EVE Search - Sticky:[Odyssey] Navy Battleships

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Odyssey] Navy Battleships

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 8 post(s)
Liang Nuren Heretic Army Heretic Initiative 3498	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:27:00 - [601] - Quote Jason Sirober wrote: So you're upset with the Navy Geddon's nerf to sig but you're OK with the Scorp and Domi's nerf to the same thing? Yes, actually. Sig has always been a part of the Geddon's tank and the increase is quite substantial. The nerf is significantly larger relative to the SNI and NDomi (who always had relatively large sig radiuses) -Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
Maximus Andendare Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 154	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:29:00 - [602] - Quote Liang Nuren wrote: The CNR doesn't really get you anything except being able to fly it with "max DPS" with Caldari BS 1. -Liang Actually, Navy ships will take BS II on June 4.... :P
Jason Sirober The Riot Formation Unclaimed. 18	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:31:00 - [603] - Quote Liang Nuren wrote: Jason Sirober wrote: So you're upset with the Navy Geddon's nerf to sig but you're OK with the Scorp and Domi's nerf to the same thing? Yes, actually. Sig has always been a part of the Geddon's tank and the increase is quite substantial. The nerf is significantly larger relative to the SNI and NDomi (who always had relatively large sig radiuses) -Liang But now that the Geddon has a Domi's drone bay I suspect that increased sig is deserved... Unless it was a typo and they take away that absurd drone bay which would make it OK to decrease the sig radius
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 1536	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:32:00 - [604] - Quote Malcanis wrote: Liang Nuren wrote: Jason Sirober wrote: Liang Nuren wrote: Jason Sirober wrote: Whatever dude. Any comments on the other races or are you a one-BS type of guy? I actually commented on the battleships individually. But here, just because you're a special snowflake: - Navy Geddon: I highly disapprove of the giant increase in sig radius. It's a totally unwarranted nerf. - NApoc: I have no comment. I don't fly the Apoc or NApoc now, and don't really intend to. I might fly it with the new changes. - CNR: I highly disapprove of trading the ROF bonus for 8 launchers. The damage application bonus is a cool idea. I like the extra mid. - CNS: I am completely mindblown that CCP thinks the ship may be too powerful. The extra low is most likely to be used for fitting mods. - Navy Mega: Doesn't seem dramatically changed really. - Navy Domi: So glad he didn't take away the hybrid bonus. The increased calibration is gonna be Awesomeness. - Fleet Phoon: Fully bonused 6/6 is pretty cool. They seem pretty intent on pushing a shield tank on it and it ate a small mobility nerf. I really preferred the armor tank. - Fleet Pest: Meh. I own one and don't use it. I doubt I'll use it after this either. -Liang Guess you didn't catch the sarcasm dude. I read the whole thread but you seem to only hark on about the CNR. Nobody seems to give a damn about the geddon's sig increase. It's probably the next biggest thing on my list. -Liang I've mentioned it in this thread. I'll be pushing for a review of this stat because I don't see why the Navgeddon needs to be so fat. You should ask them why its getting that cavernous drone bay while you're at it, doesn't really fit with the ship or the -1 slot for drone boat motif, and its most definitely a drone boat at 375m3 of drones.
Perihelion Olenard 159	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:32:00 - [605] - Quote Roime wrote: Is there a specific reason why NPC corp members are allowed to post on the forums? Read only access, and posting rights to the new player area would suffice. What the.. no dislike button. Just because a person is playing a new character doesn't mean that person hasn't been playing for much longer. I wear my sunglasses at night.
Maximus Andendare Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 154	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:36:00 - [606] - Quote Johnson Oramara wrote: For their price tags they are just horrible. And some are even more horrible than their t1 counterparts. I wasn't commenting on anything; just passing along what CCP's thoughts were on the matter. But to sort of reply to the CNR raging debate here: maybe CCP didn't want a CNR with 7x and a ROF bonus, because the damage would have been too high in light of the cruise missile buff; not in relation to Golems or TFIs, but in general. I haven't run the math--nor do I wish to engage in a math debate--so I am just tinfoil hatting what CCP may be thinking. So the CNR is a worse Golem? Use a Golem. If the CNR has matching range and better damage application (plus an additional slot), as I understand it, over a T1 Raven, then isn't it an upgrade, or am I still missing something? Pardon me if I am--I live in a wormhole and we don't use BSs much. ;)
Jason Sirober The Riot Formation Unclaimed. 18	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:37:00 - [607] - Quote Navy Geddon Slot layout: 8H, 4M, 8L; 7 turrets , 0 launchers Fittings: 17500 PWG(+175), 560 CPU(+3) Defense (shields / armor / hull): 8500(+296.5) / 11500(+1539) / 10000(+684) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate): 6000(+687.5) / 1100s(+125s) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 105 / .13(+.002) / 105200000 / 18.96s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 375(+200) Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km(+5k) / 110 / 7 Sensor strength: 26 Radar Sensor Strength (+4.75) Signature radius: 440 (+70) Let's look at the Buffs... PG, Armor, Structure, Cap, Drone bay, Targeting range, Sensor strength. and now the Nerfs... Sig radius Oh, did I miss something?
