Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
467
|
Posted - 2014.01.08 23:02:00 -
[31] - Quote
Good stuff.
The base ExpVel of citadel torps is 20m/s, and base ExpRad is 2000m. Skills improve those to 30m/s and 1500m respectively. So any ship that is larger and slower will take full damage. It is my understanding that a cap that is moving at full speed which then activates its siege or triage module for example, will continue to drift for a time until it eventually comes to a complete stop. Mass and inertia effects in Eve being based on a liquid medium rather than a vacuum.
I recall reading a post by a dev (can't remember where) stating that he was concerned about citadel torps being OP if they were buffed much because of their high alpha. And indeed, a Phoenix has an alpha of over 130k damage with Guristas Scourge Citadel torps.
I wouldn't be opposed to reducing their raw damage if their was a commensurate reduction in launcher cycle time to keep dps the same.
I also looked at the dps graph in EFT and was able to simulate an increase in ExpVel by fitting a couple rigs to the ship. Even a 10% buff to ExpVel makes a heck of a difference when shooting a moving target.
The ExpRad seems good to me.
I'm left wondering if the people that complain about citadel missile damage application simply need to train their application skills more. So I ran a couple easy numbers.
According to EFT, a Hel boosted by both a max-skilled Claymore and a Rag has a sigRad of 7275m and can move at 100m/s. Worst case with no missile application skills you would be dealing 7275/2000*20/100 = 72.75% damage applied. So ~7275dps.
Training those skills just to level 3 completely removes all damage application issues in this case. 7275/1700*26/100=1.1126.
Should be working fine. I think I'll train for it on sisi just so I can try it myself.
On a side note, if you were to use Strong Crash, rigs, TP and a webber, I don't see why you couldn't blap a BS., especially if you hit him while he is turning around. Volley would be about 64k raw damage.
Free Ripley Weaver! |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
2738
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 03:59:00 -
[32] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:I'm left wondering if the people that complain about citadel missile damage application simply need to train their application skills more. So I ran a couple easy numbers. You might want to recheck your calculationsGǪ With all V skills, three Citadel T1 cruiser launchers with Scourge Citadel cruise ammunition and four T2 ballistic controllers will hit a moving battleship for 7% in Siege. This increases to 14% with T2 rigors and 22% with T2 rigors and a pair of T2 target painters. That's basically as good as it gets. What is the actual DPS you ask? 1133.25 for all 3 launchers in Siege mode.
Base damage application against Carriers and Dreadnoughts is 67% and 70%, respectively. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1085
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 09:07:00 -
[33] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Good stuff.
The base ExpVel of citadel torps is 20m/s, and base ExpRad is 2000m. Skills improve those to 30m/s and 1500m respectively. So any ship that is larger and slower will take full damage. It is my understanding that a cap that is moving at full speed which then activates its siege or triage module for example, will continue to drift for a time until it eventually comes to a complete stop. Mass and inertia effects in Eve being based on a liquid medium rather than a vacuum.
Yes. But the only time people do this with dreads is with the mysterious nano-Phoenix, because for turret dreads it normally destroys your own tracking! With carriers it's slightly different, it's a good way of getting some transversal on some dreads at a point, but in my experience people want to stop before triaging anyway, because they don't want to drift out of rep or refit range.
I think the belief that supercaps can speed-tank a Phoenix comes from when the siege mod gave a penalty to explosion velocity and GMP had no effect. Those were changed a while back, but old beliefs die hard - particularly when nobody is using the Phoenix in combat to find out!
This assumes that EFT is correct though. When you add the Ragnorak in EFT, you can see that the Hel's sig only drops slightly, much less than the Titan bonus would suggest, suggesting that the Titan bonus replaces the sig radius link bonus, rather than both working. I've been training Cap Ships V on Sisi to make sure this is right. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
824
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 10:09:00 -
[34] - Quote
This overall suggestion is meh, because it greatly changes the role of the phoenix compared to other dreads. And I believe that it is possible to balance it while still letting it be a DREAD.
However. Thanks to OP, now i WANT TO FIRE VOID MISSILES DAMIT !! G££ <= Me |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
694
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 12:40:00 -
[35] - Quote
ccp please at least rework its fugly model pleeeaaasssseeee |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1085
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 13:06:00 -
[36] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Soldarius wrote:I'm left wondering if the people that complain about citadel missile damage application simply need to train their application skills more. So I ran a couple easy numbers. You might want to recheck your calculationsGǪ With all V skills, three Citadel T1 cruiser launchers with Scourge Citadel cruise ammunition and four T2 ballistic controllers will hit a moving battleship for 7% in Siege. This increases to 14% with T2 rigors and 22% with T2 rigors and a pair of T2 target painters. That's basically as good as it gets. What is the actual DPS you ask? 1133.25 for all 3 launchers in Siege mode. Base damage application against Carriers and Dreadnoughts is 67% and 70%, respectively.
Unrealistic assumptions for the capitals, as already discussed, leading to misleading results.
Also sort of unrealistic for the battleship, because you've assumed no support. In reality, anyone attempting to blap stuff with a Phoenix will have support. Let's assume torps, no Rigour, standard Crash and two 60% webs and two 37.5% painters - so a standard Phoenix fit with a gang capable of tackling the target BS for a dread to shoot it. Let's take a trimarked Dominix as the target.
Dominix speed is 23 m/s (after it's slowed down, ofc!) and sig is 848 m. With Crash, the Phoenix does 70.7% damage. Pretty good, eh?
Well, not really. The problem here is that a Moros or Naglfar shooting that same Domi would normally be hitting even more easily. While you can get the Phoenix to do the blap thing against caps (and with Rigours, 90% webs and linked bonused painters you can start thinking about whacking T3s off the field!), the fundamental problem is that the Moros and Nag simply do this better and more easily, requiring less specialised support. Conversely, there's a balance problem in that if the Phoenix does become able to reliably apply DPS to small stuff, there is basically no escape for a target when being shot by, say, three Phoenixes. The nature of missiles makes it a tricky situation to balance, hence my preference for focusing on the anticapital role. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
2742
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 14:27:00 -
[37] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:[Also sort of unrealistic for the battleship, because you've assumed no support. Not necessarily. A Dreadnought should at least be able to "hold its own" against battleships without a small armada of support. If the solution isn't to increase the damage application for capital weapons, then why not something like rapid cruise launchers that at least give the Phoenix some peer-to-peer combat ability? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
TheMercenaryKing
StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome.
94
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 14:39:00 -
[38] - Quote
While i like the idea of dreads being able to one shot or kill battleships with ease, there needs to be a line.
Seeing dreads do better out of siege, and then (maybe) re-adding a tracking penalty to siege-mode would be awesome.This and reducing the power of capital remote reps by adding a stacking penalty would be a good balance for the first tier of capitals IMO. This Repping stacking penalty would apply only to capital reps as their rep yield is so god damn high as it is. This would mean capitals would not be able to hold tank as well unless some carriers commit. |
Ordo Malus
Shadows Of The Requiem The Unthinkables
19
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 14:59:00 -
[39] - Quote
So the common theme here is that he Phoenix's weakness is damage application against non capitals.
Assuming that: 1) Phoenix will perform well against capitals in a general situation. (Dread vs dread) 2) The other three dreads are best suited (turrets) for handling non capitals due to damage application vs sig radius (and other issues already discused) 3) Phoenix could use an increase in explosion velocity however this risks being too powerful against subcaps. 4) Phoenix needs a niche to be utilized.
Seems to me that the Phoenix's design is very dependant on what you "expect" to face. You assume dreads can go siege something, a tower, station, other capitals, and refit if needed to help combat battleships and the like. The Phoenix can bash big things well, however if we try to fix explosion velocity, it will either be too much or too little. How about increasing the damage of the phoenix even more?
Leave it identical to it's current setup but increase damage. If you want a niche, let it be that the phoenix can out brawl anything short of a super carrier. It will still have the same tank limitations, not be viable against subcaps (requiring subcap support) but it will be able to overpower other capitals. This will mean that there is a choice between what dread to use on an operations. If there is a hostile subcap fleet, you're not taking the phoenix. If its a capital brawl, bring out the phoenix. Same goes for a station/pos bash. Its superior damage to siege anything is countered by the fact that, without support, it will whelp. The other three dreadnaughts will retain their current damage ability of sieging things with the benefit of being capable of killing battleships and such. |
TheMercenaryKing
StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome.
94
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 15:16:00 -
[40] - Quote
Ordo Malus wrote:So the common theme here is that he Phoenix's weakness is damage application against non capitals.
Assuming that: 1) Phoenix will perform well against capitals in a general situation. (Dread vs dread) 2) The other three dreads are best suited (turrets) for handling non capitals due to damage application vs sig radius (and other issues already discused) 3) Phoenix could use an increase in explosion velocity however this risks being too powerful against subcaps.
the explosion radius (sig) is okay, but its the explosion velocity that's the problem when talking about damage application. All capitals and above are susceptible to torps and cruise missiles except if they are moving. A carrier moving at top speed with max transversal still receives more than 70% of base damage from turret dreads, but with torps its about a 50% reduction (even more if they are running sig reduction).
When speaking of raw Damage, again capital missiles are lacking. People say the moros is great only because it has not received a blaster range nerf yet (which it deserves). Pulses would then fill the gap between blaster and autos.
If my proposed change of explsion velocity were to happen, then see the following:
TL;DR Math : 500 sig bs @ 120 m/s vs Cit. torps (changed for GMP)= 13.7% base damage
Base damage * [ (500/ 1500) * (50 / 120) ] ^ 1 Base damage * [ (0.33) * (0.415) ] Base damage * (.13695)
Currently it is: TL;DR 8.25% of base damage with current torps
Base damage * [ (500/ 1500) * (30 / 120) ] ^ 1 Base damage * [ (0.33) * (0.25) ] Base damage * (.0825) |
|
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
1085
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 15:40:00 -
[41] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Gypsio III wrote:[Also sort of unrealistic for the battleship, because you've assumed no support. Not necessarily. A Dreadnought should at least be able to "hold its own" against battleships without a small armada of support.
No it shouldn't, IMO, and anyway, a lone turret dread cannot hold its own against hostile BS, because it's really quite easy for them to get under its guns' tracking and receive 0% damage.
Ordo Malus wrote:1) Phoenix will perform well against capitals in a general situation. (Dread vs dread)
I don't think it does perform well here. It has lower DPS than the Moros and Naglfar and less flexibility of damage type than the Naglfar. It has no meaningful range advantage and when you mix damage types to avoid your applied DPS being crippled by RAHs or refitting, it does less raw damage than even the Revelation. Applied DPS over time is further reduced by the interaction of siege mode and missile flight time. The burst tank and volley damage are nice, but I don't think it's controversial to rank the Phoenix 4/4 in this situation - which is kinda suggested by the usage stats.
And note that fiddling with explosion velocity does nothing for the Phoenix's ranking here - the only thing that can really be changed is raw DPS and damage type flexibility. This is why I keep banging on about explosion velocity not being the answer alone. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
2743
|
Posted - 2014.01.09 16:47:00 -
[42] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:No it shouldn't, IMO, and anyway, a lone turret dread cannot hold its own against hostile BS, because it's really quite easy for them to get under its guns' tracking and receive 0% damage. Respectfully, this is where we agree to disagree. All the Phoenix really needs is three more launcher slots such that it could run a combination of Siege-bonused Citadel cruise launchers and standard cruise launchers. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |