open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Navy ship changes for Dominion
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 ... : last (35)

Author Topic

Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
Posted - 2009.09.25 12:42:00 - [721]
 

well faction versions do come with more HP, which does require a higher recharge time. just because they had the same as regular bs up until today doesnt make it ipso facto right.

however, this is indeed quite a high number. i can't say i'm a fan of this tanking method, hence i'm not too experienced but i believe 2 extenders usually come with such a fitting? that results in ~30% more HP on the gravy raven compared to its baby sister. i'd derive a recharge rate in the area of 3250s

IGuardian
Internet Guardians Corp
Internet Guardians
Posted - 2009.09.25 12:53:00 - [722]
 

Please do not remove the mid slot from the Tempest Fleet Issue, if you do get rid of it are we allowed to swap it for another ship or something... it will be useless to me. Also if you loose the mid slot, im sure a lot of people that use it with shield tanking skills will have to sell it or retrain for armor tanking.

CCP Ytterbium

Posted - 2009.09.25 15:00:00 - [723]
 

Further changes.

Typhoon:

• Slot layout: received an additional launcher slot and turret slot (for a total of 5/5 turrets/launchers, 8/4/7)

Tempest:

• Hitpoints: armor and shield values swapped (now has 6954 armor and 6211 shields)

Typhoon Fleet Issue:

• Slot layout: received an additional launcher slot and turret slot (for a total of 5/5 turrets/launchers, 8/4/8)

Tempest Fleet Issue:

• Slot layout: 7th turret slot removed for a 7th low-slot (for a total of 6/4 turrets/launchers, 8/5/7)
• Hitpoints: armor and shield values swapped (now has 10431 armor and 9316 shields)

Octavio Santillian
Einherjar Rising
Cry Havoc.
Posted - 2009.09.25 15:01:00 - [724]
 

Edited by: Octavio Santillian on 25/09/2009 15:33:51
Edited by: Octavio Santillian on 25/09/2009 15:06:10
Edited by: Octavio Santillian on 25/09/2009 15:03:51

EDIT: I originally cross posted with Ytterbium.

First, I’d like to thank Ytterbium for taking our comments into consideration. Huzza!

Here is my very early take.

The standard Phoon looks to be quite awesome. I haven’t had a chance to digest fitting, but it’s going to be a beast for in your face brawling.

The Typhoon Fleet Issue also looks to be pretty solid.

The change to the standard Tempest is much appreciated and long overdue, but the ship will still be inferior to its counterparts unless the projectile balancing moves it the rest of the way.

The issue is much the same with the Tempest Fleet Issue. The currently proposed ship is vastly superior to the previous incarnation, but the jury is will still be out until we see how projectile balancing affects the ship.

Most people feel the Tranquility TFI is underpowered, so I’m not sure I see the need to diminish one aspect of the ship in order to augment another. Adding a low without swapping the armor/shields would have been an insult (as the CNR would have had more base armor), so those two moves together are and even trade for the loss of a mid. An even trade still leaves this ship lacking.

Zief
Posted - 2009.09.25 15:36:00 - [725]
 

A strange thing happened to me when I read Ytterbium's latest post. Suddenly I began to hear Rufus Wainwright's "Halleluja".. Tears poured down my face and a piercing ray of heavenly light flashed down on my tortured being. Then I realized that I had left iTunes playing and my cat had just knocked down a lamp which was shining in my eyes.

Everything else aside I am pleased with this latest revelation. Giving the standard 'Phoon a 5/5 split for it's highslots will make some new fits turn up on battle clinic to be sure. It'll be even rougher trying to squeeze on more of those grid heavy siege launchers, but I'm not complaining even in the slightest. It'll become even more of a cheap, plated, cap independent, WTF Gank-mobile now. I like it. Also bravo to the Fleet Typhoon, this is now a ship I would REALLY like to own some day.

I don't really get the swap on the stats for the vanilla tempest. If someone could 'school' me I'd be grateful. I don't really see how it'll effect much of anything.

Now. On to the important bit. The Fleet Tempest. THIS will now be a bad*** ship. When the turret balance happens it'll be even better. The low slots to mount an actual armor tank and utilities. Bravo Bravo. Thumbs up.

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2009.09.25 15:43:00 - [726]
 

Originally by: Zief
A strange thing happened to me when I read Ytterbium's latest post. Suddenly I began to hear Rufus Wainwright's "Halleluja".. Tears poured down my face and a piercing ray of heavenly light flashed down on my tortured being. Then I realized that I had left iTunes playing and my cat had just knocked down a lamp which was shining in my eyes.

Everything else aside I am pleased with this latest revelation. Giving the standard 'Phoon a 5/5 split for it's highslots will make some new fits turn up on battle clinic to be sure. It'll be even rougher trying to squeeze on more of those grid heavy siege launchers, but I'm not complaining even in the slightest. It'll become even more of a cheap, plated, cap independent, WTF Gank-mobile now. I like it. Also bravo to the Fleet Typhoon, this is now a ship I would REALLY like to own some day.

I don't really get the swap on the stats for the vanilla tempest. If someone could 'school' me I'd be grateful. I don't really see how it'll effect much of anything.

Now. On to the important bit. The Fleet Tempest. THIS will now be a bad*** ship. When the turret balance happens it'll be even better. The low slots to mount an actual armor tank and utilities. Bravo Bravo. Thumbs up.


This.

Original Tempest was meant to be an Active Shield tanker back in the day, hence the higher shields.

Constantine Merlonne
Posted - 2009.09.25 15:48:00 - [727]
 

Roleplay speaking, did someone got the explaination to the change of the name of the slicer to "Imperial"?
Then why the other frigs are not turned into "State issue", "Tribal Issue" and "Federal Issue" (if i remember well the designations)?

Lumy
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:00:00 - [728]
 

Originally by: Constantine Merlonne
Roleplay speaking, did someone got the explaination to the change of the name of the slicer to "Imperial"?
Then why the other frigs are not turned into "State issue", "Tribal Issue" and "Federal Issue" (if i remember well the designations)?


Imperial, Federate, State and Tribal issue ships are/were unique ships given as prizes at alliance tournaments. I guess that is what CCP wants to keep the names for.

Urhgo Khanab
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:00:00 - [729]
 

Originally by: CCP Ytterbium
Further changes.

Typhoon:

• Slot layout: received an additional launcher slot and turret slot (for a total of 5/5 turrets/launchers, 8/4/7)

Tempest:

• Hitpoints: armor and shield values swapped (now has 6954 armor and 6211 shields)

Typhoon Fleet Issue:

• Slot layout: received an additional launcher slot and turret slot (for a total of 5/5 turrets/launchers, 8/4/8)

Tempest Fleet Issue:

• Slot layout: 7th turret slot removed for a 7th low-slot (for a total of 6/4 turrets/launchers, 8/5/7)
• Hitpoints: armor and shield values swapped (now has 10431 armor and 9316 shields)





Shocked
This is so awesome. I think i need a towelVery Happy

Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:03:00 - [730]
 

I'm not sure how swapping the shield/armour values around solves the niche issue of the tempest, nor the fleet tempest for that matter.

Have you considered that there might be too many armour tanking ships trying to do the same thing in the same fashion? Until this issue is addressed, you'll either not fix the Tempest, or displace the problem onto another ship.
People are keen on 7/6/6, 8/7/4 slot layout wise.

As for the Typhoon and fleet versions, thanks for listening, those ships are practically perfect.

Ulstan
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:11:00 - [731]
 

Edited by: Ulstan on 25/09/2009 16:11:56
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium
Further changes.

Typhoon:

• Slot layout: received an additional launcher slot and turret slot (for a total of 5/5 turrets/launchers, 8/4/7)

Tempest:

• Hitpoints: armor and shield values swapped (now has 6954 armor and 6211 shields)

Typhoon Fleet Issue:

• Slot layout: received an additional launcher slot and turret slot (for a total of 5/5 turrets/launchers, 8/4/8)

Tempest Fleet Issue:

• Slot layout: 7th turret slot removed for a 7th low-slot (for a total of 6/4 turrets/launchers, 8/5/7)
• Hitpoints: armor and shield values swapped (now has 10431 armor and 9316 shields)


Excellent changes, except I'd still rather see the tempest shield tanked :p We have more than enough armor tanking gunboats.

But 5/5 Typhoon is excellent, as is the fleet phoon.

Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:15:00 - [732]
 

Edited by: Pattern Clarc on 25/09/2009 16:15:41
Make Zuluparks Tempest less fail TBH. Very Happy

Constantine Merlonne
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:19:00 - [733]
 

Originally by: Lumy
Originally by: Constantine Merlonne
Roleplay speaking, did someone got the explaination to the change of the name of the slicer to "Imperial"?
Then why the other frigs are not turned into "State issue", "Tribal Issue" and "Federal Issue" (if i remember well the designations)?


Imperial, Federate, State and Tribal issue ships are/were unique ships given as prizes at alliance tournaments. I guess that is what CCP wants to keep the names for.


But the Imperial Navy Slicer will be far from being a unique shipLaughing The current designation is "Amarr Navy Slicer" and will turn to "Imperial Navy Slicer". And i find it strange. I know it's not a big deal but i think CCP has a reason.

To mare
Amarr
Advanced Technology
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:20:00 - [734]
 

give to the typhoon a little bit of CPU while you are changing it. it will be very difficult to fit 5 siege on it.

Ulstan
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:24:00 - [735]
 

True. Navy scorp has the same issue. Siege launchers are very hungry O.O

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:44:00 - [736]
 

I don't know that this will "fix" the Tempest itself, but the projectile changes in the other thread might. I 110% support the Phoon/Fleet Phoon changes. Wish the Fleet Pest was a shield tanker, but this will work fine. :)

Thanks for listening!

-Liang

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:52:00 - [737]
 

Originally by: Ulstan
Excellent changes, except I'd still rather see the tempest shield tanked :p We have more than enough armor tanking gunboats.


Even if the Tempest was intended to be a shield-tanker, everyone would still have to armour tank it, thanks to the absurdly imbalanced, diversity-destroying fitting requirements of remote armour reps and shield transporters... *SUBTLE HINT CCP, A LARGE SHIELD TRANSPORTER ON A MEGATHRON SHOULD NOT REQUIRE OVER 20% OF ITS CPU...* Rolling Eyes

Elaron
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:03:00 - [738]
 

Originally by: To mare
give to the typhoon a little bit of CPU while you are changing it. it will be very difficult to fit 5 siege on it.

I think the fitting conundrums will be what keeps the ship in line after that change. Players who are best able to work within the constraints will be the most successful with it.

Arele
Minmatar
Samurai Salvaging
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:06:00 - [739]
 

Originally by: CCP Ytterbium
Further changes.

Typhoon:

• Slot layout: received an additional launcher slot and turret slot (for a total of 5/5 turrets/launchers, 8/4/7)



Hopefully CPU reqs of Seige II could be looked at in the future, but this change is huge.

Lumy
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:08:00 - [740]
 

How about trying a Fleet Tempest with 7 guns, but 8/6/5 or 8/7/4 layout? I'm assuming you consider 20 total slots with 7 guns crime against humanity or something (so no 8/6/6 or 8/7/5). In short, it shouldn't be just Machariel for financially impaired. It could be (full gank and full shield tank) vs (full armor tank or full gank with some utility mids).

In current iteration, Machariel is better/or equal in almost every way:
lower mass, more guns, faster (~20%), more agile, more CPU, more powergrid, bigger drone bay, higher bandwidth, more capacitor, higher scan resolution (50%) ... and don't forget 10% fallof er level AND one more gun.

Kaito Haakkainen
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:08:00 - [741]
 

Excellent news on the Typhoon change, but I must agree with those stating that the Tempest should be designed to shield tank. Fixing shield tanking issues (particularly, but not limited to, poor RR compared to armour tanks) would be a better answer than just making more armour tanking BS. Especially for a race that has a significant number of shield tanking t2 ships and shield transfer based logistics.

