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) |

Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
268
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 08:45:00 -
[841] - 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. |

Bi-Mi Lansatha
The Scope Gallente Federation
138
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 08:49:00 -
[842] - Quote
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
If anyone suggests fitting mods, go and sit in a corner and reflect on your badness.

|

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
857
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 09:06:00 -
[843] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote: CNR The CNR has lost its way. In PVP it's completely outclassed by the Scorp Navy, Typhoon, and Typhoon Fleet and in PVE it's outclassed by the Typhoon Fleet and Golem. The loss of the utility high was pretty bad, but even giving that back isn't going to make a dent in the Fleet Phoon's superiority.
As a shield fleet ship the CNR is quite superior to the typhoon fleet.. (I agree with the scorpion but the scorp is also majorly OP so..)
I guess i could see it performing worse than the phoon at PVE (Its supposed to be worse than the golem) because of the phoons drone bay but... thats minor imo and i think the raven more than makes up for it in extra mid slots.
BYDI (Shadow cartel) Recruitment open!
|

Deerin
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
148
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 09:46:00 -
[844] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote: Fleet Phoon This ship is superior to the CNR for the same reason that the old CNR was superior to the old Golem - the extra raw damage output overwhelms the superior damage application.
The overwhelming DPS difference is (1.375/1.333) =%3.1 I think the exp radius bonus (which is also a 1/0.75=1.333 magnitude bonus) is far superior to this. Also you can fit more BCU's to a CNR. 4 BCU's on fleet phoon = no place for armor tank and using 5 meds for shield tank = no place for target painter(s).
Fleet phoon also has quite low PG so I don't really think it can replace TFI as a projectile boat. Maybe the XLASB fits might work in fleet phoon's favor due to high CPU but that's it.
Speaking of CPU, CNR needs a CPU boost.
|

Itis Zhellin
Pagan INC 9th Company
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 09:50:00 -
[845] - Quote
I'm a bit confused about the CNR, it says that it will have 8 launcher slots but on SiSi is still 7. Or the changes are not implemented on the test server yet?
Some fo you say that there is no use to use missiles on anything under BS's, there are drones for a reason. Well, a bomber would say that is not true by removing all my drones from the combat scene loling at my missiles. |

Zetak
State War Academy Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 10:22:00 -
[846] - Quote
Alexander Renoir wrote:CCP if you want to change the Cruise Missiles and the CNR you should consider following: I do NOT need any bonus which will ONLY work on small targets, if I lose an important bonus which will help me for big targets. For small targets I have drones. Everythinig, starting with cruiser and all above, is already no problem for cruise missiles yet. The bonus of Rate Of Fire is more important for BIG targets like Battleships than an explosion radius. You can change something on the ammunition.. right. But please let the Rate Of Fire Bonus of the CNR as it is. In addition to that you do not need to change the slot layout for the High-Section of the CNR. CCP Rise wrote: 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
This is not necessary but counterproductive. We have drones for small and fast moving targets. You should not shoot CM against frigates, WHAT certainly do function already now. SO please keep the slot-layout and the bonus (RoF) of the CNR as it is. Changing the ammunition is enough. Thanks.
I honestly don't agree with this. Yes, my ship will have somewhat lesser dps, BUT it will do as much damage with 4 bcs as a golem, 8k to be exact with fury, and the same dps as a torp golem with javelin ammo. because ratts have one strong and two weak hp, the high damage is more important with high hp ratts because you can cut a huge amount of hp from the low resi hp of the ship with high damage, and that is the point.
The chance of getting an unlucky pulse regen from a ratt is reduced with this method. The tradeoff is the 80 dps, but the toughest enemies the elite cruisers will be a piece of cake with the sign bonus even with fury. The biggest waste of time when doing missions were these high resi fast tough son of a guns cruisers. I had to waste a lot of ammo on them too if I wanted to save time. But no more!!! If you can somehow equip torps, the benefit is even better. It basically gives a free tp worth of bonus. well not exactly that much, but you can get the idea. |

Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 10:37:00 -
[847] - Quote
Itis Zhellin wrote:I'm a bit confused about the CNR, it says that it will have 8 launcher slots but on SiSi is still 7. Or the changes are not implemented on the test server yet?
Some fo you say that there is no use to use missiles on anything under BS's, there are drones for a reason. Well, a bomber would say that is not true by removing all my drones from the combat scene loling at my missiles. We have drones for that reason yes, we even have this ammo type called Precision but still everyone just seem to go nuts being able to hit even frigs with the same faction ammo... and we are talking about battleships...
In some earlier threads people had issue where guns couldn't track small targe butt you could still hit it with missiles, now you can actually hurt those frigs for real and people are praising it? |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9421
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 10:48:00 -
[848] - Quote
Deerin wrote:Liang Nuren wrote: Fleet Phoon This ship is superior to the CNR for the same reason that the old CNR was superior to the old Golem - the extra raw damage output overwhelms the superior damage application.
The overwhelming DPS difference is (1.375/1.333) =%3.1 I think the exp radius bonus (which is also a 1/0.75=1.333 magnitude bonus) is far superior to this. Also you can fit more BCU's to a CNR. 4 BCU's on fleet phoon = no place for armor tank and using 5 meds for shield tank = no place for target painter(s). Fleet phoon also has quite low PG so I don't really think it can replace TFI as a projectile boat. Maybe the XLASB fits might work in fleet phoon's favor due to high CPU but that's it. Speaking of CPU, CNR needs a CPU boost.
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.
1 Kings 12:11
|

Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 10:49:00 -
[849] - Quote
Deerin wrote:Liang Nuren wrote: Fleet Phoon This ship is superior to the CNR for the same reason that the old CNR was superior to the old Golem - the extra raw damage output overwhelms the superior damage application.
The overwhelming DPS difference is (1.375/1.333) =%3.1 I think the exp radius bonus (which is also a 1/0.75=1.333 magnitude bonus) is far superior to this. Also you can fit more BCU's to a CNR. 4 BCU's on fleet phoon = no place for armor tank and using 5 meds for shield tank = no place for target painter(s). Fleet phoon also has quite low PG so I don't really think it can replace TFI as a projectile boat. Maybe the XLASB fits might work in fleet phoon's favor due to high CPU but that's it. Speaking of CPU, CNR needs a CPU boost. Your math sucks, factor in the tp's and rigs and then try to tell me that the CNR has superior damage. Even with 3 BCU's TFI will have superior damage but you sure can squeeze the fourth in there too. |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9421
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 10:54:00 -
[850] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote: Fleet Phoon This ship is superior to the CNR for the same reason that the old CNR was superior to the old Golem - the extra raw damage output overwhelms the superior damage application. However, this relationship isn't just in PVE - it's also in PVP. The Fleet Phoon is just better than the CNR. It is also just better than the Fleet Pest.-Liang
Phoon: 8.25 effective launchers CNR: 8 effective launchers
The CNR has two damage application bonuses; missile velocity and explosion radius.
I don't think that "overwhelm" is the appropriate verb for doing 33/32 = 3.12% more raw DPS.
In fact I'm going to go right ahead and say that the CNR (and ipso facto the Golem) is a significantly superior missile platform to the Fleet Phoon.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|

Zetak
State War Academy Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 10:56:00 -
[851] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Liang Nuren wrote: Fleet Phoon This ship is superior to the CNR for the same reason that the old CNR was superior to the old Golem - the extra raw damage output overwhelms the superior damage application. However, this relationship isn't just in PVE - it's also in PVP. The Fleet Phoon is just better than the CNR. It is also just better than the Fleet Pest.-Liang
Phoon: 8.25 effective launchers CNR: 8 effective launchers The CNR has two damage application bonuses; missile velocity and explosion radius. I don't think that "overwhelm" is the appropriate verb for doing 33/32 = 3.12% more raw DPS. In fact I'm going to go right ahead and say that the CNR (and ipso facto the Golem) is a significantly superior missile platform to the Fleet Phoon.
I cannot agree more |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9421
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 10:59:00 -
[852] - Quote
You thought it was RoF didn't you Liang? 
(It's OK we've all done this)
1 Kings 12:11
|

Jerick Ludhowe
JLT corp
448
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:04:00 -
[853] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
Phoon: 8.25 effective launchers CNR: 8 effective launchers
The CNR has two damage application bonuses; missile velocity and explosion radius.
I don't think that "overwhelm" is the appropriate verb for doing 33/32 = 3.12% more raw DPS.
In fact I'm going to go right ahead and say that the CNR (and ipso facto the Golem) is a significantly superior missile platform to the Fleet Phoon.
Bad comparison man, just bad...
You're simply looking at the two ships in terms of missiles only. While this is a reasonable way to look at the cnr as that's pretty much all it is, the fleet phoon on the other hand has 2 free highs for nuets/turrets, as well as a much much larger drone bay...
Liang's original assessment is correct, the fleet Phoon is the superior ship outside of very specific situations.
P.S. CSM's should probably be a bit more objective in comparisons... Just saying.... |

Templar Dane
Amarrian Vengeance
111
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:05:00 -
[854] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Liang Nuren wrote: Fleet Phoon This ship is superior to the CNR for the same reason that the old CNR was superior to the old Golem - the extra raw damage output overwhelms the superior damage application. However, this relationship isn't just in PVE - it's also in PVP. The Fleet Phoon is just better than the CNR. It is also just better than the Fleet Pest.-Liang
Phoon: 8.25 effective launchers CNR: 8 effective launchers The CNR has two damage application bonuses; missile velocity and explosion radius. I don't think that "overwhelm" is the appropriate verb for doing 33/32 = 3.12% more raw DPS. In fact I'm going to go right ahead and say that the CNR (and ipso facto the Golem) is a significantly superior missile platform to the Fleet Phoon.
Discounting the full flight of sentries?
|

Jerick Ludhowe
JLT corp
448
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:07:00 -
[855] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:
Discounting the full flight of sentries?
I know right? It's very easy to "prove" a point when you ignor massive justified arguments coming from the other side...
Ships need to be compared in a far more objective manner Malcanis, you're simply comparing half of the fleet phoon to the whole of the CNR... Bad, just bad.
|

Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:09:00 -
[856] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Liang Nuren wrote: Fleet Phoon This ship is superior to the CNR for the same reason that the old CNR was superior to the old Golem - the extra raw damage output overwhelms the superior damage application. However, this relationship isn't just in PVE - it's also in PVP. The Fleet Phoon is just better than the CNR. It is also just better than the Fleet Pest.-Liang
Phoon: 8.25 effective launchers CNR: 8 effective launchers The CNR has two damage application bonuses; missile velocity and explosion radius. I don't think that "overwhelm" is the appropriate verb for doing 33/32 = 3.12% more raw DPS. In fact I'm going to go right ahead and say that the CNR (and ipso facto the Golem) is a significantly superior missile platform to the Fleet Phoon. How about you look at the ships as a whole, now that you finally admit that TFI does more missile dps then look at it's drone bay, those 2 free highslots which you know, are projectile bonused.
With the ships fitted the TFI will overwhelm the CNR in dps. |

Morrigan LeSante
The Lost and Forgotten Troopers
270
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:11:00 -
[857] - 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. |

Jerick Ludhowe
JLT corp
448
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:18:00 -
[858] - Quote
Johnson Oramara wrote:
How about you look at the ships as a whole, now that you finally admit that TFI does more missile dps then look at it's drone bay, those 2 free highslots which you know, are projectile bonused.
With the ships fitted the TFI will overwhelm the CNR in dps.
Don't forget that those projectiles get an extremely overpowered 7.5% rof per level... Why? Only bad balance devs know.
Fleet Phoon needs a nerf (change projectile rof from 7.5% to 5% as well as nerfing it back down to a 5/5 turret launcher layout), CNR needs like 30 more cpu, SFI needs? I don't even know, some kind of severe nerfing. |

Kane Fenris
NWP
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:32:00 -
[859] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: TEMPEST FLEET ISSUE The Tempest Fleet Issue is becoming MinmatarGÇÖs GÇÿcombatGÇÖ battleship, and as a result will move more solidly into a role that it already takes on as a very strong projectile platform with an armor base GÇô something that is difficult to find elsewhere. The Tempest, as always, wants to occupy a space between attack and combat, and therefor has unusually high speed and unusually low sig for its role.
Minmatar Battleship Skill Bonuses: +5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret rate of fire +5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret damage
Slot layout: 8H, 5M, 7L; 6 turrets, 4 launchers Fittings: 17500 PWG(+450), 580 CPU(+3) Defense (shields / armor / hull): 10200(+884) / 10800(+369) / 9000(-961) Capacitor (amount / recharge rate): 5500(+187.5) / 1150s(-4.875s) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 130(-2) / .115(+.007) / 103300000 / 16.47s(+1s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75 / 100 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 74km(+11.5km) / 100 / 7 Sensor strength: 24 Ladar Sensor Strength(+.25) Signature radius: 350(+10)
giveing it some thought by compareing it to the tribal issue... which is powerfull in my eyes but only a little to powerfull for a navy
why dont just give it a 7th turret slot and a little more pg and cpu that would buff it into a good place imho (i feel 2 utility highs is not good at its intended role juast as a cruise launcher wouldnt) (if need be another buff one could buff drones to 100 / 125) |

