| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
KIAEddZ
   |
Posted - 2004.02.16 10:41:00 -
[1]
Too much Scorp Apoc Tempest loving on this forum :) and even the lowly pile o crap that is the typhoon gets more loving than Ravens. (my raven would tear a typhoon in 2)
So give it some loving.
(i wish to ddiscuss the Ravens abilities as a combat BS, both fleet and small engagement 1v1 2v2 3v3, and this is an opaque post attempting to stir up some reaction :) )
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=176347
www.kia-corp.co.uk/killboard
CEO of KIA Corp - Been doing it for the Laydeez since 1993, now we i |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 10:42:00 -
[2]
My Typhoon would eat your Raven for breakfast.*
With chips on the side.
*As long as you used rockets only.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
KIAEddZ
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 11:26:00 -
[3]
Edited by: KIAEddZ on 16/02/2004 11:28:07
Ooooh :) a challenge.
I would send you home like a ickle boy that wore no pants to gym class ;)
You wouldnt know what hit ya ;)
Now back to the subject. Is the raven any good?
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=176347
www.kia-corp.co.uk/killboard
CEO of KIA Corp - Been doing it for the Laydeez since 1993, now we i |
zincol
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 12:53:00 -
[4]
Edited by: zincol on 16/02/2004 12:54:41
whats wrong wid 6 seige and rest all tanking?
Raven seems fine u just dont get enuff cpu to use turret's.
The poor scorps dont have such firepower and the new nerfy thing dont look too good for scorp.
w00t!
|
Darsk'hul
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 13:08:00 -
[5]
Yek ! Caldari ship ...
ALL your BS are crap ! My looooooovely Dominix is the best (okay, actually, i've failed to get a megathron, which was my first choise, but ... hum ... ) 
__________
No more CEO of Placid Partners Inc.
Contact for this corp is now Yilo.
Freelancer at Lost Order |
Robskiwarrior
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 13:28:00 -
[6]
my bantam would tear you all apart.. 
...
|
Cleopatera
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 13:39:00 -
[7]
i love my raven. i generally go for a tank setup it keeps me unscratched against most in a 1 on 1. the only thing i can think of that have gotten past my sheilds are a tempest rigged for serious dmg with 1400's and a megathron with blasters at close range.
one thing with the raven in fleet is it looses alot of its potential at range which is anoying. you can fit 4 425's but it will hurt your PG and cpu.
imo the raven is prety damn good all roud, it can easily be rigged for some ewar, (6 med slots, same as a BB but ok you'd choose a scorp over a raven for ewar any day)its got excellent dmg potential with torps but generally the mid slots will keep the raven as one of the best ships around..
oh and it looks much better than any other bs (except maby the megathron i s'pose)
-------------------------------------------
Voted "Best" |
Artegg
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 15:00:00 -
[8]
 Quote:
Too much Scorp Apoc Tempest loving on this forum :) and even the lowly pile o crap that is the typhoon gets more loving than Ravens. (my raven would tear a typhoon in 2)
So give it some loving.
(i wish to ddiscuss the Ravens abilities as a combat BS, both fleet and small engagement 1v1 2v2 3v3, and this is an opaque post attempting to stir up some reaction :) )
Raven = sucks
sucks = no loving
Soon you will learn Eddz
|
Systemlord
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 15:11:00 -
[9]
If we could use torpedoes in fleet battles it would be a better ship, but the insane splash radius prevents the use of torpedoes as you destroy onther missiles intended for your target.
Need more CPU, it's stupid to only properly use 6 of 8 slots, and fitting 6 sieges without "wasting" a low slot for extra cpu isn't easy ..
Fix the missiles and we are getting somewhere.
Fix the cost and manufacture time on cruise missiles and we are getting even closer to other races.
Fix the slow speed
Fix the slow lock on time
(unless the Caldari is supposed to be slow, low tech and dumb, but then you need to fix the high tech storyline for them)
Basically, please fix the Raven so it's pilots are on equal terms with the other lvl2 BS pilots...
|
ProphetGuru
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 16:10:00 -
[10]
I'm sure glad someone brought this up cough 
Yes the raven ship bonus sux. TomB has, by the looks of his latest post, given up on making any rails balanced for raven use, and seems to indicate it may get more launcher slots, with missile bonuses to boot. (Gonna need more variations of launchers to pull that off btw)
Evolution..... Just when you thought you were winning.