ArmyOfMe
Hysera.
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:10:00 - [742]
 

k, umm, not sure about the fleet tempest change tbh.
imo the fleet tempest is now what the standard tempest should be tbh, is there any reason you cant change the normal tempest to a 8/5/7 and then do the fleet tempest with 8/5/7 or 8/7/5 and 7 turrets?

its a fleet version so it deserves to have a higher dps then the standard one imo, at least on a ship that has so low dps to begin with(in falloff that isWink)

Ryas Nia
Minmatar
Veto.
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:26:00 - [743]
 

Originally by: Pattern Clarc
I'm not sure how swapping the shield/armour values around solves the niche issue of the tempest, nor the fleet tempest for that matter.

Have you considered that there might be too many armour tanking ships trying to do the same thing in the same fashion? Until this issue is addressed, you'll either not fix the Tempest, or displace the problem onto another ship.
People are keen on 7/6/6, 8/7/4 slot layout wise.

As for the Typhoon and fleet versions, thanks for listening, those ships are practically perfect.


Agreeing with this, while your changes are adressing SOME of the long standing issues with the tempest/fleet tempest its still a ship without a roll and flavor. The phoon fix is perfect and i like it. Lets see if we can find something a bit more interesting to do with the tempest now.

Seriously Bored
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:29:00 - [744]
 

The amount of Khumaak that's going to be left at your guys' doors will be staggering. Thank you CCP for listening to us rust lovers!

The Phoon will now live up its name in versatility. I think it's going to take more time to tell whether these changes plus the ammo/artillery changes will make the Tempest a desirable ship again. But given what you've done or are planning to do for the rest of our ships, I'm okay with baby steps.

ArmyOfMe
Hysera.
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:40:00 - [745]
 

if im not asking to much i would love to read/hear your thoughts on the tempest/fleet tempest and the reason for slot changes, removing of a turret etc etc.
i really want to read the pro's and cons for different slot layouts and i'd like to see the numbers on dps with 6 and 7 turrets. and i'd like to see if you have actually compared the ship against ships like the navy mega, cnr etc

Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:51:00 - [746]
 

Originally by: CCP Ytterbium
Further changes.

Typhoon:

• Slot layout: received an additional launcher slot and turret slot (for a total of 5/5 turrets/launchers, 8/4/7)

Tempest:

• Hitpoints: armor and shield values swapped (now has 6954 armor and 6211 shields)

Typhoon Fleet Issue:

• Slot layout: received an additional launcher slot and turret slot (for a total of 5/5 turrets/launchers, 8/4/8)

Tempest Fleet Issue:

• Slot layout: 7th turret slot removed for a 7th low-slot (for a total of 6/4 turrets/launchers, 8/5/7)
• Hitpoints: armor and shield values swapped (now has 10431 armor and 9316 shields)


Shocked

Utterly awesome. I think this should be the end of the "minmatar battleships are subpar" thing... Tempest and Phoon will both kick ass after this.

I'll have to re-evaluate my "why bother training Minnie bs to V?" stance now.
Very Happy

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:54:00 - [747]
 

Edited by: AstroPhobic on 25/09/2009 17:54:58
Still think the tempest could use some love somewhere, but the rest of the changes are great. Thanks, CCP!

ed: @ Alex: err, the pest hasn't changed nearly at all.

Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.09.25 18:00:00 - [748]
 

Originally by: AstroPhobic
Edited by: AstroPhobic on 25/09/2009 17:54:58
Still think the tempest could use some love somewhere, but the rest of the changes are great. Thanks, CCP!

ed: @ Alex: err, the pest hasn't changed nearly at all.


Well, true... I was more looking at the Fleet Pest there. The upcoming projectile weapon buffs will hopefully boost the normal Pest to "kick ass" levels, too.

AstroPhobic
Minmatar
Holding Corp
Posted - 2009.09.25 18:06:00 - [749]
 

Originally by: Alex Harumichi
Well, true... I was more looking at the Fleet Pest there. The upcoming projectile weapon buffs will hopefully boost the normal Pest to "kick ass" levels, too.



I have my doubts, but it will likely go from LOL --> acceptable. The new geddon? Unlikely.

The new phoon however - oh man. I told myself there was a good reason to train torps up, and I was right. Very Happy

Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
Posted - 2009.09.25 18:11:00 - [750]
 

wait what..? 5/5 phoonFI _and_ 8 lows?

just checking... it is the right thing to do but.... who are you and what have you done to ytterbium?!


Pages: first : previous : ... 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 ... : last (35)

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