EVE Search - Why are all split weapon ships worst in class?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Why are all split weapon ships worst in class?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Grace Hopper	Posted - 2007.03.18 00:42:00 - [1] Edited by: Grace Hopper on 18/03/2007 00:39:34 Seems that the split weapons makes these ships preform really badly. The phoon managed to break the mould for awhile but if it had been a single weapon type ship (missles) it would have been even more powerful. Even as far as Faction and T2 ships are concerned the split weapon ships are terrible in comparison with dedicated damage type ships. They have to forgo damage mods because of the need for twice the slots and also have fitting problems when trying to run all guns/missles. Since they have a lower damage capability it seems that these ships all need some sort of non-traditional bonus to make them useful. The ares or raptor for instance could use something like a web range bonus in place of any of any other bonuses, it would then have some sort of purpose at least, instead of just being the best shuttle. Even the Nightmare pales in comparison to the other faction ships and seems pretty aimless. Having more armor than anything else dosen't seem like a real good reason to fly one of these, when you have things like the Macherial or Navy Raven at the same (or less) price. It's only saving grace is that it looks so cool. All of these ships need some sort of change or tweak. I think the idea has definate merit, but they've all been low class ships throughout the lifetime of the game. Making them all even more unique than they are now seems like the best option to me though. Rather than retooling them all as dedicated turret or missle ships.
dalman Finite Horizon	Posted - 2007.03.18 01:07:00 - [2] You are very wrong. The typhoon is a kick-*** ship for solo or small gang, also in 'tank-mode'. If you are a skilled pilot, in terms of both skillpoints and player skill, you should be able to rival any other BS 1vs1 in a tanked typhoon. This includes faction battleships as well. The obvious problem you face is to kit it out the best way with it's gimped powergrid (exactly the same problem the dominix has). And just like the dominix would, it would be the 'end all, be all' with more powergrid. The nightmare is indeed a bit gimped. But it has nothing, nothing at all, to do with the split weapons. It has to do with mostly lack of cpu/grid to fully use the ship, but also with the not so impressive cap, low speed/agility, and 'small' dronebay. The T2 ships are another story. And the base line is that pretty much all T2 ships gets a dual damagebonus to one weaponsystem. Therefor any T2 ship with split weapons will be lacking quite alot. Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.18 01:10:00 - [3] Have to agree with the OP. Unless you invest one hell of a lot of money, dual weapon bonus will always beat split weapon bonus. And then you can invest an equal amount of money into a dual bonus ship and still come out on top. The Typhoon's saving graces are it's speed, it's ability to run a half-decent tank, and the slight bonus of being able to sacrifice dps for different damage types. I look at those poor faction ships and shake my head. sgb
Grace Hopper	Posted - 2007.03.18 01:47:00 - [4] Edited by: Grace Hopper on 18/03/2007 01:44:27 Quote: The typhoon is a kick-* ship for solo or small gang, also in 'tank-mode'. If you are a skilled pilot, in terms of both skillpoints and player skill, you should be able to rival any other BS 1vs1 in a tanked typhoon. This includes faction battleships as well. The obvious problem you face is to kit it out the best way with it's gimped powergrid (exactly the same problem the dominix has). And just like the dominix would, it would be the 'end all, be all' with more powergrid. The Typhoon is the best split weapon ship. But I still consider it worst in class. Other ships tank batter, other ships use drones and missles better etc. And it's master of none approach does not aggregate to a better ship because of it, in my opinion. It received a boost sometime back, but I still think it needs something more, and that something more in the form of some kind of unique bonus will not turn it into an ubership if done correctly. What kind of small unique bonus could make it a little bit better do you think? Quote: The nightmare is indeed a bit gimped. But it has nothing, nothing at all, to do with the split weapons. It has to do with mostly lack of cpu/grid to fully use the ship, but also with the not so impressive cap, low speed/agility, and 'small' dronebay. Because of the split bonus it has to fit 7 or 8 large weapons and then try and find room for a tank too, this is what causes it's cpu/grid problems I think. If it only had to fit 6 guns or launchers then it would be a better ship, but I think a better approach would be as previously iterated. Quote:** The T2 ships are another story. And the base line is that pretty much all T2 ships gets a dual damagebonus to one weaponsystem. Therefor any T2 ship with split weapons will be lacking quite alot. Again as previously iterated, they could use some sort of small bonus. What form do you think that bonus could take?
Vellaron	Posted - 2007.03.18 02:15:00 - [5] One problem is that it reduces the effecitveness of weapon upgrade modules. If say a ballistics control taking up a lowslot only provides a bonus to half my rack of weapons then i am at a disadvantage over a ship that has all their guns aplified by it. Another problem is that you need a lot more skillpoints to make a split rack effective.
Jei'son Bladesmith Bladesmith Mining and Development Consortium	Posted - 2007.03.18 02:18:00 - [6] Originally by: Vellaron One problem is that it reduces the effecitveness of weapon upgrade modules. If say a ballistics control taking up a lowslot only provides a bonus to half my rack of weapons then i am at a disadvantage over a ship that has all their guns aplified by it. Another problem is that you need a lot more skillpoints to make a split rack effective. Exactly, that nicely sums up the primary problems with any split weapon ships. *☼☼☼ Confidence keeps you alive...cockiness will get you podded ☼☼☼*
dalman Finite Horizon	Posted - 2007.03.18 02:19:00 - [7] Originally by: Grace Hopper What kind of small unique bonus could make it a little bit better do you think? As I said, I don't think the typhoon needs a boost at all. A typhoon (with a pilot that I know is very skilled) is rly the only situation where I'd be thinking twice before attacking 1vs1. (that's a bit of a modified truth though, because I'd assume a faction BS is also faction fitted while I wouldn't assume that about the phoon) Originally by: Grace Hopper Because of the split bonus it has to fit 7 or 8 large weapons and then try and find room for a tank too, this is what causes it's cpu/grid problems I think. If it only had to fit 6 guns or launchers then it would be a better ship, but I think a better approach would be as previously iterated. I'd just fix the fittings. The fittings should be such that it allows it to fit a full 4/4 setup with high/low end versions (as in dualheavy + torps or mega + cruise) + a full setup (including dual rep, cap booster and probably mwd). Originally by: Grace Hopper What form do you think that bonus could take? The T2 ships with split weapons need one more bonus than the one system ships IMO. It's a simple fact that two bonuses to 'split systems' is the same as one bonus to 'single system'. But this really only becomes a problem to T2 ships, as they get a 2:nd damage bonus. The T1 ships get a bonus that is "only so and so" useful (like cap on apoc or tracking on megathron), and the split weapons T1 ships usually has other pros that makes up for that (phoon for example has 'no cap weapons', big dronebay, "very" high speed and small sig radius). And for the record it needs to be pointed out that the dominix is also a ship that has a split systems bonus. But I don't find many people whining about that. Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me
Lygos Finis Actum	Posted - 2007.03.18 02:26:00 - [8] I believe that flexibility was the intended advantage. With one system knocked out, you were supposed to be able to carry on with a secondary attack or defense strategy. Unfortunately, development has favored non-selective disablement mechanics. ECM and damps are favored over tracking disruptors, smartbombs and defender missile systems. Would be nice if we had more certain, yet more selective disabling modules. Like a magnetometric ECM that only prohibits you from locking onto Gallente ships. --- T2 Risk \| Corp Divisions
Vijaya	Posted - 2007.03.18 07:52:00 - [9] The typhoon is an excellent ship for close range warfare. It's fast, agile and can carry a decent tank. Using autocannons and cruises you bypass the powergrid issues to an extent. With t2 heavy drones, it can atleast equal other bs's. Drawbacks are the lack of being able to fit artillery + torps, while maintaining a tank, and how skill intensive it is as it requires, gun, missile, and drone skills to pilot effectively.
Tenaka Kahn Minmatar Blackguard Brigade	Posted - 2007.03.18 08:41:00 - [10] So, ships like the Huginn suck by that line of thought? Or perhaps the highest damage dealing dreadnought the naglfar? If you have the proper skills to utilize a split weapons layout it means you have a high level of vesatility. It's not nearly as much of a drawback as you might think and TBH there are very few ships (t1 or t2) that really utilize a split weapon system. Its mostly faction frigs and such that have the true split weapon system as opposed to auxillary weapons to supplement the main weapons system.
Sokratesz Guardians of Hell's Gate Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2007.03.18 08:46:00 - [11] It's true to a certain extent..it's not like the naglfar needs to dictate range... March 2007; the time common sense took control at CCP.
Grace Hopper	Posted - 2007.03.18 11:17:00 - [12] Edited by: Grace Hopper on 18/03/2007 11:20:13 Originally by: Tenaka Kahn So, ships like the Huginn suck by that line of thought? Or perhaps the highest damage dealing dreadnought the naglfar? If you have the proper skills to utilize a split weapons layout it means you have a high level of vesatility. It's not nearly as much of a drawback as you might think and TBH there are very few ships (t1 or t2) that really utilize a split weapon system. Its mostly faction frigs and such that have the true split weapon system as opposed to auxillary weapons to supplement the main weapons system. The huginn is a perfect example of a split weapon ship that works great. It gets a non typical bonus that enables it to have a unique role. The split slot layout of the nagalfar ends up gimping it if damage mods are used. Its universially thought of as the best dread to destroy first because it has a bad tank in comparison to other dreads, not because it does the most damage. It's damage is very middle of the pack. I still think the phoon is going to go back to being the worst t1 BS as soon as the speed mod nerf happens. That was previously it's saving grace. The vaunted versatility that a split weapon system is supposed to add to a ship meets a harsh reality when used in practice. Versatility is a result of mid and low slot balance, not high slots. Ex. Raven, Dominix etc. There may not be that many split weapon ships, but they are all under preformers when compared to other ships in thier class. With the exception of the Huginn, but I outlined the reasons for that in the first post. Originally by: Vijaya The typhoon is an excellent ship for close range warfare. It's fast, agile and can carry a decent tank. Using autocannons and cruises you bypass the powergrid issues to an extent. With t2 heavy drones, it can atleast equal other bs's. Drawbacks are the lack of being able to fit artillery + torps, while maintaining a tank, and how skill intensive it is as it requires, gun, missile, and drone skills to pilot effectively. It pales in close range fights compared to a Geddon, Autotempest, maybe even torp ravens, and certainly dominixes.
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.18 12:11:00 - [13] I'll take on a phoon in any other bs of your choice, with the same amount of isk to spend, and similar skill points. It just can't go the distance. If we had say a 6 turret / 6 missile layout on the highs, maybe even 7, at least it would actually be flexible. sgb
Laboratus Gallente BGG Alektorophobia	Posted - 2007.03.18 12:15:00 - [14] Split weapon ships just require a lot more sp to be good, but are absolute kick ass. Typhoon for example does insane damage, is fast and tanks well, when it combines autocannos, cuise missiles and Heavy drones. It uses 3 different weapon systems and is impressive... ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
mematar Turbulent	Posted - 2007.03.18 12:23:00 - [15] Originally by: Laboratus Split weapon ships just require a lot more sp to be good, but are absolute kick ass. Typhoon for example does insane damage, is fast and tanks well, when it combines autocannos, cuise missiles and Heavy drones. It uses 3 different weapon systems and is impressive... Qft
Leandro Salazar Bravehearts Xelas Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.18 12:39:00 - [16] Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 18/03/2007 12:36:45 For heavy tanking and low DPS, the split slot ships are doing okay. Just like for full gank and no tank. But for setups that are trying to achieve average tanking and good DPS (i.e. fitting damage mods), they suck due to damage mods only being 50% effective. And I guess those setups are most common. A Typhoon is my PvP ride of choice as well, but it is fitted with 4 siege, 4 nos and a heavy tank, so just ignores one of the ship bonuses, which certainly is far from optimal. Its saving grace is really only the overpoweredness of nos, and the main reason I use it is that it is not usually primaried, it handles like a light brick instead of a heavy one, and that the large drone bay allows me to carry a nice assortment of different drones. In actual combat, it is inferior to its single weapon system brethern. How to fix it? I don't know. I think 7.5% damage bonuses would probably work, even if that would create insane gank setups if you totally forgo any kind of tank. If you beat other ships in a Typhoon, that is most likely due to you being a better pilot, you having more SP, the other ship having a crap fitting, or the other ship being Amarr lol. Not due to the Typhoon being the superior ship. --------- There is no 'n' in turret There is no 'r' in faction There is no 'a' in Kestrel
Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy Apocalyptica.	Posted - 2007.03.18 15:43:00 - [17] Split weapon systems is at a disadvantage because weapon bonus and damage mods will not apply to all weapons... On the other hand split weapon system ships have some nice overall setups, AND it gives your ship the advantage of high damage turrets and select damage type launchers (that might not always be an advantage but still cool). I am not entirely sure devs have actually considered how difficult it is to use some of these split weapon systems, but I don't think they are "far off". Especially the Typhoon class battleship is doing a great job even in a conventional setup. A ship like Moa is really hard to use in most situations, but that is mostly due to only having 4 medslots with a shield bonus and being too slow to get advantage of a range bonus... - I'm a nice guy!! and OMG I love Team Tuxford for the speedbalancing...
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.03.18 16:24:00 - [18] To be 'versatile', the Typhoon would need: 1500 more base grid 40 more base CPU +2 Turret +2 Launcher -1 Low Slot +2 Mid Slot 8/6/6 [6 Turrets/6 Launchers] THAT would be versatile. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Star Commander Got Corp?
smallgreenblur Minmatar Wreckless Abandon	Posted - 2007.03.18 16:25:00 - [19] Originally by: Thor Xian To be 'versatile', the Typhoon would need: 1500 more base grid 40 more base CPU +2 Turret +2 Launcher -1 Low Slot +2 Mid Slot 8/6/6 [6 Turrets/6 Launchers] THAT would be versatile. You'd have to lose one of your slots, i would say a high, so have 7/6/6. sgb
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.03.18 16:31:00 - [20] Originally by: smallgreenblur Originally by: Thor Xian To be 'versatile', the Typhoon would need: 1500 more base grid 40 more base CPU +2 Turret +2 Launcher -1 Low Slot +2 Mid Slot 8/6/6 [6 Turrets/6 Launchers] THAT would be versatile. You'd have to lose one of your slots, i would say a high, so have 7/6/6. sgb That was my original thought too, but I didnt keep it in. _________________________ ~Thor Xian, Star Commander Got Corp?
Sokratesz Guardians of Hell's Gate Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2007.03.18 16:32:00 - [21] Quote: Why are all split weapon ships worst in class? Imagine having to fight with a Machete in one hand and an M4 assault rifle set to auto in the other. It just doesn't work. March 2007; the time common sense took control at CCP.
Scordite	Posted - 2007.03.18 16:48:00 - [22] Originally by: Sokratesz Quote: Why are all split weapon ships worst in class? Imagine having to fight with a Machete in one hand and an M4 assault rifle set to auto in the other. It just doesn't work. That's a mixed range issue, not a split weapon system one ----------------------------------------------- The only legitimate use of the BLINK tag: Schr÷dinger's cat is [BLINK] not [/BLINK] dead.
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.03.18 17:09:00 - [23] Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 18/03/2007 17:06:39 ahem the Typhoon can deal out up to 250 dps from torpedoes, plus 317 dps from drones, plus 240dps from Autocannons û 807 dps in total, all while running a 7 slot armour tank with 81/73/77/78% resistances and 12,086 armour. That's already more than capable of going toe-to-toe with an equivalently skilled (i.e. perfect) T2 Blasterthron, and you guys want more?... Edit: setup for those who don't believe me (yes I have fought against this) Quote: 4 dual 425 II 4 siege II ab II faint warp prohibitor (20k) web medium electrochemical injector large rep II internal force field array exlosive hardener II kinetic hardener II n-type thermic hardener energized adaptive nano membrane II 1600mm rolled tungsten ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Tarron Sarek Gallente Endica Enterprises	Posted - 2007.03.18 18:12:00 - [24] In direct reply to the topic "Why are all split weapon ships worst in class?": Because of the damage bonuses. Most players are crazy about damage. In WoW people are crazy about crits, and dmg. It must have something to do with e-peens. Or efficiency? I guess both. Ways to balance it could be: - dmg bonuses only for split weapon ships - smaller dmg bonus (e.g. 3%) - some other small boost to commonly underused split weapon ships just some random 2 cents ___________________________________ _/_/ Game balance isn't just a luxury _/_/
Grace Hopper	Posted - 2007.03.18 19:29:00 - [25] Edited by: Grace Hopper on 18/03/2007 19:27:51 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 18/03/2007 17:06:39 ahem the Typhoon can deal out up to 250 dps from torpedoes, plus 317 dps from drones, plus 240dps from Autocannons û 807 dps in total, all while running a 7 slot armour tank with 81/73/77/78% resistances and 12,086 armour. That's already more than capable of going toe-to-toe with an equivalently skilled (i.e. perfect) T2 Blasterthron, and you guys want more?... Edit: setup for those who don't believe me (yes I have fought against this) Quote: 4 dual 425 II 4 siege II ab II faint warp prohibitor (20k) web medium electrochemical injector large rep II internal force field array exlosive hardener II kinetic hardener II n-type thermic hardener energized adaptive nano membrane II 1600mm rolled tungsten I wonder offhand how many people in the entire game have the skills to fly this. Probably less than 100, heck probably less than 50. And it would take close to two years or more to train for. All for something thats just barly capable of fighting a t2 blasterthron or equilivant.
Grace Hopper	Posted - 2007.03.18 19:29:00 - [26] Edited by: Grace Hopper on 18/03/2007 19:27:51 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 18/03/2007 17:06:39 ahem the Typhoon can deal out up to 250 dps from torpedoes, plus 317 dps from drones, plus 240dps from Autocannons û 807 dps in total, all while running a 7 slot armour tank with 81/73/77/78% resistances and 12,086 armour. That's already more than capable of going toe-to-toe with an equivalently skilled (i.e. perfect) T2 Blasterthron, and you guys want more?... Edit: setup for those who don't believe me (yes I have fought against this) Quote: 4 dual 425 II 4 siege II ab II faint warp prohibitor (20k) web medium electrochemical injector large rep II internal force field array exlosive hardener II kinetic hardener II n-type thermic hardener energized adaptive nano membrane II 1600mm rolled tungsten I wonder offhand how many people in the entire game have the skills to fly this. Probably less than 100, heck probably less than 50. And it would take close to two years or more to train for. All for something thats just barly capable of fighting a t2 blasterthron or equilivant.
LVSOCOM Minmatar Vale Heavy Industries SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.03.18 20:20:00 - [27] Edited by: LVSOCOM on 18/03/2007 20:18:44 Originally by: Grace Hopper Edited by: Grace Hopper on 18/03/2007 19:27:51 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 18/03/2007 17:06:39 ahem the Typhoon can deal out up to 250 dps from torpedoes, plus 317 dps from drones, plus 240dps from Autocannons – 807 dps in total, all while running a 7 slot armour tank with 81/73/77/78% resistances and 12,086 armour. That's already more than capable of going toe-to-toe with an equivalently skilled (i.e. perfect) T2 Blasterthron, and you guys want more?... Edit: setup for those who don't believe me (yes I have fought against this) Quote: 4 dual 425 II 4 siege II ab II faint warp prohibitor (20k) web medium electrochemical injector large rep II internal force field array exlosive hardener II kinetic hardener II n-type thermic hardener energized adaptive nano membrane II 1600mm rolled tungsten I wonder offhand how many people in the entire game have the skills to fly this. Probably less than 100, heck probably less than 50. And it would take close to two years or more to train for. All for something thats just barly capable of fighting a t2 blasterthron or equilivant. Umm no. It would take about 9-10 months of dedicated skilling. It would also definetely be able to stand with a T2 Megathron-- I know, I'm working on how to improve my fit right now. If I had kept inside the minmatar tree I'd probably be flying something very similar already. Remember, the missile tree takes much less time then the turret skill trees to reach the sp needed to use T2 Large weaponry (seiges). 806 DPS is alot. Most Ion II throns, still packing a tank, reach about 850-900ish. Thats with heavy drone op V and drone interfacing V factored in as well...
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE	Posted - 2007.03.18 21:04:00 - [28] You can even make probably more today. 1 PG rig to upgrade dual 425 to dual 650. 1 Armor rig to drop 1 low slot to a Gyro II. reaching about 850 dps But anyone must agree that there is NO battleship that needs as much skills as this one to be effective. If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Gabriel Karade Nulli-Secundus	Posted - 2007.03.18 21:04:00 - [29] Originally by: Grace Hopper Edited by: Grace Hopper on 18/03/2007 19:27:51 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 18/03/2007 17:06:39 ahem the Typhoon can deal out up to 250 dps from torpedoes, plus 317 dps from drones, plus 240dps from Autocannons û 807 dps in total, all while running a 7 slot armour tank with 81/73/77/78% resistances and 12,086 armour. That's already more than capable of going toe-to-toe with an equivalently skilled (i.e. perfect) T2 Blasterthron, and you guys want more?... Edit: setup for those who don't believe me (yes I have fought against this) Quote: 4 dual 425 II 4 siege II ab II faint warp prohibitor (20k) web medium electrochemical injector large rep II internal force field array exlosive hardener II kinetic hardener II n-type thermic hardener energized adaptive nano membrane II 1600mm rolled tungsten I wonder offhand how many people in the entire game have the skills to fly this. Probably less than 100, heck probably less than 50. And it would take close to two years or more to train for. All for something thats just barly capable of fighting a t2 blasterthron or equilivant. Ah but balancing is done based upon maximum skill levels, and don't forget the range versatility this puppy has; up to 75km with torpedoes (locking range is the limitation), up to 60km with drones, and 85% hits at 20km with the 425mm's using barage L. It's the delay associated with MWD'ing to the target (15-20km) that kills Blasterthrons fighting this setup... ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE	Posted - 2007.03.18 23:02:00 - [30] Somethign that I can't just let go is.. WHY WHY Typhoon has more shield than armor if its CLEARLY an armor tanker? Please CCP. Solve that and you will have enough thanking form typhoon pilots (they deserve now that they will loose the possibility of usign typhoon main strenght) If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.