Janna Windforce
EVE University Ivy League
10
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:35:00 -
[860] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
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.
Cheers! At least there is hope :) Could you more elaborate on the second paragraph? Malkuth launchers require less CPU and meta 3 are a lot cheaper than arbalests. |
|

Donedy
Snuff Box Urine Alliance
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:38:00 -
[861] - Quote
Johnson Oramara wrote:Malcanis wrote:Liang Nuren wrote: Fleet Phoon This ship is superior to the CNR for the same reason that the old CNR was superior to the old Golem - the extra raw damage output overwhelms the superior damage application. However, this relationship isn't just in PVE - it's also in PVP. The Fleet Phoon is just better than the CNR. It is also just better than the Fleet Pest.-Liang
Phoon: 8.25 effective launchers CNR: 8 effective launchers The CNR has two damage application bonuses; missile velocity and explosion radius. I don't think that "overwhelm" is the appropriate verb for doing 33/32 = 3.12% more raw DPS. In fact I'm going to go right ahead and say that the CNR (and ipso facto the Golem) is a significantly superior missile platform to the Fleet Phoon. How about you look at the ships as a whole, now that you finally admit that TFI does more missile dps then look at it's drone bay, those 2 free highslots which you know, are projectile bonused. With the ships fitted the TFI will overwhelm the CNR in dps. How about you try to fit a TFI and discover that "OH LOOK I DONT HAVE ENOUGH PG TO FIT ANYTHING MORE THAN MY 6 GUNS/LAUNCHERS!?"
And thats with only one plate/Lse. Dont even think about fitting it as an active platform. |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9421
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:41:00 -
[862] - Quote
Templar Dane wrote:Malcanis wrote:Liang Nuren wrote: Fleet Phoon This ship is superior to the CNR for the same reason that the old CNR was superior to the old Golem - the extra raw damage output overwhelms the superior damage application. However, this relationship isn't just in PVE - it's also in PVP. The Fleet Phoon is just better than the CNR. It is also just better than the Fleet Pest.-Liang
Phoon: 8.25 effective launchers CNR: 8 effective launchers The CNR has two damage application bonuses; missile velocity and explosion radius. I don't think that "overwhelm" is the appropriate verb for doing 33/32 = 3.12% more raw DPS. In fact I'm going to go right ahead and say that the CNR (and ipso facto the Golem) is a significantly superior missile platform to the Fleet Phoon. Discounting the full flight of sentries?
I specifically said "missile platform".
1 Kings 12:11
|

Donedy
Snuff Box Urine Alliance
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:42:00 -
[863] - Quote
Also im not convinced at all with the tempest. Even his description is not fitting with the reality (Im referring to his "unsual speed and agility") |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9423
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:46:00 -
[864] - Quote
Janna Windforce wrote:Malcanis wrote:
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.
Cheers! At least there is hope :) Could you more elaborate on the second paragraph? Malkuth launchers require less CPU and meta 3 are a lot cheaper than arbalests.
Those are meta, not tier.
Say you're fitting your Megathron and you discover that you just can't get your fit to work with 7x 450mm II Rails. You have the option to drop to 350mm II Rails, losing some range, and gaining some tracking by fitting lower tier guns with reduced fitting requirements.
If you're fitting Torp launchers to your Raven, and you just can't get 6 to fit with the rest of your mods, then you have to drop one launcher, losing 1/6th of your primary DPS with no gain in any other attribute. There are no "low tier" launcher options that have a penalty to missile velocity but better explosion radius or more damage and less RoF, in return for reduced fitting costs.
1 Kings 12:11
|

mama guru
Thundercats The Initiative.
117
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:47:00 -
[865] - Quote
Donedy wrote:Also im not convinced at all with the tempest. Even his description is not fitting with the reality (Im referring to his "unsual speed and agility")
The sad reality is that the "attack/combat" differentials might work for battlecruisers and cruisers. Battleships are simply too slow, especially armor versions, to have a dedicated speed role that a smaller ship won't do better.
"Attack" battleships ought to be designed as linebreakers. Good dps with good damage projection, with slightly less tank overall and an increase in maneuverability. The megathron as it is for example would be better of if the tracking bonus was swapped to a hybrid falloff bonus. This might even make blasters viable for PVE. ______
EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak. |

Jerick Ludhowe
JLT corp
448
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:49:00 -
[866] - Quote
Donedy wrote:Also im not convinced at all with the tempest. Even his description is not fitting with the reality (Im referring to his "unsual speed and agility")
In all fairness, pretty much every single ship description in the game needs a re-write...
They are all pretty much uninformative, unimaginative, and often flat out wrong. A modest amount of time put into these descriptions would result in longer, more well thought out, and far more detailed descriptions which coincide perfectly to how the ship is used. All in all, far better ship descriptions would be a very welcome change...
an example of how ship descriptions could be changed.
1. Date of design/introduction 2. Company/Persons who designed it. 3. Overall Design goal of the ship. 4. Some kind of short story linked with a date of a battle highlighting the ships strengths. 5. Overall Consistency in the manner in which ship descriptions appear. |

Jerick Ludhowe
JLT corp
448
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:53:00 -
[867] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: I specifically said "missile platform".
So we should all just discredit half of the ship so that the argument supports your initial statement?
Come now dude... Lets be objective...
You're ignoring 2 turret/nuets slots as well as a full sized drone bay which can be very easily be used for sentries in missions/pvp or other drones (like 5 heavies) in smaller scale closer range pvp.
|

Janna Windforce
EVE University Ivy League
10
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 11:54:00 -
[868] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:
Those are meta, not tier.
Say you're fitting your Megathron and you discover that you just can't get your fit to work with 7x 450mm II Rails. You have the option to drop to 350mm II Rails, losing some range, and gaining some tracking by fitting lower tier guns with reduced fitting requirements.
If you're fitting Torp launchers to your Raven, and you just can't get 6 to fit with the rest of your mods, then you have to drop one launcher, losing 1/6th of your primary DPS with no gain in any other attribute. There are no "low tier" launcher options that have a penalty to missile velocity but better explosion radius or more damage and less RoF, in return for reduced fitting costs.
I see, those are somewhat valid points, but probably counterbalanced by facts that you don't have to train for T2 stuff in sequence from smaller ones? |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9423
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 12:07:00 -
[869] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Malcanis wrote: I specifically said "missile platform".
So we should all just discredit half of the ship so that the argument supports your initial statement? Come now dude... Lets be objective... You're ignoring 2 turret/nuets slots as well as a full sized drone bay which can very easily be used for sentries in missions/pvp or other drones (like 5 heavies) in smaller scale closer range pvp.
As said above, it's a platform.
Let's see the Typhoon fit you have in mind - along with the CPU & PG it will require.
1 Kings 12:11
|

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
9423
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 12:08:00 -
[870] - Quote
Janna Windforce wrote:Malcanis wrote:
Those are meta, not tier.
Say you're fitting your Megathron and you discover that you just can't get your fit to work with 7x 450mm II Rails. You have the option to drop to 350mm II Rails, losing some range, and gaining some tracking by fitting lower tier guns with reduced fitting requirements.
If you're fitting Torp launchers to your Raven, and you just can't get 6 to fit with the rest of your mods, then you have to drop one launcher, losing 1/6th of your primary DPS with no gain in any other attribute. There are no "low tier" launcher options that have a penalty to missile velocity but better explosion radius or more damage and less RoF, in return for reduced fitting costs.
I see, those are somewhat valid points, but probably counterbalanced by facts that you don't have to train for T2 stuff in sequence from smaller ones?
And that's counterbalanced in turn by having to train the short and long range missiles seperately, plus the missile support skills giving less bonuses and having higher ranks.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
|
|
|
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 |