You're just plain wrong.

Your math is bad.

Old CCNR: 7 / .75 = 9.3333 eff launcher
New CCNR: 8 * 1.3 = 10.4 eff launcher

Old TCNR: 7 / .75 = 9.333 eff launcher
New TCNR: 8 eff launcher

-Liang

You'll get a bit more if you fit cruise, quite a bit less if you fit torps. They're straight up pigeon holing the ship into cruise and then keeping the missile velocity bonus.

-Liang

It is good at something. Best armor alpha ship. Stop trying to meta game against goons.

This is some really dumb theorycrafting. All ships able to fit cruise will get that 30% bonus, not just the CNR.

If anything, torps are getting the better end of this damage application boost, since it will apply to targets between the size of a torp's optimal and a cruise optimal

sigh...

ok mr legion... how will you guys make a cat version of the navy mega?

in the end the rokh is still a better option for rails and blasters... and costs less

so really i cant see a fleet concept for the new mega...

as it stands i will continue using it for what its used now... station games... thats it.

the napoc is killer so is the scorp... plus that phoon just looks smexy...

but again gal are left out with out a fleet ship...

or are you again just going to reply with one line...

The idea with the Tempest is that it fits really well into a lot of armor based compositions, acting more or less like an armor Maelstrom. It still has higher alpha than the Typhoon, with a lot more hp and similar utility. It goes a lot faster than the other combat battleships and has much smaller sig, so it definitely isn't eclipsed completely.

I can understand why some of you might want something with a bit more pop and I promise to talk with Fozzie and the rest of the department to make sure we're happy with this form before Odyssey goes out.

Your math is bad.

Old CCNR: 7 / .75 = 9.3333 eff launcher
New CCNR: 8 * 1.3 = 10.4 eff launcher

Old TCNR: 7 / .75 = 9.333 eff launcher
New TCNR: 8 eff launcher

-Liang

i bolded the part that needs to be fixed... tracking bonus for the tech I version is ok... but gal need a fleet ship and a mega navy issue can be that fleet ship... and the only way to make it so it to give it a fall off bonus... that will bring large neutrons with null into fleet bs range...

otherwise you are just making a pretty station game ship...

Stuff ......

The idea with the Tempest is that it fits really well into a lot of armor based compositions, acting more or less like an armor Maelstrom. It still has higher alpha than the Typhoon, with a lot more hp and similar utility. It goes a lot faster than the other combat battleships and has much smaller sig, so it definitely isn't eclipsed completely.

I can understand why some of you might want something with a bit more pop and I promise to talk with Fozzie and the rest of the department to make sure we're happy with this form before Odyssey goes out.

*slow hand clap*

Congratulations CCP Rise, you've officially made your mark on the Amarrian national fleets not once, but twice. Both times I might add, making at least one ship in the line up broken and ruined. I wish to enlighten you to my opinion, and remind you that you have another thread to reply to, which I might add, feels like you have abandoned. I also know that this topic is to be filled with "constructive" criticism, which doesn't mean I'll be all accepting and forgiving; No, I'm going point out the flaws that you have once more generated, then pointing out how they could be countered and corrected so that the Amarrian's are not left without a decent fleet.

Firstly, the negative (ish) sides:

Navy Issue Armageddon

At least you've seen sense this time around and not, to put it politely, messed around with the Navy Issue of the Armageddon that you've done to the standard issue, which shockingly (not) shows absolutely zero relation apart from the enlarged drone bay. Maybe you should rectify that in the standard issue so that the it makes a better understanding of Navy Issue progression, rather than just a desperate reaction into realising your mistake and trying to rectify it in the vain hope that people will forgive you.

Now, I actually agree with the touched increases to the ship you have given it - it makes it a little easier to base values off if the numbers are flat rather than not. It's also a smallish increase to the EHP that the ship does rather need. I also see that you've kept in the 10% Cap bonus to the ship. Was this intentional or just an oversight given the obscene cap requirements the Amarrians have to endure as a racial body?

Navy Issue Apocalypse

Aaand it was going so well. Where do I begin?

It has been pointed out (and mathematically shown, since numbers apparently are your thing) that a ship with a 7.5% bonus to tracking will not be able to hit anything smaller than a perfectly transversal cruiser at level V. Now, I agree that a battleship should have difficulty hitting smaller vessels, however if someone has invested a lot of time and energy (like myself) into piloting one of the better mission running ships in the game, I want it be viable outside of that role as well - with that current change, it will not help outside of a PvE situation. I know I'm not the first to go into a PvP situation, but when I do and I'm in that ship, I would prefer it if I wasn't unable to hit the enemy because they were inside a Rifter - not to say I want to have instantly hitting ships regardless of size, but just somewhat of an actual ability.