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 16:14:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Jim Raynor on 16/02/2004 16:19:54
the problem lies in missiles, fix missiles and the raven is an awesome ship.
if raven had missile rof + dmg bonus and cruise missiles moved at 3200m/s instead of 1600m/s the raven would be great.
as far as ravens speed/mass/scanning resolution/signature radius is concerned
i think the raven comes dead last in too many categories.. it's the most massive tier2 battleship, tied for the slowest, lowest scanning resolution, and highest signature radius.. caldari ships certainly need a 'weakness' but does it need to be dead last in all of these categories?
caldari ships have a long targetting range but no weapons to capitalize on it as missiles suck as long range weapons..
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Baun
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 17:16:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Baun on 16/02/2004 17:16:59
Problems with the Raven
1) Slowest Rof of any Battleship (Base ROF of 20seconds on a siege launcher with the ability to only feasibly reduce it to 12 (unless you are completely nuts and trained 1.5mil skill points for BS lvl5, slower than a 1400mm on a tempest)
2) Worst Damage per second. Missles take a lot of time to reach their target. Missles can be taken out by defenders, smart bombs, intervening drones, other missles and warping away (even if they dont actually enter warp).
3) Not enough CPU. Siege Missle Launchers take almost twice the CPU of a 1400mm Artillery Piece. Furthermore, Caldari are supposed to be the shield kings yet it is impossible to fit an XL booster and fit a sufficient number of Siege Missle launchers as to maintain the already poor DPS.
4) The Hybrid Bonus is worthless. I don't believe it even works and the Raven cannot fit 2 425mm Rail Guns and 6 siege launchers (or indeed 4 siege launchers and 2 h-50s, while maintaining decent shielding).
5) It is a slow POS. It turns slowly, it moves slowly and it is easy to target. This is inconsistent given the Caldari Description
Ways to fix the Raven
in order of importance
1) Fix the bug wherein engaging warp makes all one invulnerable to missles.
2) Make missles cheaper (especially cruise missles). Is it really fare that they do less damage, hit less frequently, cost more to produce and take longer to produce?
3) Change the Raven (and Caracal) Hybrid bonus to a Missle Bonus 5% dmg/lvl to ALL missle types.
4) Make missles faster. This will increase the Damage/second of a Raven without neccesitating faster launch times.
5) Add a new module that would allow one to increase missle damage. If you think about it, other BSs (and all other non-missle ships for that matter) have both a ship damage bonus and the availability of damage and rof increasing modules and yet the Raven has neither. To furthere complicate this, the Raven is the only BS whose primary weapons can be countered no less than 5-6 ways.
6) Give the Raven more CPU (50 more would be a good start)
7) Make it slightly more agile and 10m/s faster
Ways to improve caldari ships in general
1) Make their shields more unique. Introduce shield permeability and set that to 10% for all races other than Caldari, and 0% for Caldari.
2) ... more to come
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
ProphetGuru
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 17:48:00 -
[13]
Now come on. I agree Raven needs a better ship bonus and missiles need work, but all of the above enacted would equal raven>all.
Yes lets have ravens with 3500ms missiles, doing 450dmg with improved dmg, running 8 siege launchers with increased cpu, 5 hardeners and a x-large shieldbooster, with lows full of cap relays or diags. Come on.
Don't get carried away. Yes it needs help.
Not THAT much help
Evolution..... Just when you thought you were winning.
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 17:51:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Jim Raynor on 16/02/2004 17:53:14
i'd reduce the signature radius on the raven to 500m, increase it's speed to 120m/s and lower it's mass a little bit..
that combined with fixing missiles and perhaps another bonus for missiles like DMG or something would make the Raven pretty sweet.
i'd take the scorpion shield bonus for the raven over the hybrid one too though..
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Kurtz
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 19:48:00 -
[15]
ItÆs not just the Raven here that needs the improvements.
Two ships had specific nerfing applied to them; the Blackbird and the Scorpion, the Raven just received a general nerfing from the overall changes in the targeting. Its problems predate Castor, and to think it even had one less low slot months back, nobody flew that ship back then.
The agility and speed corrections to the Blackbird really reduced the desire to use that ship. It handles more like a level 3 industrial now than the ôdelicate tactical situationö itÆs description says. I admit the pre-castor specifications were bugged, but this correction is too hard here. Give this ship back speed and agility.
The Scorpion also suffered speed and agility nerfing, as well as penalties in scan radius for targeting.
The Raven received the penalties in targeting and still has CPU and power issues that are not as large an issue on the other three level 2 battleships. Thankfully the Raven was spared the speed and agility nerfs. I suppose if you made that brick any slower they would have to declassify it as a battleship and call it a tower.
I think that speed and agility should be returned to the Scorpion and Blackbird, to fit their roles as electronic warfare platforms. They should also be able to lock targets faster than any other ship, however because of their electronic presence they should have even a larger scan radius to make target locking them faster. Perhaps this could be applied via a ship bonus of speed and scan resolution per level.