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 5054	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:38:00 - [608] - Quote Liang Nuren wrote: Jason Sirober wrote: Well it's sig radius is smaller than the Navy Domi and the Navy Scorpion so I really don't know what your gripe is with that one... It might have something to do with this: Signature radius: 440 (+70) And this: CCP Rise wrote: As a GÇÿcombatGÇÖ ship, it will get some increased hitpoints along with other tweaks to its base stats, but its overall performance shouldnGÇÖt change much. That's a pretty substantial nerf. -Liang Ed: I also don't expect to get anywhere on the subject of sig radius with Rise. I've argued with him at length about the effect of sig radius and he was pretty intransigent on the subject that low sig radius means almost literally nothing. Considering the signature resolution of large turrets is 400 and this change brings the Armageddon from being under that limit to above it, that's a pretty big change. -áMy (mostly boring) Youtube channel.
Jason Sirober The Riot Formation Unclaimed. 18	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:41:00 - [609] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: Liang Nuren wrote: Jason Sirober wrote: Well it's sig radius is smaller than the Navy Domi and the Navy Scorpion so I really don't know what your gripe is with that one... It might have something to do with this: Signature radius: 440 (+70) And this: CCP Rise wrote: As a GÇÿcombatGÇÖ ship, it will get some increased hitpoints along with other tweaks to its base stats, but its overall performance shouldnGÇÖt change much. That's a pretty substantial nerf. -Liang Ed: I also don't expect to get anywhere on the subject of sig radius with Rise. I've argued with him at length about the effect of sig radius and he was pretty intransigent on the subject that low sig radius means almost literally nothing. Considering the signature resolution of large turrets is 400 and this change brings the Armageddon from being under that limit to above it, that's a pretty big change. However it's a fair change I'd say
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 9366	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:41:00 - [610] - Quote Jason Sirober wrote: Malcanis wrote: I've mentioned it in this thread. I'll be pushing for a review of this stat because I don't see why the Navgeddon needs to be so fat. I hope you'll be pushing a review of that stat for the Navy Domi and Navy Scorpion too? The SNI thoroughly deserves to be that fat. 1 Kings 12:11
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 9366	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:44:00 - [611] - Quote Maximus Andendare wrote: Johnson Oramara wrote: For their price tags they are just horrible. And some are even more horrible than their t1 counterparts. I wasn't commenting on anything; just passing along what CCP's thoughts were on the matter. But to sort of reply to the CNR raging debate here: maybe CCP didn't want a CNR with 7x and a ROF bonus, because the damage would have been too high in light of the cruise missile buff; not in relation to Golems or TFIs, but in general. I haven't run the math--nor do I wish to engage in a math debate--so I am just tinfoil hatting what CCP may be thinking. Hahah don't be silly what could possibly be wrong with doing 1100 DPS at 200Km? 1 Kings 12:11
Liang Nuren Heretic Army Heretic Initiative 3498	Posted - 2013.05.14 20:48:00 - [612] - Quote Malcanis wrote: Maximus Andendare wrote: Johnson Oramara wrote: For their price tags they are just horrible. And some are even more horrible than their t1 counterparts. I wasn't commenting on anything; just passing along what CCP's thoughts were on the matter. But to sort of reply to the CNR raging debate here: maybe CCP didn't want a CNR with 7x and a ROF bonus, because the damage would have been too high in light of the cruise missile buff; not in relation to Golems or TFIs, but in general. I haven't run the math--nor do I wish to engage in a math debate--so I am just tinfoil hatting what CCP may be thinking. Hahah don't be silly what could possibly be wrong with doing 1100 DPS at 200Km? I dunno... looking at the Fleet Phoon and Typhoon: probably nothing. -Liang Ed: Also, I like how you've gone from "The new CNR is better than the old CNR" to "But dealing damage at 200km is OP!". Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 5056	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:00:00 - [613] - Quote Jason Sirober wrote: However it's a fair change I'd say Well what else changed? The bonuses are the same but the lasers will use 10% less cap now. Base armor HP was increased by ~15%, base structure HP by ~7%, base shield by ~4%, overall increase of ~9% HP Base PG increased by 175, CPU by 3 And a ridiculously large drone bay, 200m^3 larger than what it was before So yeah, maybe a signature radius increase was warranted. But a 19% increase in signature radius? Is that really necessary? -áMy (mostly boring) Youtube channel.
