scr.hu/4s/nnsdx

See how the NApoc isn't obsoleted by the Paladin? That's the kind of relationship I'm looking for. Right now it has that kind of relationship. Soon... the CNR is simply a bad Golem.

-Liang

Which is "it"? The Golem?

No, missile damage works as a constant and partial application. Once you've reached full application, that's it. That's why you'll see the same damage over and over and over when you're shooting a POS in a missile ship. For battleships, you're going to deal pretty good damage all the time so extra painters and damage application bonuses aren't really going to help you much. For shooting BCs, Cruisers, and Frigs the damage application bonuses (explo radius, explo velocity, painter effectiveness) will help you and actually increase your damage.

-Liang

About the Geddon, that's fine then. About the CNR, you'd be better served by starting a thread about missile damage application than complaining that the ship will now do less damage against bigger targets and more against smaller targets. Unless you like to fight in large BS vs BS battles which would suit the current CNR with the new cruise missile changes better than the new CNR.

Except you are not talking about BS fights, you are talking about missions and how it's going to interfere with your isk/hour ratio. If I'm wrong tell me so and explain why. If I'm right, go ahead and start that other thread.

If you think it'd be OP then suggest something that distinguishes it from all the other missile ships.

-Liang

Pg looks too high for a 6 turret ship. TFI can fit almost everything without problems. Other than that it looks very decent. Maybe too decent. 9 turrets worth alpha is quite high..thouh pest is paying with loss of one lot in this case

Uhhhhhhhhh..... ok. You can see it at a glance really: http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Missile_Damage. Notice how sig radius is factored into both the explo radius and the explosion velocity parts of the equation? Yyyeaaaahhhhh...

-Liang

I like how you point out that the CNR is going to be worse in PVP than the SNI and worse at PVE than the Golem. Where, exactly, does it state that faction battleships should be literally useless? The NApoc isn't obsoleted by the Paladin and the CNR shouldn't be by the Golem. I really don't understand why that's so ******* hard to understand.

-Liang

Ed: And the CCNR will be worse in PVP than either the Fleet Phoon or regular Typhoon. That's the part that's really cute. It really can't catch a break and the ship will come out of the gates completely obsolete. Right now it has a role - and it can keep that role. But if we need it to have a different role, let's do that. But wholly obsolete ships are bullshit and the reason we're doing Tiericide in the first place.

Ok, one more time:
- Cruise Golem > PVE Cruise CNR
- Torp Golem > PVE Torp CNR
- Torp SNI > PVP Torp CNR
- Torp Phoon > PVP Torp CNR
- Cruise Phoon > PVP Cruise CNR
- Cruise PhoonFI > PVP Cruise CNR

I mean, this list really goes on and on. The ship is completely without a role. No, we do not need to wait for the marauder balance pass before pointing out that the current proposal for the CNR is kinda ****.

-Liang

You are really reaching if you're trying to pitch a totally non-existent undisclosed potential possible future Marauder buff will make the Paladin totally obsolete the NApoc. Definitely living up to your name here.

-Liang

Your speculation is just ******* terrible TBH. The entire reasoning behind Tiericide is that there won't be ships that are just plain obsolete anymore. The new CNR is exactly that, and attempting to say we should just wait by presenting a case where a future undisclosed and likely not currently on the drawing board change might maybe possibly completely alter the role of two ships is just ******* silly.

-Liang

You want to hear how i would change the CNR?

First let's talk about the cruise missile change how it increases the damage by 30% but also 10% increase in explosion radius.

All the values are missile dps only with fury ammo.
This will result in Raven with 4bcu's dealing 633 dps to ~822 dps which is quite significant damage to be dealt at 190km.

OLD CNR with 4 bcu's dealing 729 dps would go up to ~960 dps which is where the problem came in, it is simply too much dps over 190km no matter if it got a little harder appliable.

NEW CNR would be dealing same dps as regular Raven, 633 before and 822 after Odyssey.

Now here is the problem, if single turret added to the ship with 25% damage bonus is enough to make it that powerful then maybe you have a problem with your cruise missile buff? In my opinion that regular Raven too with 822 dps would be a little too good compared to other long range weapons. With other weapon systems there is variance in their dps and thus giving more choices and specialization for certain ships. After Odyssey every missile battleship will be having extremely similar dps and the ones without damage application bonuses surely know how to solve the problem.

So, i would go into that cruise missile change and reduce the damage buff (i leave the numbers to ccp). I would change the CNR bonuses to 5% rof and 10% velocity per level thus giving the damage application problem for the pilot to solve and dropping one launcher while keeping the rest as it is currently. Now it actually feels like an attack battleship and has very clear role to differentiate it from the rest.

Idk man, the crow is completely outclassed by the condor right now. The Condor is pretty much the boss frigate atm, fast, hits hard, has ewar slots out the butt (for a frigate).

Its like, do I pay 1 million for this baller ass frigate, or do i pay 35 million for its crappier cousin.

Nah, the Condor is flat out better than the Crow now. If the Crow was better I'd fly it instead of the Condor. o/` ISK ain't a problem, I know where it goes... o/`

-Liang

Ed: I tried to put together Crow fits that could compete but the strength of that 4th mid, superior cap, and superior fittings is just not doable. As I said, the sig and missile velocity bonuses are extremely attractive to me.

And this is a horrible idea. The phoon use to be 8 high (4 launcher 4 turret) and it just didn't work very well because of how split weapons work. You have to have too many support modules to deal decent dps, and pretty much defines all the problems that split weapon ships have.

The typhoon is the traditional minmatar armor battleship, moving the slot layout to 8/6/6 plants it firmly as a shield ship.

My conclusion is your idea is terrible.

That is a pretty heavy nerf there, and also a pretty rubbish ship in total as you would need to fit two sets of damage mods. The Typhoon looks fine to me, I don't see the reason for any nerfs to it, and especially not as heavily as you suggested.

And now we're just shotgunning insults blindly hoping to hit the mark. You missed.

The 125 drone bandwidth pretty much has to stay. With the way they pulled the carpet out from under many typhoon pilots with the new basic phoon they more or less promised to keep the main qualities of the old typhoon in the fleet typhoon. Namely, the large drone bay, armor tank, and the flexibility of fitting missiles, turrets, or other utility highs.

Now I wouldn't be too opposed to going 5/5 turret-launcher split, or moving the bonus down to 5% RoF, or some other things to balance out the damage are fair arguments. But keeping the 8 highs, 125 drone bandwidth, and at least 7 lows are off the table to keep the spirit of the old typhoon alive.

Seeing as how the fleet pest is hands down the worst faction battleship by miles I don't think it should be the gold standard for comparisons. The fact that the double turret bonused fleet pest is worse than the single bonused fleet typhoon says more about how horrible the design of the fleet pest is.

The don't compare well at all because they do completely different things. But some people are saying the new CNR is good, and some are saying it's bad.

Everyone is saying the fleet pest is just bad.

It always has done. I'm somewhat baffled as to why they had to change the low slot layout though. It means I'd have to rip out my current armour tank (if I was going to hang around long enough to have to fly the new version).



A butter knife cuts. Why would we ever need a steak knife?

Then why don't we all just fly the fleet typhoon and stop all the arguing.

Because sun and stars and brightness and whatever.