I also see that you've struck this ship with the nerf bat in relation to the Armour/Shield values, but given it a small increase to the Hull. Again, yay to rounded numbers, but boo to a overall reduced tank for the silly "Combat Battleship" status. I also see that it (and the Armageddon) magically reacquire their much needed 8th Low slot, which shouldn't be called much in the way of a change since it already exists - Perhaps giving us a 5th med slot will equate the need to have extra Cap generation on that ship, since the other alterations are pretty unfair; Less cap with a shorter recharge times does not equal increased capacitor overall, and with the fairly minimal changes to the Laser Weapons still doesn't balance it out.


Now for the "constructive" side of things. I'm going to focus on the Apocalypse since that is the ship that you have decided to re-engineer into a role that doesn't suit it the most:

Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+7.5% to Large Energy Turret optimal range
+7.5% to Large Energy Turret falloff range

Slot layout: 8H, 5M(+1), 8L; 8 turrets , 0 launchers(-2)
Fittings: 22000 PWG(+475), 580 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 9000(-316) / 11000(-250) / 10000(+39)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate): 7500 / 1000s(-154s)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 110(+16) / .115(-.021) / 97100000(-2200000) / 15.48s(-3.24s)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75 / 100
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 76km(+8.5k) / 120(+1.25) / 7
Sensor strength: 25 Radar Sensor Strength
Signature radius: 370(-30)


For the most part, I haven't "radically" altered it; it does have a little break to its shield/armour - a little more than the Armageddon in shields and less in Armour, and the same in hull - which is to give it's intended role a little more survivability than the standard issue. The speed I've dropped down to counter the increase in armour plate. I've also kept the cap at the same value whilst decreasing the recharge time by the new value - this will actually be a larger cap. The 5th Med I've added in so that the pilot can also have a modicum of cap regeneration, whilst still presenting an offensive ability as well. The tracking bonus is changed to a falloff bonus, as if it is meant to be a sniper, give it the range it deserves.

Now, you're probably going to say that "Oh noes, the NApoc is overpowered!!!!!1111!!!". To the players that think that, I say this: I want the Amarrian's to have a viable ship line. If we cannot be granted that in the standard line up, then I will fight tooth and nail once more to see that we keep it in the Naval line. I will not stand for the Amarrians (who are already hard enough to actually use decently) be sidelined once more.

Please let me know when you've read this CCP Rise (in this thread, +1 it, whatever) - I want to hear your opinions.

Firstly you don't understand how important the tracking bonus is.

Secondly you want to give the navy mega A FALLOFF bonus. It is a hybrid ship. Falloff bonus. Hybrid ship. It will get max 15km increase (without tes and tracking computers) from a 50 percent fall off bonus with 425mms. That is dog shi t. With 2 TCs its more like 25km. Awful. From a 50 percent bonus.

+7.5% to Large Energy Turret falloff range

Firstly you don't understand how important the tracking bonus is.

Secondly you want to give the navy mega A FALLOFF bonus. It is a hybrid ship. Falloff bonus. Hybrid ship. It will get max 15km increase (without tes and tracking computers) from a 50 percent fall off bonus with 425mms. That is dog shi t. With 2 TCs its more like 25km. Awful. From a 50 percent bonus.

There already are hybrid ships with falloff bonuses, Deimos for example, and it's a very good bonus.

Also, nobody has rails in mind with a falloff bonus, it's blasters which are actually mostly a falloff weapon. Fact: the only good range bonused blaster ammo is Null because it is THE ONLY ammo with a falloff bonus. It outdamages all the other range bonused ammo at virtually all ranges. An optimal bonus on blasters is complete ****.

5 lows on scorp navy????
I have a scorp navy toon. WHAT THE HELL SHOULD I DO WITH A 5th LOW????
4th ballistic control system will give me maybe 40 or 50 dp. Almost useless^^

*slow hand clap*

Congratulations CCP Rise, you've officially made your mark on the Amarrian national fleets not once, but twice. Both times I might add, making at least one ship in the line up broken and ruined. I wish to enlighten you to my opinion, and remind you that you have another thread to reply to, which I might add, feels like you have abandoned. I also know that this topic is to be filled with "constructive" criticism, which doesn't mean I'll be all accepting and forgiving; No, I'm going point out the flaws that you have once more generated, then pointing out how they could be countered and corrected so that the Amarrian's are not left without a decent fleet.

Firstly, the negative (ish) sides:

Navy Issue Armageddon

At least you've seen sense this time around and not, to put it politely, messed around with the Navy Issue of the Armageddon that you've done to the standard issue, which shockingly (not) shows absolutely zero relation apart from the enlarged drone bay. Maybe you should rectify that in the standard issue so that the it makes a better understanding of Navy Issue progression, rather than just a desperate reaction into realising your mistake and trying to rectify it in the vain hope that people will forgive you.

Now, I actually agree with the touched increases to the ship you have given it - it makes it a little easier to base values off if the numbers are flat rather than not. It's also a smallish increase to the EHP that the ship does rather need. I also see that you've kept in the 10% Cap bonus to the ship. Was this intentional or just an oversight given the obscene cap requirements the Amarrians have to endure as a racial body?

Navy Issue Apocalypse

Aaand it was going so well. Where do I begin?

It has been pointed out (and mathematically shown, since numbers apparently are your thing) that a ship with a 7.5% bonus to tracking will not be able to hit anything smaller than a perfectly transversal cruiser at level V. Now, I agree that a battleship should have difficulty hitting smaller vessels, however if someone has invested a lot of time and energy (like myself) into piloting one of the better mission running ships in the game, I want it be viable outside of that role as well - with that current change, it will not help outside of a PvE situation. I know I'm not the first to go into a PvP situation, but when I do and I'm in that ship, I would prefer it if I wasn't unable to hit the enemy because they were inside a Rifter - not to say I want to have instantly hitting ships regardless of size, but just somewhat of an actual ability.

I also see that you've struck this ship with the nerf bat in relation to the Armour/Shield values, but given it a small increase to the Hull. Again, yay to rounded numbers, but boo to a overall reduced tank for the silly "Combat Battleship" status. I also see that it (and the Armageddon) magically reacquire their much needed 8th Low slot, which shouldn't be called much in the way of a change since it already exists - Perhaps giving us a 5th med slot will equate the need to have extra Cap generation on that ship, since the other alterations are pretty unfair; Less cap with a shorter recharge times does not equal increased capacitor overall, and with the fairly minimal changes to the Laser Weapons still doesn't balance it out.


Now for the "constructive" side of things. I'm going to focus on the Apocalypse since that is the ship that you have decided to re-engineer into a role that doesn't suit it the most:

Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+7.5% to Large Energy Turret optimal range
+7.5% to Large Energy Turret falloff range

Slot layout: 8H, 5M(+1), 8L; 8 turrets , 0 launchers(-2)
Fittings: 22000 PWG(+475), 580 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 9000(-316) / 11000(-250) / 10000(+39)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate): 7500 / 1000s(-154s)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 110(+16) / .115(-.021) / 97100000(-2200000) / 15.48s(-3.24s)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75 / 100
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 76km(+8.5k) / 120(+1.25) / 7
Sensor strength: 25 Radar Sensor Strength
Signature radius: 370(-30)


For the most part, I haven't "radically" altered it; it does have a little break to its shield/armour - a little more than the Armageddon in shields and less in Armour, and the same in hull - which is to give it's intended role a little more survivability than the standard issue. The speed I've dropped down to counter the increase in armour plate. I've also kept the cap at the same value whilst decreasing the recharge time by the new value - this will actually be a larger cap. The 5th Med I've added in so that the pilot can also have a modicum of cap regeneration, whilst still presenting an offensive ability as well. The tracking bonus is changed to a falloff bonus, as if it is meant to be a sniper, give it the range it deserves.

Now, you're probably going to say that "Oh noes, the NApoc is overpowered!!!!!1111!!!". To the players that think that, I say this: I want the Amarrian's to have a viable ship line. If we cannot be granted that in the standard line up, then I will fight tooth and nail once more to see that we keep it in the Naval line. I will not stand for the Amarrians (who are already hard enough to actually use decently) be sidelined once more.

Please let me know when you've read this CCP Rise (in this thread, +1 it, whatever) - I want to hear your opinions.

There already are hybrid ships with falloff bonuses, Deimos for example, and it's a very good bonus.

Also, nobody has rails in mind with a falloff bonus, it's blasters which are actually mostly a falloff weapon. Fact: the only good range bonused blaster ammo is Null because it is THE ONLY ammo with a falloff bonus. It outdamages all the other range bonused ammo at virtually all ranges. An optimal bonus on blasters is complete ****.

Nah that would make a nice kronos bonus maybe marauders could become a HAC version of battleships... make them smaller and more mobile with MWD bonus and projection bonuses we could have an assault line from frigs to battleships.