Trolly McForumalt Republic University Minmatar Republic 4	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:02:00 - [614] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: This list. I don't suppose we can get any sneak peeks at what's in store for rebalance in the near future? Not in any order, obviously, but just to see what's on the menu. 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. =) How about torpedoes? And not for the next expansion/update - for this one. No reason to look at cruise missiles but leave torps as they are.
Johnson Oramara Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 46	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:03:00 - [615] - Quote Here is CCP Rise from Gallente battleship thread commenting Hyperion with effective 9 turrets with 37.5% repair bonus. "If anything, I'm worried this is too strong, but it should be an extremely fun ship to use. Hope you guys approve." Here is CCP Rise commenting on the SNI which has effective of 8 launchers and 20% resist bonus. "In light of the coming cruise missile change, we are a bit concerned with the power level for the Scorp, so weGÇÖll be keeping a close eye on this one, as we still feel it could wind up being too strong depending on how the meta settles out." And finally comments about the CNR with 8 effective launchers which is same as even t1 Raven and damage application bonus which Typhoon has too and can be added with rigs & tp's. "We are giving the CNR an 8th launcher to make up for the loss of the rate of fire bonus, and replacing rate of fire with a bonus to explosion radius. Along with the incoming buff to cruise missiles, this ship is going to be an animal." Yup, by that logic every missile battleship will be an animal. Dear CCP, if single 25% damage bonus would be plain op to add then maybe your cruise missile buff is a little over the top?
Jonas Sukarala Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 167	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:14:00 - [616] - Quote Johnson Oramara wrote: Here is CCP Rise from Gallente battleship thread commenting Hyperion with effective 9 turrets with 37.5% repair bonus. "If anything, I'm worried this is too strong, but it should be an extremely fun ship to use. Hope you guys approve." Here is CCP Rise commenting on the SNI which has effective of 8 launchers and 20% resist bonus. "In light of the coming cruise missile change, we are a bit concerned with the power level for the Scorp, so weGÇÖll be keeping a close eye on this one, as we still feel it could wind up being too strong depending on how the meta settles out." And finally comments about the CNR with 8 effective launchers which is same as even t1 Raven and damage application bonus which Typhoon has too and can be added with rigs & tp's. "We are giving the CNR an 8th launcher to make up for the loss of the rate of fire bonus, and replacing rate of fire with a bonus to explosion radius. Along with the incoming buff to cruise missiles, this ship is going to be an animal." Yup, by that logic every missile battleship will be an animal. Dear CCP, if single 25% damage bonus would be plain op to add then maybe your cruise missile buff is a little over the top? tis the question i wonder if we will get an answer :P the odds aren't great i suspect 'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place..... where is the TD missile change?-á ,...projectiles should use capacitor.
Jason Sirober The Riot Formation Unclaimed. 18	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:16:00 - [617] - Quote Bottom line is bring CCP Fozzie back to balance our ships... At least he commented in the threads too
Maximus Andendare Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 154	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:19:00 - [618] - Quote Trolly McForumalt wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Quote: This list. I don't suppose we can get any sneak peeks at what's in store for rebalance in the near future? Not in any order, obviously, but just to see what's on the menu. 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. =) How about torpedoes? And not for the next expansion/update - for this one. No reason to look at cruise missiles but leave torps as they are. There's a great reason: Torps are doing well in their intended role.
Trolly McForumalt Republic University Minmatar Republic 4	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:26:00 - [619] - Quote Maximus Andendare wrote: Trolly McForumalt wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Quote: This list. I don't suppose we can get any sneak peeks at what's in store for rebalance in the near future? Not in any order, obviously, but just to see what's on the menu. 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. =) How about torpedoes? And not for the next expansion/update - for this one. No reason to look at cruise missiles but leave torps as they are. There's a great reason: Torps are doing well in their intended role. Eh... after the cruise buff I don't really think they're looking so hot (comparatively). Unless torps intended role are only for SBs and POS bashing.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 1536	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:32:00 - [620] - Quote Liang Nuren wrote: Ed: Also, I like how you've gone from "The new CNR is better than the old CNR" to "But dealing damage at 200km is OP!". Perhaps, like in the Tracking Enhancer thread in relation to the Talos, we'll just agree to disagree quitely without lookling like the retards. To me, the CNR has more cap, more slots, more calibration, WAY more speed (its phoon levels of fast) more agility, and its damage application will be better versus things like sig tanking cruisers. To you the loss of the utility high slot cripples it for PVP, for me, not so much, I can deal without it and look at the larger picture of the ship and still be happy. For you the lost of 3km on the Talos was basically game over, for me, doesn't matter in the slightest. So far the only thing we seem to agree on is that the Geddon sig bloom was a bit on the "WTF" side of the deal, but I'm pretty sure its just because we have different philosophies where ships and fittings are concerned. Mine is more fleet oriented, yours is more solo PVP oriented. Also you said something about the Rattlesnake, I'll be the first to spoil it, we have a RS fleet comp, just no actual war to field it in or opponent who would fight us with it if we did. You'll find that once you start fielding faction BS comps the hardest thing to do is find somebody that doesn't go "holy ****" and run away when they see 64 faction/pirate BS.
Tank Talbot Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 171	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:35:00 - [621] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: Jason Sirober wrote: However it's a fair change I'd say Well what else changed? The bonuses are the same but the lasers will use 10% less cap now. Base armor HP was increased by ~15%, base structure HP by ~7%, base shield by ~4%, overall increase of ~9% HP Base PG increased by 175, CPU by 3 And a ridiculously large drone bay, 200m^3 larger than what it was before So yeah, maybe a signature radius increase was warranted. But a 19% increase in signature radius? Is that really necessary? I had actually wondered if the signature radius was designed to keep the ship in a niche for solo through small gang play and out of blob doctrines? In a way a more aggressive alternative to the Hyperion (in a similar niche with the armor rep bonus.) Every feature from the gun bonuses to the drone bay versatility supports that idea from my point of view. As such, I don't want to complain about the ship too much as it does a fine job filling a role I support.
Fade Azura Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension 162	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:37:00 - [622] - Quote The Navy Domi has been saved! Gallente rejoice! thank you CCP ... the changes look solid and the throwbacks were done to the appropriate ships. overall good job keep up the progress.
MinutemanKirk Quantum Cats Syndicate Samurai Pizza Cats 18	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:37:00 - [623] - 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.
Maximus Andendare Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 154	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:52:00 - [624] - Quote Trolly McForumalt wrote: Maximus Andendare wrote: Trolly McForumalt wrote: How about torpedoes? And not for the next expansion/update - for this one. No reason to look at cruise missiles but leave torps as they are. There's a great reason: Torps are doing well in their intended role. Eh... after the cruise buff I don't really think they're looking so hot (comparatively). Unless torps intended role are only for SBs and POS bashing. 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.
Perihelion Olenard 160	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:52:00 - [625] - Quote MinutemanKirk wrote: 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. 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. I wear my sunglasses at night.
MinutemanKirk Quantum Cats Syndicate Samurai Pizza Cats 18	Posted - 2013.05.14 21:57:00 - [626] - 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.
Pattern Clarc Aperture Harmonics 534	Posted - 2013.05.14 22:00:00 - [627] - Quote 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. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction
Julius Foederatus Hyper-Nova 187	Posted - 2013.05.14 22:12:00 - [628] - Quote I actually like the navy mega changes, since we're essentially getting more dps from the RoF bonus and no lost dps from a smaller drone bay. It still has the utility high, and just the same number of low slots as before. My only gripe, and this goes for the regular mega as well, is that it needs more cap, not less. The current megas are not cap stable running void (and maybe faction am, I don't have EFT in front of me), so the RoF bonus is going to make them even less useful from a cap perspective, especially if you're using that utility high for a heavy neut (like you better ******* be doing). On a side note, please tell me the 375m3 drone bay for the navy geddon is a typo. That would be utterly ridiculous if it was a real change.
Trolly McForumalt Republic University Minmatar Republic 4	Posted - 2013.05.14 22:18:00 - [629] - Quote Maximus Andendare wrote: Trolly McForumalt wrote: Maximus Andendare wrote: Trolly McForumalt wrote: How about torpedoes? And not for the next expansion/update - for this one. No reason to look at cruise missiles but leave torps as they are. There's a great reason: Torps are doing well in their intended role. Eh... after the cruise buff I don't really think they're looking so hot (comparatively). Unless torps intended role are only for SBs and POS bashing. 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. Buffs come in different flavors - torp damage is fine. But they could use a buff to explosion radius (reduce it for those who might think that buff always means increase) and a reduction on fitting requirements. This is only my impression - this might have already been the subject of internal discussion and testing (lol?) and it was determined that torps are fine. It'd be nice to hear either way considering this is the BS balance pass and a fair number of people have complained about torps in the past.
Trolly McForumalt Republic University Minmatar Republic 4	Posted - 2013.05.14 22:22:00 - [630] - Quote Pattern Clarc wrote: 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. As soon as I saw that ship that's what I thought. Fill the lows with damage mods and shield tank it (albeit a bit poorly) and see what kind of numbers I can pull out EFT warrioring. And I disagree that most of the ships are at that level.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,31s, ref 20250913/0828
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.