open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Tempest needs changing.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 ... : last (42)

Author Topic

Harotak
Malicious Destruction
Posted - 2009.08.25 22:54:00 - [751]
 

Edited by: Harotak on 25/08/2009 23:01:19
Originally by: Orakkus
Autocannons would have the following changes done:

- Their base ROF changed from 7.88 to 6.698. This will do several things with the addition of the ammo damage increase. The change would put Projectile DPS between Pulse Lasers (as the low side at 25.22 DPS) and Hybrid Blasters (at the high side with 29.42 DPS) and would be at 27.18 DPS. This would make Autocannons competative against other weapon systems, while not being overpowered as Minmatar would still have to fight in falloff and have the problems with reloading using the current clip size.



Don't forget that autocannon ships get a rate of fire bonus. You can't compare the base damage of the weapons to other weapon systems. Same thing with lasers; their "damage bonus" is considered to be built in since the ships need to have a cap use bonus for them instead.

With the ROF increase you propose my maelstrom would deal out over 1600 dps overloaded.



WHAT I WOULD CHANGE:

7% damage mod increase for all large autocannons
Change ROF bonus on maelstrom to damage bonus
give tempest 125m3 drone bay and 8/4/7 slot layout
give phoon 8/5/6 slot layout
make projectile ammo base damage the same as hybrid charges and laser crystals
remove optimal penalty from hail
change void falloff penalty to 25%
remove tracking penalty from hail, conflag, and void
boost large blaster tracking 20%

Suboran
Gallente
Best Path Inc.
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2009.08.25 22:58:00 - [752]
 

Tempest just needs more statistical beef other than that is seems to be fine in most ways

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2009.08.25 23:12:00 - [753]
 

Edited by: The Djego on 25/08/2009 23:14:46
Originally by: Orakkus
Alright, here's what I'd do in specific.

First off, increase T1 ammo damage to match equivelent Hybrid and Crystal damage (currently its 10% below these). This would translate through to Faction ammo, though not Tech 2 ammo.

Autocannons would have the following changes done:

- Their base ROF changed from 7.88 to 6.698. This will do several things with the addition of the ammo damage increase. The change would put Projectile DPS between Pulse Lasers (as the low side at 25.22 DPS) and Hybrid Blasters (at the high side with 29.42 DPS) and would be at 27.18 DPS. This would make Autocannons competative against other weapon systems, while not being overpowered as Minmatar would still have to fight in falloff and have the problems with reloading using the current clip size.

Artillery
- Their base ROF fire would be increased to about 42 or 43 from 23.63, while the damage modifier would be doubled to about 14.2x. This would bring back alpha strikes as a viable tool. While in optimal, the Arties will be slightly better over Railguns and Beam weapons, they will still have excellent DPS and have the advantage of being able to hit seperate targets more often.

When these changes, coupled with the ships as they currently stand, it should bring back all three Minmatar ships inline with Amarr, Gallente, and Caldari Battleships without overpowering them, and still retaining some individuality.




Amno fix, yes I sugested it myself.

ROF on Aks, well thats around 17.65 more rof, thats a is a little over 20% more DPS.

As a baseline Pest fix, well it would be ok. If you now look at Rifer, Rupture, Cane, Maelstorm it is to mutch in the end.

For Artis, well again you try to fix all with the gun itself. This gun would only have one shot at a BS in a fleet fight and even less DPS. If you look at beams they are basicly a solid weapon, that realy shine on ships with optimal bonus(Zealot/Apoc). What I try with my idea is to make this the same to the Pest(extrem alpha + more range + low rof) while giveing the gun itself a bit more DPS and a bigger alpha without reducing ROF to unhandy levels on ships with the ROF bonus.

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2009.08.25 23:13:00 - [754]
 

Edited by: Orakkus on 25/08/2009 23:33:57
This would be just for Large weapon systems and ammo only. Medium and Smalls appear to be in line with other weapon comparable weapon systems.

And I opted for this route instead of "more DPS" because really there are several ships that offer "more DPS". A massive alpha strike, on the other hand, can be an effective tool in fleets. Currently, it isn't.. its not strong enough to make difference, and soon you(after two rounds)are severely outclassed. However, doing incredibly massive damage will allow those ships to be effective.. however, since the the refire rate is so long, it won't be out dpsing anyone.. there by not just doing the same job in a different ship.

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2009.08.25 23:26:00 - [755]
 

Edited by: The Djego on 25/08/2009 23:26:57
Originally by: Orakkus
This would be just for Large weapon systems and ammo only. Medium and Smalls appear to be in line with other weapon comparable weapon systems.


Basic problem would still be the Mael with AKs. If you take in the 10% damage boost on projektiel amno you get preaty close to a mega, actualy outdamage it after damage types(if you switch Fusion\EMP) against armor tanks.

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.08.26 00:58:00 - [756]
 

Originally by: Orakkus
Edited by: Orakkus on 25/08/2009 23:33:57
This would be just for Large weapon systems and ammo only. Medium and Smalls appear to be in line with other weapon comparable weapon systems.

And I opted for this route instead of "more DPS" because really there are several ships that offer "more DPS". A massive alpha strike, on the other hand, can be an effective tool in fleets. Currently, it isn't.. its not strong enough to make difference, and soon you(after two rounds)are severely outclassed. However, doing incredibly massive damage will allow those ships to be effective.. however, since the the refire rate is so long, it won't be out dpsing anyone.. there by not just doing the same job in a different ship.


Medium arties are pretty terribad tbh. I think boosts should go across the board. a 10% dps boost on small levels and 30% more falloff is pretty much peanuts, but at the large level it's huge. Think, a rifter that does 150dps right now would do 165dps after a 10% dps increase... besides the "I for one welcome our new rifter overlord" threads, there isn't a big impact. Besides, if it's that big of a change it may nudge the minnie frigs and cruisers back to being top notch, where the battleships will just be in line and probably still picked over.

Chestrano
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.08.26 10:45:00 - [757]
 

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1131657&page=5

I hope the CSM will see the problem soon.

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2009.08.26 15:36:00 - [758]
 

Okay, just so that I can spend more time figuring this out.

How is damage calculated.. I seem to be missing a calculation or two when I try to do it by hand.

I think its regarding how the listed damage (EM/Therm/Exp/Kin) relates to the Base Armor Damage and the Base Shield Damage. Anyone have that particular mathmatical relationship handy?

Kismo
Posted - 2009.08.26 15:42:00 - [759]
 

Originally by: Orakkus
Okay, just so that I can spend more time figuring this out.

How is damage calculated.. I seem to be missing a calculation or two when I try to do it by hand.

I think its regarding how the listed damage (EM/Therm/Exp/Kin) relates to the Base Armor Damage and the Base Shield Damage. Anyone have that particular mathmatical relationship handy?


Base Armor and Base Shield damage are ignorable. They merely represent damage-after-resists for an unfit ship.

You can get DPS by taking the ammo damage (EM 0 / Thm 0 / Kin 10 / Exp 22 = 32 damage) and multiplying times the damage mod (12.2 = 390.4) and then dividing by ROF (2.2 = 177.45).

Another way to get it would be to take the ammo damage (as above)
0 EM, 0 Thm, 10 * (1 - (RESIST / 100) Kin, 22 * (1 - (RESIST / 100)) Exp = (say) 12.4 damage
* DAMAGE MOD
* ROF
= 68.7

This is damage after resists. If you're looking for the hit/hit quality formula, I'll see if I can dig up a link.

King Hopy
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2009.08.26 15:47:00 - [760]
 

Originally by: Orakkus
Okay, just so that I can spend more time figuring this out.

How is damage calculated.. I seem to be missing a calculation or two when I try to do it by hand.

I think its regarding how the listed damage (EM/Therm/Exp/Kin) relates to the Base Armor Damage and the Base Shield Damage. Anyone have that particular mathmatical relationship handy?


I am pretty sure that the base armor damage and base shield damage are calculated using the damage per damagetype (fe. 40 thermal, 10 kinetic) and applying it to the AVERAGE shield resist for said damage and to the AVERAGE armor resist for that. Either that or instead of the average resist its the BASE resist on armor before any bonuses (t2 etc.). This meaning that if for example the ammo does 40 thermal damage and the average/base resist on armor for thermal is 10% it would mean that the base armor damage is 36. Correct me if I'm wrong but that is the assumption I have allways been under. If it's not something like that there would be no point at all in listing both damage by damage type and damage for armor and shield.

And yes, projectiles need fixing. I think the problem is mainly with artillery. Bad damage, inferior range and the dmg is nerfed even further with the ridiculously small clip size.

Seriously Bored
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.08.26 15:50:00 - [761]
 

Edited by: Seriously Bored on 26/08/2009 15:52:00
Originally by: Orakkus
Okay, just so that I can spend more time figuring this out.

How is damage calculated.. I seem to be missing a calculation or two when I try to do it by hand.

I think its regarding how the listed damage (EM/Therm/Exp/Kin) relates to the Base Armor Damage and the Base Shield Damage. Anyone have that particular mathmatical relationship handy?


If you're looking for the most used formula for calculating turret damage, check HERE.

If you're trying to calculate your turret DPS by hand, you would go with ammo damage, times the turret damage multiplier, times the number of turrets, divided by firing time.

To figure in reload time into your DPS, use (firing time + [10/clip size]) for non-Amarr ships.

EFT uses total ammo damage to calculate DPS, which would be 44 for EMP L. If you want to use Base Armor Damage or Base Shield Damage instead, that would be interesting...

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2009.08.26 16:02:00 - [762]
 

Alright.. seems that we appear to disagree on the solution. Therefore, I would like the following folks to send me an e-mail message in Eve detailing what changes they would suggest.

Kismo
Astrophobic
The Djego
Seriously Bored
Kagura Nikon
Aranis Nax
Seishi Maru

Please provide reasonings, calculations, etc. Send as many e-mail messages as necessary. What I plan to do is individually put them on the Assembly Hall and monitor them for about a month(I will keep tabs on them to make sure they don't get lost in the shuffle unless its clear it isn't a well liked idea). If those mentioned folks can get me their ideas to me by Thursday, then I will make sure to get it up on Friday Morning (Pacific Standard time).

After that month has passed, we'll present the most favorable idea to the CSMs.. and we will vote for it as a voting block.

Seriously Bored
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.08.26 16:43:00 - [763]
 

Originally by: Orakkus
Alright.. seems that we appear to disagree on the solution. Therefore, I would like the following folks to send me an e-mail message in Eve detailing what changes they would suggest.

Kismo
Astrophobic
The Djego
Seriously Bored
Kagura Nikon
Aranis Nax
Seishi Maru

Please provide reasonings, calculations, etc. Send as many e-mail messages as necessary. What I plan to do is individually put them on the Assembly Hall and monitor them for about a month(I will keep tabs on them to make sure they don't get lost in the shuffle unless its clear it isn't a well liked idea). If those mentioned folks can get me their ideas to me by Thursday, then I will make sure to get it up on Friday Morning (Pacific Standard time).

After that month has passed, we'll present the most favorable idea to the CSMs.. and we will vote for it as a voting block.


Interesting idea. For the record, are we trying to fix the Tempest alone, or biting the big bullet and going for projectiles as a whole?

There's already another thread in the Assembly Hall that's been mentioned a bunch concerning projectiles alone. We'd probably have a better shot of getting the Tempest itself fixed first.

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2009.08.26 16:53:00 - [764]
 

Edited by: Orakkus on 26/08/2009 16:53:49
Yeah, I started that thread,and it has run into the same issues as this one. The problem is that while the majority of folks agree that there is an issue. Everyone is too divided about the solution. Either way you look at it, someone isn't going to be happy.

Therefore, make your post to relate either to Projectiles and/or Tempests. Essentially it will be a stand on its own thread, with me keeping tabs on it so that everyone has the same opportunity to look at what options are out there. True, people may vote for all of them, but in general, the most popular one will get the most votes. Then once we clear the rest away, we then can present a solution to both the CSMs and the Devs that has the most support.. and one that isn't flying in a hundred directions at once.

Aranis Nax
Minmatar
Minmatar United Freedom Front
The 11th Hour
Posted - 2009.08.26 17:10:00 - [765]
 

I'll see what I can do

PS. Astrophobic: it was my graphs that you referred to 1-2 pages back I guess.

Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
Posted - 2009.08.26 17:50:00 - [766]
 

Originally by: Seriously Bored
Originally by: Orakkus
Alright.. seems that we appear to disagree on the solution. Therefore, I would like the following folks to send me an e-mail message in Eve detailing what changes they would suggest.

Kismo
Astrophobic
The Djego
Seriously Bored
Kagura Nikon
Aranis Nax
Seishi Maru

Please provide reasonings, calculations, etc. Send as many e-mail messages as necessary. What I plan to do is individually put them on the Assembly Hall and monitor them for about a month(I will keep tabs on them to make sure they don't get lost in the shuffle unless its clear it isn't a well liked idea). If those mentioned folks can get me their ideas to me by Thursday, then I will make sure to get it up on Friday Morning (Pacific Standard time).

After that month has passed, we'll present the most favorable idea to the CSMs.. and we will vote for it as a voting block.


Interesting idea. For the record, are we trying to fix the Tempest alone, or biting the big bullet and going for projectiles as a whole?

There's already another thread in the Assembly Hall that's been mentioned a bunch concerning projectiles alone. We'd probably have a better shot of getting the Tempest itself fixed first.


disagree.. tempest fix depends on how projectiels are fixed.

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2009.08.26 17:53:00 - [767]
 

That's why I want those I chose to send me their suggestions. In the end, it will be the other Minmatar pilots to decide.

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.08.26 18:03:00 - [768]
 

Originally by: Aranis Nax
I'll see what I can do

PS. Astrophobic: it was my graphs that you referred to 1-2 pages back I guess.


Possibly. It may have been Bored's singular weapon comparison. I can't be bothered to look.

@ Orakkus: willdo when I have time.

Seriously Bored
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.08.26 18:16:00 - [769]
 

Edited by: Seriously Bored on 26/08/2009 18:18:08
Originally by: Seishi Maru


disagree.. tempest fix depends on how projectiels are fixed.


I'm not sure I agree with you here Seishi...even if projectiles got a large damage boost, or a large falloff boost, etc., the Tempest still would have nothing to differentiate it from the Maelstrom or Typhoon. Those two ships would be boosted by the same amount.

Minmatar would have better BSs on the whole, but Tempest would still do less damage at the same range as the Mael or Phoon. People might complain about it less as an anti-support ship, though.

Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
Posted - 2009.08.26 19:03:00 - [770]
 

Originally by: Seriously Bored
Edited by: Seriously Bored on 26/08/2009 18:18:08
Originally by: Seishi Maru


disagree.. tempest fix depends on how projectiels are fixed.


I'm not sure I agree with you here Seishi...even if projectiles got a large damage boost, or a large falloff boost, etc., the Tempest still would have nothing to differentiate it from the Maelstrom or Typhoon. Those two ships would be boosted by the same amount.

Minmatar would have better BSs on the whole, but Tempest would still do less damage at the same range as the Mael or Phoon. People might complain about it less as an anti-support ship, though.


yes, but if the projectiels are not decided uponm yet, then CCP can simply say that somethign cannot be done because will be overpowered when projectiels are "fixed" and we wil have nothing to arguee on that.

Kismo
Posted - 2009.08.26 20:16:00 - [771]
 

Originally by: Orakkus
Alright.. seems that we appear to disagree on the solution. Therefore, I would like the following folks to send me an e-mail message in Eve detailing what changes they would suggest.

Kismo
Astrophobic
The Djego
Seriously Bored
Kagura Nikon
Aranis Nax
Seishi Maru

Please provide reasonings, calculations, etc. Send as many e-mail messages as necessary. What I plan to do is individually put them on the Assembly Hall and monitor them for about a month(I will keep tabs on them to make sure they don't get lost in the shuffle unless its clear it isn't a well liked idea). If those mentioned folks can get me their ideas to me by Thursday, then I will make sure to get it up on Friday Morning (Pacific Standard time).

After that month has passed, we'll present the most favorable idea to the CSMs.. and we will vote for it as a voting block.


Sure, I'll send it to you when my home internet comes back up. Should be any day now...

Centurion Redux
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.08.27 04:47:00 - [772]
 

Edited by: Centurion Redux on 27/08/2009 05:02:46
Edited by: Centurion Redux on 27/08/2009 04:49:48
I dont fly in large fleet battles, but what about this off the wall setup. I would imagine the optimal range is too short and sig radius to huge?

Highs
6x 1400mm Howi IIs with tremor
Mids
2x Large Shield Extender IIs
1x Invul field II
1x Tracking Comp II optimal range
1x Quad Booster MWD
Lows
1x RCU II
2X Gyro IIs
2x Tracking Enhancer IIs
1x DCU II
Rigs
3x Core Defence Field Extender Is

289 Dps with Reload on
152+44 Optimal/Falloff
84,205 EHP

Maybe swap one Rig for em hardner rig?

Would be a mean fit if you could drop the RCU for a Gyro or another tracking enhancer.(Aka massage powergrid)

Or if artys had a better optimal/falloff could be pretty sick to drop the tc for another invul
Also clip size on arty is too Freaking small.

Chestrano
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.08.27 15:23:00 - [773]
 

bump

Shaemell Buttleson
Posted - 2009.08.27 15:35:00 - [774]
 

Originally by: Centurion Redux
Edited by: Centurion Redux on 27/08/2009 05:02:46
Edited by: Centurion Redux on 27/08/2009 04:49:48
I dont fly in large fleet battles, but what about this off the wall setup. I would imagine the optimal range is too short and sig radius to huge?

Highs
6x 1400mm Howi IIs with tremor
Mids
2x Large Shield Extender IIs
1x Invul field II
1x Tracking Comp II optimal range
1x Quad Booster MWD
Lows
1x RCU II
2X Gyro IIs
2x Tracking Enhancer IIs
1x DCU II
Rigs
3x Core Defence Field Extender Is

289 Dps with Reload on
152+44 Optimal/Falloff
84,205 EHP

Maybe swap one Rig for em hardner rig?

Would be a mean fit if you could drop the RCU for a Gyro or another tracking enhancer.(Aka massage powergrid)

Or if artys had a better optimal/falloff could be pretty sick to drop the tc for another invul
Also clip size on arty is too Freaking small.



You need to check your targeting range and then ask yourself why you'd be fitting long range ammo.


kessah
Blood Blind
Posted - 2009.08.28 01:33:00 - [775]
 

Would having a buffer in such a range orientated ship really make more preference to range of guns and range of locking?

If your sniping in a fleet then your prolly going to go down fast with 100 people shooting at you, you might last 2seconds longer that normal mebbie.

Andrea Skye
Caldari
Heavy Risk...
Posted - 2009.08.28 01:38:00 - [776]
 

I love the tempest its my favourite bs. And in fact Kessah, Im currently using one of your fits from a thread u posted in a while back.

Its something like this:

6x 425mm's
2x heavy nuets/remote reps

Heavy cap booster
100mm mwd
24km point
web
ECCM/semsor booster

2x LAR
2x EAMNs
1 explosive hardener
1 dc

I like it but its not rly made for fighting other BS's. Vs smaller stuff its nice, and in a gang the nuets and ulility slots are cool. But the other Tier 2 BS are so much better.

It certianly could use improvements and it would be great if the devs at least looked into it.

Personally i think it should get another Turret slot and drop a mid slot or two for an extra low or two. Add abit more grid and i think it would be on par with the other races ships.

Aranis Nax
Minmatar
Minmatar United Freedom Front
The 11th Hour
Posted - 2009.08.28 03:54:00 - [777]
 

Originally by: Andrea Skye
I love the tempest its my favourite bs. And in fact Kessah, Im currently using one of your fits from a thread u posted in a while back.

Its something like this:

6x 425mm's
2x heavy nuets/remote reps

Heavy cap booster
100mm mwd
24km point
web
ECCM/semsor booster

2x LAR
2x EAMNs
1 explosive hardener
1 dc

I like it but its not rly made for fighting other BS's. Vs smaller stuff its nice, and in a gang the nuets and ulility slots are cool. But the other Tier 2 BS are so much better.

It certianly could use improvements and it would be great if the devs at least looked into it.

Personally i think it should get another Turret slot and drop a mid slot or two for an extra low or two. Add abit more grid and i think it would be on par with the other races ships.

Why is everyone so damn insistant on turning the Tempest into a MegathronMad.
If you want to fly a mega don't fly the Tempest.


Ecky X
SniggWaffe
FREE KARTTOON NOW
Posted - 2009.08.28 05:04:00 - [778]
 

Edited by: Ecky X on 28/08/2009 05:18:06
Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson
Originally by: Centurion Redux
Edited by: Centurion Redux on 27/08/2009 05:02:46
Edited by: Centurion Redux on 27/08/2009 04:49:48
I dont fly in large fleet battles, but what about this off the wall setup. I would imagine the optimal range is too short and sig radius to huge?

Highs
6x 1400mm Howi IIs with tremor
Mids
2x Large Shield Extender IIs
1x Invul field II
1x Tracking Comp II optimal range
1x Quad Booster MWD
Lows
1x RCU II
2X Gyro IIs
2x Tracking Enhancer IIs
1x DCU II
Rigs
3x Core Defence Field Extender Is

289 Dps with Reload on
152+44 Optimal/Falloff
84,205 EHP

Maybe swap one Rig for em hardner rig?

Would be a mean fit if you could drop the RCU for a Gyro or another tracking enhancer.(Aka massage powergrid)

Or if artys had a better optimal/falloff could be pretty sick to drop the tc for another invul
Also clip size on arty is too Freaking small.



You need to check your targeting range and then ask yourself why you'd be fitting long range ammo.





Shaemell is right. The Tempest looks almost acceptable, doesn't it? Until you realize you need to stuff 2-3 sensor boosters in there.


The problem isn't just the Tempest, that just compounds it. Artillery really do suck.


I like the idea of a highest-dps longrange weapon @ 152km, increasing artillery's damage mod but leaving its range alone. It may make fleets think twice about engagement ranges, if they have to leave out their highest DPS ships to engage at 180 or 200. I haven't looked at how it performs vs other weapons systems with close range ammo, but at least increasing the damage on tremor may fix artillery in general.


I feel that the Maelstrom performs fine compared to its competition, at least with autocannons, but the Tempest really needs something. How about a Marauder-like bonus? A base 100% bonus to projectiles, and drop either the RoF or damage bonus, depending on what you want out of it. Give it 4 turrets, 6 highs. With the RoF bonus left, it will have slightly more turret DPS - the same as the Maelstrom. With the damage bonus left, it will have the same DPS it had (a bit less than the Maelstrom's), only with much higher volley damage. The Mael will still have a tanking bonus and superior slot layout for tanking, as well as an extra heavy drone than on the 'pest, so give it a 5 or 10% falloff bonus as its new 2nd bonus and call it a day.

Centurion Redux
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.08.28 05:57:00 - [779]
 

Originally by: Ecky X
Edited by: Ecky X on 28/08/2009 05:18:06
Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson
Originally by: Centurion Redux
Edited by: Centurion Redux on 27/08/2009 05:02:46
Edited by: Centurion Redux on 27/08/2009 04:49:48
I dont fly in large fleet battles, but what about this off the wall setup. I would imagine the optimal range is too short and sig radius to huge?

Highs
6x 1400mm Howi IIs with tremor
Mids
2x Large Shield Extender IIs
1x Invul field II
1x Tracking Comp II optimal range
1x Quad Booster MWD
Lows
1x RCU II
2X Gyro IIs
2x Tracking Enhancer IIs
1x DCU II
Rigs
3x Core Defence Field Extender Is

289 Dps with Reload on
152+44 Optimal/Falloff
84,205 EHP

Maybe swap one Rig for em hardner rig?

Would be a mean fit if you could drop the RCU for a Gyro or another tracking enhancer.(Aka massage powergrid)

Or if artys had a better optimal/falloff could be pretty sick to drop the tc for another invul
Also clip size on arty is too Freaking small.



You need to check your targeting range and then ask yourself why you'd be fitting long range ammo.





Shaemell is right. The Tempest looks almost acceptable, doesn't it? Until you realize you need to stuff 2-3 sensor boosters in there.


The problem isn't just the Tempest, that just compounds it. Artillery really do suck.


I like the idea of a highest-dps longrange weapon @ 152km, increasing artillery's damage mod but leaving its range alone. It may make fleets think twice about engagement ranges, if they have to leave out their highest DPS ships to engage at 180 or 200. I haven't looked at how it performs vs other weapons systems with close range ammo, but at least increasing the damage on tremor may fix artillery in general.


I feel that the Maelstrom performs fine compared to its competition, at least with autocannons, but the Tempest really needs something. How about a Marauder-like bonus? A base 100% bonus to projectiles, and drop either the RoF or damage bonus, depending on what you want out of it. Give it 4 turrets, 6 highs. With the RoF bonus left, it will have slightly more turret DPS - the same as the Maelstrom. With the damage bonus left, it will have the same DPS it had (a bit less than the Maelstrom's), only with much higher volley damage. The Mael will still have a tanking bonus and superior slot layout for tanking, as well as an extra heavy drone than on the 'pest, so give it a 5 or 10% falloff bonus as its new 2nd bonus and call it a day.


Yeah... 2-3 SB ruins the whole fit, DOH. Well i tried to fix something thats too broken to fix.

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.08.28 13:40:00 - [780]
 

Originally by: Ecky X
I feel that the Maelstrom performs fine compared to its competition, at least with autocannons, but the Tempest really needs something. How about a Marauder-like bonus? A base 100% bonus to projectiles, and drop either the RoF or damage bonus, depending on what you want out of it. Give it 4 turrets, 6 highs. With the RoF bonus left, it will have slightly more turret DPS - the same as the Maelstrom. With the damage bonus left, it will have the same DPS it had (a bit less than the Maelstrom's), only with much higher volley damage. The Mael will still have a tanking bonus and superior slot layout for tanking, as well as an extra heavy drone than on the 'pest, so give it a 5 or 10% falloff bonus as its new 2nd bonus and call it a day.


Was this not the Vargur that CCP prenerfed into near uselessness so it couldn't be used in PvP? I don't see CCP doing anything like that, especially when it contradicts their prenerf. That, and they won't put a 100% role bonus on a t1 ship.


Pages: first : previous : ... 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 ... : last (42)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only