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 : ... 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 ... : last (42)

Author Topic

Roland Thorne
Minmatar
Jian Products Engineering Group
Posted - 2009.09.07 07:52:00 - [961]
 

Edited by: Roland Thorne on 07/09/2009 08:18:55
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 07/09/2009 02:08:39
Originally by: Allen Ramses
Edited by: Allen Ramses on 06/09/2009 23:39:17
Originally by: AstroPhobic
I don't know what you're talking about here. Autocannons aren't meant to be blasters. They need to excel in mid range, and increasing falloff does that. Increasing damage straight up pushes them into short range.
ACs already excel in mid range. Because of the optimal/falloff balance, you can use the highest damage ammo without any effective range loss. And you want to push this further? OK, but you have to promise that nobody will cry about the considerably lower raw DPS ACs get in comparison to blasters, pulses, and torps.



ACs excel in mid-range?

This is nonsense



I agree its nonsense. Playing around in falloff is not how I want to kill a ship fast. Even in barrage, I always have to set my orbit damn close to make sure I cause damage.

The only thing falloff is good for is surprising SB and inties at 30k with 425mm ACs :)

ACs and their falloff has always seemed like a sliding scale to me, but you have to admit it makes a difference in DPS not to rely on it that much and rather get into optimal for best damage. So, would that nullify the falloff bonus for the tempest? Could be no one would use it practically.

Hiroshima Jita
Posted - 2009.09.07 07:59:00 - [962]
 

Has anybody pointed out yet the the tempest fleet issue is getting bum****ed in the upcoming expansion?

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.09.07 08:02:00 - [963]
 

Originally by: Hiroshima Jita
Has anybody pointed out yet the the tempest fleet issue is getting bum****ed in the upcoming expansion?



Yeah.... CCP did. And they sounded like they didn't know how to stop. They must be addicted.

-Liang

Spaztick
Terminal Impact
Kairakau
Posted - 2009.09.07 10:30:00 - [964]
 

I would've removed a low instead of a mid, but that's just me.

Aranis Nax
Minmatar
Minmatar United Freedom Front
The 11th Hour
Posted - 2009.09.07 10:34:00 - [965]
 

Edited by: Aranis Nax on 07/09/2009 10:37:32
I think it's time CCP should distance themselves from the rule that says: 1 high slot = 1 mid slot = 1 lo = 1 turret = ...
For one mid slots are worth more then lows and far more then highs.

Killing the one thing that's good about fleet pest is caused by that rule, it's caused issues in the past, it will continue to do so untill it's changed.
My suggestions will generally follow that rule but I think it should change.

debbie harrio
Posted - 2009.09.07 10:48:00 - [966]
 



What about existing fleet tempests, do you wake up one morning to find your fleet pest without a mid slot.

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2009.09.07 13:44:00 - [967]
 

Originally by: debbie harrio


What about existing fleet tempests, do you wake up one morning to find your fleet pest without a mid slot.


You can΄t undock untill you unfit the med slot item that has not a med slot any more, same as any kind of slot changes CCP did so far.

Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
Posted - 2009.09.07 13:59:00 - [968]
 

Originally by: Aranis Nax
Edited by: Aranis Nax on 07/09/2009 10:37:32
I think it's time CCP should distance themselves from the rule that says: 1 high slot = 1 mid slot = 1 lo = 1 turret = ...
For one mid slots are worth more then lows and far more then highs.

Killing the one thing that's good about fleet pest is caused by that rule, it's caused issues in the past, it will continue to do so untill it's changed.
My suggestions will generally follow that rule but I think it should change.



In fact even that is not fixed. THe value difference between a mid and a low depends on how many of those are already present! The more already there.. the more valuable a new one becomes because allow specialization. Also A high slot PLUS A weapon slot is more or less equal to a low or mid slot.

All thta considerign the ship has fittigns to use any of the options.

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.09.07 15:55:00 - [969]
 

Edited by: AstroPhobic on 07/09/2009 18:14:07
Originally by: Roland Thorne
ACs and their falloff has always seemed like a sliding scale to me, but you have to admit it makes a difference in DPS not to rely on it that much and rather get into optimal for best damage. So, would that nullify the falloff bonus for the tempest? Could be no one would use it practically.


I wouldn't get within optimal in a tempest unless I had to. It doesn't have enough EHP or DPS to survive, which is one of the reasons why I suggested even more falloff and speed/agility. If you're going to run into optimal, the phoon or mega are much better choices.

ed:typo

Roland Thorne
Minmatar
Jian Products Engineering Group
Posted - 2009.09.07 18:03:00 - [970]
 

Edited by: Roland Thorne on 07/09/2009 18:04:18
Originally by: AstroPhobic


I wouldn't get within optimal in a tempest unless I had to. It doesn't have enough speed or DPS to survive, which is one of the reasons why I suggested even more falloff and speed/agility. If you're going to run into optimal, the phoon or mega are much better choices.


No, we don't need to replicate blasters, I give you that.

Originally by: Cpt Branko
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 07/09/2009 02:08:39
Originally by: Allen Ramses
Edited by: Allen Ramses on 06/09/2009 23:39:17
Originally by: AstroPhobic
I don't know what you're talking about here. Autocannons aren't meant to be blasters. They need to excel in mid range, and increasing falloff does that. Increasing damage straight up pushes them into short range.
ACs already excel in mid range. Because of the optimal/falloff balance, you can use the highest damage ammo without any effective range loss. And you want to push this further? OK, but you have to promise that nobody will cry about the considerably lower raw DPS ACs get in comparison to blasters, pulses, and torps.




Minmatar AC are supposed to be able to outdistance other races at short-range using falloff - I believe this is your assumption, and the reason for a more agile tempest. Tempest should be fast enough to hold range on a tougher ship and pound it from outside their optimal and non existent falloff. At this point, the faster ship should outlast and win the fight.

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.09.07 18:15:00 - [971]
 

Yes, but you're talking about 1 on 1s which don't really exist. True it will help it in solo, but that's not the point. It will be an excellent anti-support ship, chasing after battlecruisers and HACs and mauling them with ACs.

Ecky X
SniggWaffe
FREE KARTTOON NOW
Posted - 2009.09.07 18:15:00 - [972]
 

Originally by: Roland Thorne
Minmatar AC are supposed to be able to outdistance other races at short-range using falloff - I believe this is your assumption, and the reason for a more agile tempest. Tempest should be fast enough to hold range on a tougher ship and pound it from outside their optimal and non existent falloff. At this point, the faster ship should outlast and win the fight.



Are you suggesting that pulse lasers should not have 50-90km optimal?

Psiri
Posted - 2009.09.07 18:29:00 - [973]
 

Edited by: Psiri on 07/09/2009 18:29:58
Originally by: Roland Thorne
Edited by: Roland Thorne on 07/09/2009 18:04:18
Originally by: AstroPhobic


I wouldn't get within optimal in a tempest unless I had to. It doesn't have enough speed or DPS to survive, which is one of the reasons why I suggested even more falloff and speed/agility. If you're going to run into optimal, the phoon or mega are much better choices.


No, we don't need to replicate blasters, I give you that.


This, a damage increase wouldn't play at all on the character of AC's. I feel that they just need an increase to falloff, so that they can apply a reasonable ammount of damage at the range where they're s'posed to excel.

Aside from that the problem is just that lasers are THAT much more powerful at the moment, it's not just large projectiles looking bad but missiles and hybrids got their fair share of problems aswell.

I'd like to see something along the lines of,

- Give large projectiles 20% more falloff
- Give large hybrids 20% more tracking
- Reduce large laser tracking and range by 10%
- Give large missiles (and rockets tbh) 10% more explosion velocity and radius.

Roland Thorne
Minmatar
Jian Products Engineering Group
Posted - 2009.09.07 18:34:00 - [974]
 

Originally by: Ecky X
Originally by: Roland Thorne
Minmatar AC are supposed to be able to outdistance other races at short-range using falloff - I believe this is your assumption, and the reason for a more agile tempest. Tempest should be fast enough to hold range on a tougher ship and pound it from outside their optimal and non existent falloff. At this point, the faster ship should outlast and win the fight.



Are you suggesting that pulse lasers should not have 50-90km optimal?


lol yes. That is not the point here though :)

Spaztick
Terminal Impact
Kairakau
Posted - 2009.09.07 20:54:00 - [975]
 

Playing around a bit on SiSi, You cannot outtrack Amarr pulse lasers with both targets webbed, and I can just barely do it putting one TD on the Amarr boat; the speed is just too slow, thus it does you better to use TDs than try to outtrack.

Roland Thorne
Minmatar
Jian Products Engineering Group
Posted - 2009.09.07 23:58:00 - [976]
 

Originally by: AstroPhobic
Yes, but you're talking about 1 on 1s which don't really exist. True it will help it in solo, but that's not the point. It will be an excellent anti-support ship, chasing after battlecruisers and HACs and mauling them with ACs.


Not entirely for solo, because those same issues are going to be effective for gang battles too. Not having much of a tank, nano pests are probably going to be popular after these proposed changes. They are going to be able to pop in and out of combat like recons or HACs would, maybe even using 800s for huge falloff.

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.09.08 00:14:00 - [977]
 

Originally by: Roland Thorne
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Yes, but you're talking about 1 on 1s which don't really exist. True it will help it in solo, but that's not the point. It will be an excellent anti-support ship, chasing after battlecruisers and HACs and mauling them with ACs.


Not entirely for solo, because those same issues are going to be effective for gang battles too. Not having much of a tank, nano pests are probably going to be popular after these proposed changes. They are going to be able to pop in and out of combat like recons or HACs would, maybe even using 800s for huge falloff.


That would be the goal, yes. Making a competitive battleship that actually has a role in a small gang environment.

kessah
Blood Blind
Posted - 2009.09.08 01:14:00 - [978]
 

Anyone else think Astrophobic will get the 1000th reply? Razz

Roland Thorne
Minmatar
Jian Products Engineering Group
Posted - 2009.09.08 01:28:00 - [979]
 

One step closer from a blue-collar on a USA holiday when Americans do absolutely nothing in celebration of working :P

Kazami Kozura
Posted - 2009.09.08 05:46:00 - [980]
 

I dont want a small scale or solo BS, cause lowsecganking is for what the fewest ppl do.
What matters is RRBS.
And im sick of ships who do 900+dps and can fit 140k ehp tanks...

Tempest needs:
1 or better 2 more lowsolts
much more PG (would say around a minimum of 600PGmore for the plate in the new low)
i would give up 1 high AND 1 med for that if enought PG for 1400 would be in i would easely give up 2 med slots and 1 high slot

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.09.08 06:18:00 - [981]
 

Originally by: Roland Thorne
One step closer from a blue-collar on a USA holiday when Americans do absolutely nothing in celebration of working :P


Speak for yourself. I replaced my toilet, tiled and grouted my bathroom, entry and exit ways, reinsulated/caulked the windows, reinsulated my attic, put away a few dozen pounds of pears and plums, picked blackberries, dehydrated plums (made prunes), and nursed the kittens on schedule. The only thing on the agenda that didn't get done was building a wood shed behind the house.

And in other news, boost projectiles and the Tempest.

-Liang

Roland Thorne
Minmatar
Jian Products Engineering Group
Posted - 2009.09.08 06:52:00 - [982]
 

Was meeting my new soon-to-be inlaws this weekend. Labor day was just a bonus to relax :)

And yes, please fix the tempest soon. Also, I will not take post 1000 lol

Chestrano
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.09.08 23:00:00 - [983]
 

Bump. Minmatar still needs a boost!

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.09.08 23:20:00 - [984]
 

Originally by: kessah
Anyone else think Astrophobic will get the 1000th reply? Razz


The tempest is clearly the best battleship.™

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2009.09.09 00:11:00 - [985]
 

Originally by: AstroPhobic
The tempest is clearly the best battleship.™


Just cuz I'm tired and curious. Did one of the Devs say that, and if not who did? Or is it a Trademark of AstroPhobic Catchy Phrases and other Nomenclature Enterprises, Inc.

Roland Thorne
Minmatar
Jian Products Engineering Group
Posted - 2009.09.09 00:31:00 - [986]
 

Originally by: AstroPhobic
Originally by: kessah
Anyone else think Astrophobic will get the 1000th reply? Razz


The tempest is clearly the best battleship.™


"... when ccp is done with it."

One could only hope that could be true. I would also like a better RRBS then the 'phoon. Having it fast and agile would be cool too. Hell, it being more then a lols ship would be better then now.

Allen Ramses
Caldari
Zombicidal Mania
Posted - 2009.09.09 00:52:00 - [987]
 

Edited by: Allen Ramses on 09/09/2009 00:53:08
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Currently missiles and pulse lasers excel in mid range. Autocannons do not. Increasing falloff allows them to compete in midrange, because the falloff penalty is quite large.
Yes, the falloff penalty is indeed quite large, but not as large as the 30% less peak DPS ACs do in comparison to beams and blasters. Further increasing the falloff will soften the blow for ACs, but it will not address the issue of miserably low DPS.

Quote:
Well my changes pretty much address that. Minmatar was never "the explosive" race, they always had weird mixes. I changed the high damage ammo to be prominently explosive so that it would be another option where currently barrage does everything better. A complete overhaul is pretty drastic, I think the ammo isn't that bad.
No more the explosive race than Caldari is the kinetic race, or Gallente the thermal race, I suppose. But no matter what spin you put on it, it doesn't change the fact that there are major issues that absolutely to be ironed out. Barrage isn't insanely popular because it has 50% more falloff, it is insanely popular because it has 50% more falloff with the same gross damage output as EMP.

Quote:
Okay, no. That's not how you calculate DPS. It's Damage OVER time. 10 damage over 10 seconds is 1 DPS. So an increase of 50% damage is 15 damage, and an increase of 50% ROF is 15 seconds. 15/15 is still 1 DPS. Falloff is a poor range mechanic and optimal is superior (about 3x superior to be mathematical).
Sorry, wrong again. You are confusing rate and duration, which are inversely proportional. Also, I'll give you that optimal is ~2.66x superior than max falloff, but you forget that arties also have a sufficient, yet modest, optimal on top of that. You also forget that arties have a very high falloff range, which is unaffected by ammo type. Add 10% to optimal and they are railguns. Add 25% optimal and they have a larger window of error.

Quote:
No, it gives you several different choices to do whatever you want in an ineffective manner. Whatever you do with it, it's going to suck, and be worse than even the other two minmatar counterparts, which says something. Yes, 10% is justified because it only affects 6 turrets. Maybe you don't realize this, but a 12.5% damage bonus is the same as 7.5% ROF. Which may I remind you, is currently present on another ship (nag).
Maybe you misunderstand me. The tempest, as it is now, is a jack of all trades, while being a master of none. While it has disposition toward dealing massive (by comparison) amounts of projectile DPS, its slot configuration allows it to fill WAY more roles than other more specialized BSs. As for the Naglfar, it happens to be a dread with only 2 turret hardpoints, and it is NOT a tier 2 battleship. You do realize this, right? Do you think you have any grounds at all to compare the two? At all?

Also, by your logic, a Raven should have a 10% damage bonus because it only affects six launchers... Ikanhazplx?

Quote:
You can't speed/sig tank a typhoon. I'd gladly take the scorpion, it's very valuable in any fleet or gang. I can't say the same for a phoon.
You certainly can, provided you aren't in a stationary RR BS fleet (which are the death of PvP). Also, how effective is a scorpion in any kind of combat deployment whatsoever? Oh yeah, it isn't.

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.09.09 01:08:00 - [988]
 

Originally by: Allen Ramses
Yes, the falloff penalty is indeed quite large, but not as large as the 30% less peak DPS ACs do in comparison to beams and blasters. Further increasing the falloff will soften the blow for ACs, but it will not address the issue of miserably low DPS.


ACs do about as much DPS as lasers at optimal - and with the ammo changes, it should be slightly more. They do have very good tracking in the firing zone and other things - most people here agree that the ammo buff + falloff increase should be enough.

Quote:
No more the explosive race than Caldari is the kinetic race, or Gallente the thermal race, I suppose. But no matter what spin you put on it, it doesn't change the fact that there are major issues that absolutely to be ironed out. Barrage isn't insanely popular because it has 50% more falloff, it is insanely popular because it has 50% more falloff with the same gross damage output as EMP.


Yes, which one of the reasons I'm advocating a fusion that does as much as antimatter/multifrequency counterparts and an EMP that does a majority EM damage instead of some screwed up mix that makes so sense.

Quote:
Sorry, wrong again. You are confusing rate and duration, which are inversely proportional. Also, I'll give you that optimal is ~2.66x superior than max falloff, but you forget that arties also have a sufficient, yet modest, optimal on top of that. You also forget that arties have a very high falloff range, which is unaffected by ammo type. Add 10% to optimal and they are railguns. Add 25% optimal and they have a larger window of error.


150km isn't sufficient. That's about all you can squeeze out of a minnie sniper. Most fleets operate around 180 if not 200km. Also, rate of fire in game is measured as duration, so I think that's just semantics.

Quote:
Maybe you misunderstand me. The tempest, as it is now, is a jack of all trades, while being a master of none. While it has disposition toward dealing massive (by comparison) amounts of projectile DPS, its slot configuration allows it to fill WAY more roles than other more specialized BSs. As for the Naglfar, it happens to be a dread with only 2 turret hardpoints, and it is NOT a tier 2 battleship. You do realize this, right? Do you think you have any grounds at all to compare the two? At all?


Yeah, it's a tech 1 ship with limited turret hardpoints just like the tempest. The tempest has always been the "versatile" boat - don't think I'm trying to change this. Just right now it's jack of all trades - useful in none.

Quote:
Also, by your logic, a Raven should have a 10% damage bonus because it only affects six launchers... Ikanhazplx?


No, minmatar has their "built in" 25% ROF nerf so that "other races won't use our uber capless guns" similar to the cap usage bonus of lasers. You'll note that almost every (every?) minmatar ship has a 5% ROF bonus, and that projectiles do much less base DPS.

Quote:
You certainly can, provided you aren't in a stationary RR BS fleet (which are the death of PvP). Also, how effective is a scorpion in any kind of combat deployment whatsoever? Oh yeah, it isn't.


You can't speed/sig tank a battleship anymore, period. And the scorpion is useful in just about every engagement - I'd like to have whatever you're smoking.

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.09.09 01:14:00 - [989]
 

Originally by: Orakkus
Originally by: AstroPhobic
The tempest is clearly the best battleship.™


Just cuz I'm tired and curious. Did one of the Devs say that, and if not who did? Or is it a Trademark of AstroPhobic Catchy Phrases and other Nomenclature Enterprises, Inc.


I tried to start a meme in the "Which is the best battleship?" thread, but only got one follower.

Kind of like But it has capless guns!™

Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
Posted - 2009.09.09 01:33:00 - [990]
 

152km COUDL be enough. But only if tempest was VERY superior to any other sniepr UP to that range. For example changing its DAMAGE bonus to 10% per level while keeping the rof bonus.

That woudl at least make FC thign 3-5 secodns about wich would be the best range to engage.


Pages: first : previous : ... 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 ... : 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