The Raven makes no such claims of being an EW platform, and therefore does not qualify for the benefit. The Raven however, should be able to fit 6 siege launchers and supporting system modules. So adding some CPU may solve this.
|
Baun
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 20:32:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Baun on 16/02/2004 20:35:42
Quote:
Now come on. I agree Raven needs a better ship bonus and missiles need work, but all of the above enacted would equal raven>all.
Yes lets have ravens with 3500ms missiles, doing 450dmg with improved dmg, running 8 siege launchers with increased cpu, 5 hardeners and a x-large shieldbooster, with lows full of cap relays or diags. Come on.
Don't get carried away. Yes it needs help.
Not THAT much help
Just think about it. Which other tier2 Battleship gives no DMG bonus to its primary weapon AND has no module that can increase the damage and ROF of its primary weapon?
Thats right, they all have damage bonuses (although im not too familiar with the apoc so who knows), and they all have optional modules that can increase damage and rof. Furthermore, the Raven's primary weapon hits about as often (likely less with a skilled pilot tempest pilot) than a Tempest's 1400mm and has a slower ROF, and when it does hit it does less damage.
I do not think the Raven should be given more Launcher slots unless Missles are not improved, and I do not think they should be able to continuosly run the medslots you specified. I do, however, think that either it needs more CPU or the cpu requirement of Siege Launchers need to be toned down, such that it can at least fit similiar defensive capabilities to ships which can do more damage and have a higher cap recharge rate.
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
Teeth
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 21:16:00 -
[17]
Quote:
Thats right, they all have damage bonuses (although im not too familiar with the apoc so who knows.
Apoc gives bonus to capacitor and energy usage.
|
Reiisha
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 22:24:00 -
[18]
i see you never gone head to head with a raven before.... it's nigh unklillable and it kills any other bs with cap and shield to spare, let alone in fleet battles.
Gamersland.nl, DE site voor PC gaming! |
ProphetGuru
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 23:18:00 -
[19]
Ravens are not unkillable by any means. It does need a bit of help with it's ship bonus, and missiles need some help, but that's about it.
Evolution..... Just when you thought you were winning.
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.02.16 23:33:00 -
[20]
Quote:
i see you never gone head to head with a raven before.... it's nigh unklillable and it kills any other bs with cap and shield to spare, let alone in fleet battles.
out of curiousity, what makes the raven unkillable? it's basically a tempest with worse bonuses and worse in just about every regard.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Kashre
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 00:42:00 -
[21]
Quote:
Quote:
i see you never gone head to head with a raven before.... it's nigh unklillable and it kills any other bs with cap and shield to spare, let alone in fleet battles.
out of curiousity, what makes the raven unkillable? it's basically a tempest with worse bonuses and worse in just about every regard.
From my experiences on chaos (never fought one on TQ) it makes a good tank, so 1 on 1 witha tempest or a typhoon I can never get through their shields. That doesnt make it unkillable, but I sure cant do it at my current skill levels.
The sixth mid slot (which I notice no one has mentioned as an bonus which might offset its crappy other stats)makes it a better EW platform than any other level 2 battleship as well.
Personally, I think its a damn good ship... the only real problem with it is that missiles are still screwed (which I want fixed as well since I fly a typhoon most of the time).
Fix the missiles, and the raven is easily going to be a match for any other level 2 battleship, imo.
+++
It's called "low security space" for a reason. |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 01:42:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Jim Raynor on 17/02/2004 01:43:09
honestly the more low slots you have the better of a shield tank you are, an apocolypse can out shield tank a raven any day.
raven should get its hybrid bonus swapped for a shield bonus, and they should fix missiles.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Cuisinart
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 01:48:00 -
[23]
Quote:
Edited by: Jim Raynor on 17/02/2004 01:43:09
honestly the more low slots you have the better of a shield tank you are, an apocolypse can out shield tank a raven any day.]
huh?
Vision without action is a daydream
Action without vision is a nightmare |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 01:49:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Jim Raynor on 17/02/2004 01:51:40
apoc = cap bonus
apoc = 7 low slots / cap relay
apoc + XL booster + EM/Thermal Ward + Shield Amp = way better shield tank than a raven
CAP = SHIELDS = TANK.
(oops, apoc has 7 low right?)
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Baun
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 03:33:00 -
[25]
Then only reason people think the Raven is a good shield tank is that its primary weapons do not use very much Cap. This means that one can easily run a large shield booster and 4 hardeners virtually forever. The Raven, however, could not itself do enough damage to break through such a setup, while other BSs if properly equipped can (although it is difficult). The issue is that the same is true for ANY other level 2 BS, as all it is about is cap power relays and cap recharge rate, and as the Raven has the lowest number of low slots of a t2 BS it has the worst shield tanking ability (the best shield tank is probably an Apoc using 1400mm).
I.E Jim is right.
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
KIAEddZ
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 11:50:00 -
[26]
Edited by: KIAEddZ on 17/02/2004 11:52:38
Now we are getting somwhere.
I ahve religously used the raven for a good few months now, but in battle, she just lacks the opportunities for strength that the other Lvl2 BS do.
Apoc. 8 Turrets! 7 low slots. Massive Damage from a Tach/Pulse setup.
Megatron. MWD and 7 Close Range Hybrids and 10 Drones. Simply ridiculous amount of damage/sec
Tempest. 1 less Med slot than a Raven, but in every other way its miles ahead. And bloody hell does she hit hard, and of course a cpaless weapon setup.
Raven. Missiles, NO damage bonus available, cant fit 6 Siege Launchers and 2 decent Large weps. 5 low slots :( Torps and Cruise hit hard, no doubts, but its so easy to counter them, 2 medium launchers on a cruiser with defenders is enough! Surely there is something wrong there! Not to inclue of course the time it takes for the missiles to get to a target, and the huge ROF of the Siege Launchers (i have mine down to 12 secs, but thats my limit realistically)
It needs tweaking. If it isnt tweaked, it will remain the most unpopular Lvl 2 BS by far, which is a great shame to say the least. It doesnt need much, just nbeeds bringing up to scale.
Give it 2 more Launcher bays, so it can carry 8. Give it a little more cpu (75). Give it a ROF and Missile Velocity Bonus as its Natural. That would enable it to compete with the Megathrons/Apocs/Tempests that currently smack us about like biatches ;)
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=176347
www.kia-corp.co.uk/killboard
CEO of KIA Corp - Been doing it for the Laydeez since 1993, now we i |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 12:01:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Jim Raynor on 17/02/2004 12:11:37
BOTTOM LINE
MISSILES ARE INFERIOR PRIMARY WEAPONS ON BATTLESHIPS
-insanely costly to manufacture (50 to 100 times more than large ammo)
-very slow -- thus, poor DoT -- especially at long range
(so what good is the 'advantage' of having the very long targetting range of Caldari ships if missiles suck at long range???)
-the blast radius makes it impossible to fight in empire if you are involved in a corporation war (CONCORD GANK)
-the blast radius takes out incoming missiles (your own and allies), thus makes it impossible to missile ships to focus fire on targets
They just total garbage in battleship combat if you rely on them as your primary weapons.
TomB has seemingly acknowledged this and we can just only hope that he has the wisdom to make Caldari ships viable again and gets missiles up to par with turrets.
If more missile skills are needed for missiles to get that balance, by all means, i'll be the first in line to purchase and train those skills.
I like my Raven, I just wish CCP would fix it already.
9 months and still waiting....
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
KIAEddZ
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 14:12:00 -
[28]
Personally, i couldnt give a rats ass about the cost of missiles, if you can afford a Raven and decent bolt ons, whats a few million isk for a months supply of missile ammo.
But your other points Jim, are what is important.
I do lubb my raven, and am stupidly deggedly loyal, hope they fix her soon.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=176347
www.kia-corp.co.uk/killboard
CEO of KIA Corp - Been doing it for the Laydeez since 1993, now we i |
fras
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 15:49:00 -
[29]
Raven might need a bonus but any major changes made to missiles to balance the Raven would royally screw frigates, cruisers and other battleship balance.
Not everyone sits in battleships doing 20v20 fleet battles at 60k.
There's plenty of ships with few/no missile bays as well as plenty other ships (mostly minmatar) with a strong fielding.
Someone mentioned fixing missiles to help their Typhoon, you must be having a laugh? Like it's broken or something...
Would it be fair to have a tier 1 BS with 4x1400's and 4 missile bays full of cruise flying at u at 3200m/s with no splash damage and another tier 1 BS with 5x425 rails (if you've got good fitting skills) plinking off your sheilds?
Am I whining - yes
Do I think that's balanced - no!
Try and think about the big picture! 
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2004.02.17 16:33:00 -
[30]
Edited by: j0sephine on 17/02/2004 16:36:59
"Personally, i couldnt give a rats ass about the cost of missiles, if you can afford a Raven and decent bolt ons, whats a few million isk for a months supply of missile ammo."
... A month? Just two salvos of cruises* from set of siege launchers equal about half million isk ^^;
*) i.e. less than 5 minutes of fire...
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |