| 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) |
Ersahi Kir
Infinite Mobility
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
157
   |
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:13:00 -
[151] - Quote
The tempest makes me sad. With the typhoon getting bumped up to 6 turrets and launchers the niche that the tempest lived in is getting rather small. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
525
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:13:00 -
[152] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Navy Hyperion, Abaddon, Rokh and Maelstom - when? navy hype? loose the tank bonus replace with a rof bonus? (like a big Exequror navy issue) abaddon? more low slots? rokh? optimal range and rof bonus but also add more mid slots to make up for lost ehp from no resist bonus mael? damage bonus and falloff (make it a super alpha beast!)
A 8/7/5 Maelstrom With Falloff and 7.5% damage bonus and I'll pretty much die a happy man.
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado.
Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
5029
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:24:00 -
[153] - Quote
Ugh, nevermind. I give up. |
MeBiatch
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
965
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:34:00 -
[154] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Ugh, nevermind. I give up.
finally you posted something reasonable... lol 
Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point?
-áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
5029
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:36:00 -
[155] - Quote
Well once again the changes to the Navy Apoc don't really address what's screwed up with Amarr as a whole, and I feel like it's going to be a very long time before that actually happens. |
Perihelion Olenard
158
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:40:00 -
[156] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Quote:Maybe a good moment for marauders rebalance? We're with you on this. The top of the list has a whole bunch of stuff on it, but Maruaders are there somewhere =)
The list of the top ten things to work on has twenty items on it? 
I wear my sunglasses at night. |
MeBiatch
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
965
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:40:00 -
[157] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Well once again the changes to the Navy Apoc don't really address what's screwed up with Amarr as a whole, and I feel like it's going to be a very long time before that actually happens.
yeah scorch kinda overshadows all the negative aspects of lazors...
i wonder if a re-blanced tech I ammo like they did for minmatar way back when would/could fix some of teh short comings with anything other then scorch...
Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point?
-áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
Perihelion Olenard
158
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:43:00 -
[158] - Quote
Olaf4862 wrote:Being a mostly dedicated Gallente pilot here is my feed back.
I will say that its sad that Gallente does not have any 8 gun battleship (I just love the feel of a full rack of guns). Can the Navy Mega get rid of the missile launchers that are basically useless and do not feel right and instead get an 8 gun Mega Navy.
I am ok with the Domi navy being both guns and drones. I always feel Navy issues should be all about damage and thick tank.
No eight-gun battleship is a good thing for Gallente. It means less ammo used and less capacitor used for weapons.
I wear my sunglasses at night. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
420
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:45:00 -
[159] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
RAVEN NAVY ISSUE
The CNR will be CaldariGÇÖs attack battleship, like the new tech 1 Raven. I wanted the Navy Raven to get something new, and the new Navy Drake pointed in a pretty good direction. 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.
Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+5% bonus to Torpedo and Cruise Missile explosion radius
+10% bonus to Cruise Missile Torpedo Velocity
Slot layout: 8H, 7M(+1), 5L; 0 turrets , 8 launchers(+1)
Fittings: 12000 PWG(+1075), 780 CPU(+45)
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 10500(-750) / 8000(-1961) / 9500(-461)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate): 5900(+587.5) / 1150s(-4.875s)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 123(+29) / .12(-.008) / 97300000(-2000000) / 16.19s(-1.43s)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75 / 100
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km / 105(-1.25) / 7
Sensor strength: 28 Gravimetric(+.5)
Signature radius: 410(-50)
I strongly disagree with this. You're nerfing the torp RNI in favor of the cruise variant, and go so far as to explicitly tell us you're basing the entire ship design off of cruise. Then you keep the cruise missile velocity bonus. Given that you're pigeon holing the ship into cruise, doesn't it make far more sense to trade the velocity bonus for the explosion radius bonus instead?
7 launchers, I like my utility high slot and would rather keep the rof bonus over a explosion or velocity bonus tbh
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
Heretic Initiative
3441
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 20:51:00 -
[160] - Quote
I wasn't attempting to say we should trade the ROF bonus away. I was saying I'd rather trade the missile velocity bonus for a explo radius bonus if we're dead set on pigeon holing the CNR into cruise. I actually really like the current CNR.
If it was just up to me, I'd make the attack BS changes (EHP, mobility, scan res, etc), add the 7th mid, and call it a day. The current bonuses are just fine.
-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
|
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9315
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:01:00 -
[161] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
RAVEN NAVY ISSUE
The CNR will be CaldariGÇÖs attack battleship, like the new tech 1 Raven. I wanted the Navy Raven to get something new, and the new Navy Drake pointed in a pretty good direction. 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.
Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+5% bonus to Torpedo and Cruise Missile explosion radius
+10% bonus to Cruise Missile Torpedo Velocity
Slot layout: 8H, 7M(+1), 5L; 0 turrets , 8 launchers(+1)
Fittings: 12000 PWG(+1075), 780 CPU(+45)
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 10500(-750) / 8000(-1961) / 9500(-461)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate): 5900(+587.5) / 1150s(-4.875s)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 123(+29) / .12(-.008) / 97300000(-2000000) / 16.19s(-1.43s)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75 / 100
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km / 105(-1.25) / 7
Sensor strength: 28 Gravimetric(+.5)
Signature radius: 410(-50)
I strongly disagree with this. You're nerfing the torp RNI in favor of the cruise variant, and go so far as to explicitly tell us you're basing the entire ship design off of cruise. Then you keep the cruise missile velocity bonus. Given that you're pigeon holing the ship into cruise, doesn't it make far more sense to trade the velocity bonus for the explosion radius bonus instead? 7 launchers, I like my utility high slot and would rather keep the rof bonus over a explosion or velocity bonus tbh
This was my preference when asked. On the other hand, with the CML buff that's coming, the new CNR will still do something like 15 more cruise missile DPS than the current one. It's hard to complain about that.
Well, it's hard to get anyone to listen, anyway.
Plus the CNR's alpha is going to be pretty brutal.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Marc McIntyre Crendraven
The Knights of Retribution
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:06:00 -
[162] - Quote
Navy Domi should be more drone focused and Navy Mega need 8 guns!!! I cannot stress enough the 8 guns part. Gallente have no 8 gun ships! It's a disgrace. |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
420
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:07:00 -
[163] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:CCP Rise wrote:
RAVEN NAVY ISSUE
The CNR will be CaldariGÇÖs attack battleship, like the new tech 1 Raven. I wanted the Navy Raven to get something new, and the new Navy Drake pointed in a pretty good direction. 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.
Caldari Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+5% bonus to Torpedo and Cruise Missile explosion radius
+10% bonus to Cruise Missile Torpedo Velocity
Slot layout: 8H, 7M(+1), 5L; 0 turrets , 8 launchers(+1)
Fittings: 12000 PWG(+1075), 780 CPU(+45)
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 10500(-750) / 8000(-1961) / 9500(-461)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate): 5900(+587.5) / 1150s(-4.875s)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 123(+29) / .12(-.008) / 97300000(-2000000) / 16.19s(-1.43s)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75 / 100
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km / 105(-1.25) / 7
Sensor strength: 28 Gravimetric(+.5)
Signature radius: 410(-50)
I strongly disagree with this. You're nerfing the torp RNI in favor of the cruise variant, and go so far as to explicitly tell us you're basing the entire ship design off of cruise. Then you keep the cruise missile velocity bonus. Given that you're pigeon holing the ship into cruise, doesn't it make far more sense to trade the velocity bonus for the explosion radius bonus instead? 7 launchers, I like my utility high slot and would rather keep the rof bonus over a explosion or velocity bonus tbh This was my preference when asked. On the other hand, with the CML buff that's coming, the new CNR will still do something like 15 more cruise missile DPS than the current one. It's hard to complain about that. Well, it's hard to get anyone to listen, anyway. Plus the CNR's alpha is going to be pretty brutal.
the cnr having the same base dps as the raven isn't a good thing imo, ok I know it will be better applied in this version but forcing it to use 8 launchers instead of the 6 of the raven to get the same result is painful.
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
526
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:13:00 -
[164] - Quote
FYI, the F-Tempest needs something like 4000 more power grid to be the armour equiv of the maelstrom, and that's before wanting to fit **** in your utility highs. Not that I care anymore, n-scorp, n-domi, n-phoon, n-raven. Waiting for the bombshell that will be the new price of all our shiney new toys.
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado.
Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
TheFace Asano
Yulai Guard 1st Fleet
Yulai Federation
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:17:00 -
[165] - Quote
The explosion radius bonus on the RNI is going to free up at least one rigor rig slot, giving more flexibility in rigging. The extra mid will give us a painter and plenty of space for tank, cap and a prop mod. Looking pretty positive for cruise boats as the phoon and the SNI are looking to be in a good spot (the SNI is just barely different anyway, always was close to a RNI).
The question is, however, is an "attack BS" worthwhile with t3 bc? I love my tornado, but it is pretty over powered. -1 turret on them all is probably a good idea, and the speed nerf they are getting just isn't enough. |
Schmell
Russian Thunder Squad
Darkness of Despair
32
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:20:00 -
[166] - Quote
Dat phoon Dat raven
I came
Oh btw welcome to Cruise Missiles Online: Age of Cap Warfare |
Aducat Ragnarson
Cult of the Black Goat
144
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:23:00 -
[167] - Quote
How the hell can the same people be screaming for an 8 gun megathron and then in the same breathe complain about the megathron getting nerfed?
I would ******* LOVE a BS with 1 single gun, and a dmg bonus that gives it 7 effective turrets, that way all those lovely slots will be splattered on mids and lows and utility highs makign the ship GOD.
Mega gets 8 guns, looses its utility high, dmg bonus gets nerfed so the effective turrets stay the same -> more ammo consumtion, more cap use through guns -> less utility.
Or are you actually so daft as to demand the extra gun should just be added as is giving the mega 12.5% more dps "just because 8 guns feel better"?
You want a Mega hull with 8 guns? Get a vindi!
"Waah it's Serpentis not Gallente"
Fluff is nice, but has to take a step back if the game is to be balanced.
Great changes CCP Rise, for these and the t1 BS's.
90% of the complaints come from people viewing the changes in isolation or comparing the ships to their old version and how that version did in the old meta, thos complaints should be shoved **** into **** with **** and ****.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9316
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:27:00 -
[168] - Quote
TheFace Asano wrote:The explosion radius bonus on the RNI is going to free up at least one rigor rig slot, giving more flexibility in rigging. The extra mid will give us a painter and plenty of space for tank, cap and a prop mod.
For PvE specifically, I'd rather drop the target painter and keep the rigors (In fact I'll probably go to 2x T2 Rigor, 1x T2 Flare), because juggling the painter is annoying and :effort:
That gives 2 mids to play with, and I'm looking at a boost amp and drone mod so that I can use medium drones instead of lights to kill frigates....
1 Kings 12:11
|
Fonac
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:27:00 -
[169] - Quote
Is there any plans on working on the torpedo's ?
As Liang has already "proved" .. the raven is put up for being a cruise missile ship, and torpedos are still bad.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9316
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:32:00 -
[170] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:
the cnr having the same base dps as the raven isn't a good thing imo, ok I know it will be better applied in this version but forcing it to use 8 launchers instead of the 6 of the raven to get the same result is painful.
It's not the same result, though: it's qualitatively superior in damage application and alpha.
They'll both be equally good for shooting structures and capitals, I suppose. For anything else, the CNR will be a quantum step ahead.
1 Kings 12:11
|
|
|
MeBiatch
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
969
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:32:00 -
[171] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:TheFace Asano wrote:The explosion radius bonus on the RNI is going to free up at least one rigor rig slot, giving more flexibility in rigging. The extra mid will give us a painter and plenty of space for tank, cap and a prop mod. For PvE specifically, I'd rather drop the target painter and keep the rigors (In fact I'll probably go to 2x T2 Rigor, 1x T2 Flare), because juggling the painter is annoying and :effort: That gives 2 mids to play with, and I'm looking at a boost amp and drone mod so that I can use medium drones instead of lights to kill frigates....
dont forget about a mjd for mission...
some missions have gates that are pretty far apart... being able to insta jump 100km forward will help out...
Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point?
-áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9319
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:35:00 -
[172] - Quote
Fonac wrote:Is there any plans on working on the torpedo's ?
As Liang has already "proved" .. the raven is put up for being a cruise missile ship, and torpedos are still bad.
IMO the basic problem with torpedos is the fitting requirements for the launchers. Short range turrets have lower fitting reqs than the long range; for missiles this is reversed. I do not understand why.
Giving the CNR enough fitting space to put in 8 torp launchers would make fitting Cruise laughable. Cruise should be a little harder to fit, torps a little easier.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9319
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:37:00 -
[173] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Malcanis wrote:TheFace Asano wrote:The explosion radius bonus on the RNI is going to free up at least one rigor rig slot, giving more flexibility in rigging. The extra mid will give us a painter and plenty of space for tank, cap and a prop mod. For PvE specifically, I'd rather drop the target painter and keep the rigors (In fact I'll probably go to 2x T2 Rigor, 1x T2 Flare), because juggling the painter is annoying and :effort: That gives 2 mids to play with, and I'm looking at a boost amp and drone mod so that I can use medium drones instead of lights to kill frigates.... dont forget about a mjd for mission... some missions have gates that are pretty far apart... being able to insta jump 100km forward will help out...
The CNR is getting a pretty massive speed increase. It seems a shame to waste it.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Caljiav Ocanon
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:38:00 -
[174] - Quote
8 guns for the Navythron please.
Though I fly through the valley of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am aligned to a safespot and warping out. - Me 2013 |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
Heretic Initiative
3442
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:38:00 -
[175] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:
the cnr having the same base dps as the raven isn't a good thing imo, ok I know it will be better applied in this version but forcing it to use 8 launchers instead of the 6 of the raven to get the same result is painful.
It's not the same result, though: it's qualitatively superior in damage application and alpha. They'll both be equally good for shooting structures and capitals, I suppose. For anything else, the CNR will be a quantum step ahead.
I dunno man. Stop and think about it this way. The damage application on the CNR is already good enough that people weren't clamoring to use Cruise Golems despite the dramatically superior damage application. The new bonus is extremely underwhelming and an outright nerf to the CNR.
-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
|
Perihelion Olenard
158
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:39:00 -
[176] - Quote
Caljiav Ocanon wrote:8 guns for the Navythron please.
It already got more damage from the drone bay.
I wear my sunglasses at night. |
MeBiatch
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
969
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:41:00 -
[177] - Quote
Fonac wrote:Is there any plans on the torpedo's ?
As Liang has already "proved" .. the raven is put up for being a cruise missile ship, and torpedos are still bad.
torps are not bad on a raven or stealth bombers... cuss of the range bonus they get
but on a phoon... i am not sure i would use them mainly because they lack critical range to be usefull for a large weapon.
if it were up to me i would just increase flight time for torps so they can hit up to 35ish km on unbonused ships... then reduce the bonus on the stealth bombers so they dont get too much of a boost...
i would not mind a raven that can shoot torps out to 52km...
Ok, so you've corrected my spelling,do you care to make a valid point?
-áThere are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... |
Caljiav Ocanon
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:44:00 -
[178] - Quote
Perihelion Olenard wrote:Caljiav Ocanon wrote:8 guns for the Navythron please. It already got more damage from the drone bay.
Still needs another gun. Remove the two launcher points. Remove 25m3 of drone bay even, just make it happen.
Though I fly through the valley of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am aligned to a safespot and warping out. - Me 2013 |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9319
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:44:00 -
[179] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Malcanis wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:
the cnr having the same base dps as the raven isn't a good thing imo, ok I know it will be better applied in this version but forcing it to use 8 launchers instead of the 6 of the raven to get the same result is painful.
It's not the same result, though: it's qualitatively superior in damage application and alpha. They'll both be equally good for shooting structures and capitals, I suppose. For anything else, the CNR will be a quantum step ahead. I dunno man. Stop and think about it this way. The damage application on the CNR is already good enough that people weren't clamoring to use Cruise Golems despite the dramatically superior damage application. The new bonus is extremely underwhelming and an outright nerf to the CNR. -Liang
Can you propose a scenario where the CNR will be worse on June 5th than it is right now?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
151
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 21:45:00 -
[180] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:FYI, the F-Tempest needs something like 4000 more power grid to be the armour equiv of the maelstrom, and that's before wanting to fit **** in your utility highs. Not that I care anymore, n-scorp, n-domi, n-phoon, n-raven. Waiting for the bombshell that will be the new price of all our shiney new toys. It'd be nice to see the TFI buffed for use with 1400s to at least give it some flair from the T1 counterpart, considering that fitting 6x 1400s is cheaper fitting-wise than the 8x 1400s the Maels fit.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 |