Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Umino Iruka
Ultramar Independent Contracting
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 11:08:49 -
[1] - Quote
It's true the Tempest/Tempest fleet issue needs some love, but just increasing the rate of fire bonus is not enough.
Tempest and Tempest fleet issue right now are just ******** twin brothers of the Machariel - less dps, no damage application bonus, less agility and less speed. The only thing in which Tempest fleet issue is slightly better than a Mach, is the shield/armor/hull amount - around 10% better than what Mach has.
So instead of the proposed changes, why don't you give Tempest a different role?
Minmatar ships are terribly lacking in decent artillery platforms (only Jaguar and Munin can be counted as such with bonuses to both tracking and OPTIMAL, and even they need a rework for the better.). You keep pushing falloff into minmatar hulls which is kinda understandable because of autocannons.
Artillery turrets are simply the worst weapon system in the game - sure, it doesn't spend any cap and can change damage type, but where ever you see a minmatar damage application bonus, you see falloff, so not only artillery does the shittiest dps in the game, but also has the shittiest tracking in the game, AND you get falloff where ever you want to fit them just to add that little extra chance to miss....this is really a ******** concept.
Tempest hulls already have enough powergrid to fit T2 1400mm turrets - something you don't see every day, but I guess that has more to do with having only 6 turret slots.
My idea here is:
First: remove missile hardpoints from Tempest hulls.
Tempest:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 12.5% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire (this is both of the current dps bonuses wrapped into one + that extra that CCP want's to increase)
This would mean Tempest would have 9.5 effective turrets after bonuses which is still less than a Maelstrom which has 10 effective turrets.
Tempest Fleet issue:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 15% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire
This would mean Tempest Fleet issue would have 10.5 effective turrets after bonuses (same as the Machariel)
All this would place both Tempest variations into a role of their own without being overpowered and without fighting for their place under the sun with the Machariel.
I deliberately chose an optimal bonus, and not tracking because artillery already has the worst tracking in the game, so when you bonus something that's already almost non-existant, you still get a value which is almost non-existant. Artillery can only gain any meaningful accuracy through extra range.
Having only a rate of fire bonus would prevent alpha abuse while keeping a decent amount of dps.
Would it be too much to ask to also finally fully construct the tempest and add proper symmetry to the ship - you know...so the right side of the ship gets it's own little "bridge" and the hardpoints not shooting from within the ship's gut?
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
2566
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 11:30:17 -
[2] - Quote
I prefer the fall off bonus.
Arties have decent fall off It adds more range but with less accuracy It allows me to use high damage ammo at range.
Id prefer a fleet pest with 8 guns, 5% ROF and 10% fall off. Buff grid, and nerf drone bay.
Then leave the normal pest as it is with utility highs and high damage and then the mach can be an attack faction battleship.
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1181
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 11:35:46 -
[3] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote: Tempest Fleet issue:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 15% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire
This would mean Tempest Fleet issue would have 10.5 effective turrets after bonuses (same as the Machariel)
It would actually be 24 effective turrets at L5. It might need a buff, but certainly not that much. |
Umino Iruka
Ultramar Independent Contracting
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 13:48:03 -
[4] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Umino Iruka wrote: Tempest Fleet issue:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 15% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire
This would mean Tempest Fleet issue would have 10.5 effective turrets after bonuses (same as the Machariel)
It would actually be 24 effective turrets at L5. It might need a buff, but certainly not that much.
15% * 5 = 75% 75% of 6 is 4.5 6+4.5 = 10.5
Math must be special where you come from eh?
|
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
907
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 14:41:58 -
[5] - Quote
Agreed that tempest hulls need more than they are doing now ie adding more rof on basic tempest.
While i never cared fot basic tempest and the way it is looked upon i do believe that fleet issue should steer clear of it is "battlecruiser not battleship" mantra as hard as it can.
Concept is ridiculous it will never work in favor of battleship hull without making it another machariel or better.
Optimal bonus will make it an arty platform instead of autocannons pwnmobile something Minmatar ships are in dire need boosted artillery platform and for it dual dmg and no tank bonus(maelstrom) it apsolutely need to deliver bigger payload than maelstrom to be considered over it.
Maelstrom 8gun brawler with shield boost
Tempest fleet artillery platform
Typhoon caldary missile spamer.
Tempest basic battlecruiser wannabe failure.
|
Celthric Kanerian
Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation
347
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 14:42:10 -
[6] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote: Tempest Fleet Issue 15% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire
Cause that is not op at all.... |
Umino Iruka
Ultramar Independent Contracting
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 14:57:10 -
[7] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian wrote:Umino Iruka wrote: Tempest Fleet Issue 15% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire
Cause that is not op at all....
What is OP?
It has 6 guns.
15% per level to make it slightly better than a normal Tempest, and being better than a Maelstrom by 0.5 effective turrets - It's a NAVY BATTLESHIP, it's supposed to be better than t1 battleships. |
Zavand Crendraven
Rolling Static Gone Critical
21
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 15:10:49 -
[8] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote:Lloyd Roses wrote:Umino Iruka wrote: Tempest Fleet issue:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 15% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire
This would mean Tempest Fleet issue would have 10.5 effective turrets after bonuses (same as the Machariel)
It would actually be 24 effective turrets at L5. It might need a buff, but certainly not that much. 15% * 5 = 75% 75% of 6 is 4.5 6+4.5 = 10.5 Math must be special where you come from eh? Maybe you should learn how eve works and then do the math as eve does it rather than coming up with your own math. RoF bonus applies by reducing the rate of fire (which in eve is measured in seconds) thus DPS increase from a rate of fire bonus is calculated with: 1/(1 - RoF). Now since you have a RoF bonus of 0.75 that means you will give the ship a 4X DPS bonus which is frankly ******** from a balancing perspective. |
FireFrenzy
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
510
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 16:43:35 -
[9] - Quote
you are aware that the new tempest takes the "ship with the most effective turrets" award from the vindi right? and does more DPS then the fleet tempest, vargur and machariels RIGHT?
Just making sure... |
James Baboli
Novablasters
959
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 16:55:43 -
[10] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote:
Tempest:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 12.5% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire (this is both of the current dps bonuses wrapped into one + that extra that CCP want's to increase)
This would mean Tempest would have 9.5 effective turrets after bonuses which is still less than a Maelstrom which has 10 effective turrets.
Tempest Fleet issue:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 15% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire
.15x5 = .75 A 75% rof buff.
math goes thus 6/.25= 24
expanding it out goes 6 turrets. Multiply by the damage increase, as a decimal. 0%/lvl means 0. Divide by the reciprocal of the Rate of fire bonus, expressed as a decimal number. 15%/lvl means 75%, which gives a reciprocal of .25.
A 7.5%rof or 10%/lvl damage bonus is about the strongest per level damage bonus I can think of a way to balance. Maybe a 10%ROF on something as otherwise underwhelming as projectiles, but thats still a doubling of the effective turrets.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2488
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 17:08:15 -
[11] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote:It's true the Tempest/Tempest fleet issue needs some love, but just increasing the rate of fire bonus is not enough. It sure is enough. CCP overdid the rate of fire bonus. They turned the Tempest from a really awesome ship with underwhelming DPS to a really awesome ship with overwhelming DPS. I loved everything about it previously except its only 6 turrets, but now it might as well have 7 except it doesn't have to pay for the 7th and it still gets 2 utility highs. It's like the Navy Hurricane on steroids.
Give me a top hat.
http://i.imgur.com/Boi9sA8.jpg
|
James Baboli
Novablasters
961
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 17:16:44 -
[12] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Umino Iruka wrote:It's true the Tempest/Tempest fleet issue needs some love, but just increasing the rate of fire bonus is not enough. It sure is enough. CCP overdid the rate of fire bonus. They turned the Tempest from a really awesome ship with underwhelming DPS to a really awesome ship with overwhelming DPS. I loved everything about it previously except its only 6 turrets, but now it might as well have 7 except it doesn't have to pay for the 7th and it still gets 2 utility highs. It's like the Navy Hurricane on steroids. It might as well have 12......
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
106
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 17:39:57 -
[13] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote:the rate of fire bonus is not enough. Some people are never happy...
Also I think the OP doesn't know how to do maths. |
Umino Iruka
Ultramar Independent Contracting
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 17:41:44 -
[14] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Umino Iruka wrote:
Tempest:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 12.5% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire (this is both of the current dps bonuses wrapped into one + that extra that CCP want's to increase)
This would mean Tempest would have 9.5 effective turrets after bonuses which is still less than a Maelstrom which has 10 effective turrets.
Tempest Fleet issue:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 15% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire
.15x5 = .75 A 75% rof buff. math goes thus 6/.25= 24 expanding it out goes 6 turrets. Multiply by the damage increase, as a decimal. 0%/lvl means 0. Divide by the reciprocal of the Rate of fire bonus, expressed as a decimal number. 15%/lvl means 75%, which gives a reciprocal of .25. A 7.5%rof or 10%/lvl damage bonus is about the strongest per level damage bonus I can think of a way to balance. Maybe a 10%ROF on something as otherwise underwhelming as projectiles, but thats still a doubling of the effective turrets.
Yes, I get it, I screwed up by not taking into account that reducing rate of fire via % pushes dps towards infinity (ascending curve). And thank you for a decent, argumented reply!
I've corrected the original post - the idea remains the same, only less fail on my part. |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
548
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 17:49:32 -
[15] - Quote
I would say that for both of them, 7 guns and a 10% damage bonus per level, along with a 7.5% tracking speed bonus, would be the correct way to go. Tracking speed greatly benefits both arty and autos, and would be very fun to see what it could kill with autos and high tracking. |
Umino Iruka
Ultramar Independent Contracting
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 17:56:06 -
[16] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:I would say that for both of them, 7 guns and a 10% damage bonus per level, along with a 7.5% tracking speed bonus, would be the correct way to go. Tracking speed greatly benefits both arty and autos, and would be very fun to see what it could kill with autos and high tracking.
I see what you're thinking, but I believe you're forgetting the alpha this would cause - Machariel, with a 25% bonus to turret damage and 7 turrets can score 15k volleys with the help of implants - your idea would push that to around 20k on a tempest. |
James Baboli
Novablasters
961
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 18:17:17 -
[17] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote:James Baboli wrote:Umino Iruka wrote:
Tempest:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 12.5% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire (this is both of the current dps bonuses wrapped into one + that extra that CCP want's to increase)
This would mean Tempest would have 9.5 effective turrets after bonuses which is still less than a Maelstrom which has 10 effective turrets.
Tempest Fleet issue:
10% bonus to Large Projectile turret optimal range 15% bonus to Large Projectile turret rate of fire
.15x5 = .75 A 75% rof buff. math goes thus 6/.25= 24 expanding it out goes 6 turrets. Multiply by the damage increase, as a decimal. 0%/lvl means 0. Divide by the reciprocal of the Rate of fire bonus, expressed as a decimal number. 15%/lvl means 75%, which gives a reciprocal of .25. A 7.5%rof or 10%/lvl damage bonus is about the strongest per level damage bonus I can think of a way to balance. Maybe a 10%ROF on something as otherwise underwhelming as projectiles, but thats still a doubling of the effective turrets. Yes, I get it, I screwed up by not taking into account that reducing rate of fire via % pushes dps towards infinity (ascending curve). And thank you for a decent, argumented reply! I've corrected the original post - the idea remains the same, only less fail on my part.
with only 6 turrets, the 7.5% bonus means it now has only got 9.6 effective turrets, coming out in the low end of the attack battleship subclass. I'd love something like this to work out, but the numbers to make it hit the curve for DPS (where projectiles need to be nearly the top of the curve of paper DPS to be close with applied, due to fighting in falloff) are wierd things like an 8% per level bonus.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Minty Aroma
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
51
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 20:34:43 -
[18] - Quote
I would prefer to see the tempest get a boost to speed and a falloff bonus.
Shield nano kitey BSes anyone? |
Umino Iruka
Ultramar Independent Contracting
3
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 20:50:15 -
[19] - Quote
Yeah, 9.6 effective turrets is not gonna cut it, and the only reason it somewhat works on Typhoon Fleet Issue, is because of a generous drone bay. After doing some more calculating and comparing with other similar ships, I've modified the original post again.
What CCP is proposing would make Tempest have 12 effective turrets. Machariel has 11.666... That same effect could be achieved with a single 10% rate of fire bonus on 6 guns with the addition of an optimal bonus.
The only thing I would recommend over all that is to nerf their drone bays to 25Mbit/sec and 50m3 to keep their dps somewhat in line. |
Tiddle Jr
Galvanized Inc.
292
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 22:05:45 -
[20] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=408828&find=unread
Leave it here for OP, enjoy reading. |
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
28
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 00:38:42 -
[21] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote:Yeah, 9.6 effective turrets is not gonna cut it, and the only reason it somewhat works on Typhoon Fleet Issue, is because of a generous drone bay. After doing some more calculating and comparing with other similar ships, I've modified the original post again.
What CCP is proposing would make Tempest have 12 effective turrets. Machariel has 11.666... That same effect could be achieved with a single 10% rate of fire bonus on 6 guns with the addition of an optimal bonus.
The only thing I would recommend over all that is to nerf their drone bays to 25Mbit/sec and 50m3 to keep their dps somewhat in line.
There you go, something like that looks good depending on whether a optimal bonus is more suitable then a falloff bonus. I never like the fact that many Minmatar hulls have double damage bonuses where as the Gallentee has 2 separate and more useful bonuses. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
16321
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 06:36:17 -
[22] - Quote
This thread is a mess.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi
1592
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 07:08:33 -
[23] - Quote
Projectile Artillery weapons are not meant for DPS. Their sole purpose is Alpha strikes. Nothing else.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Umino Iruka
Ultramar Independent Contracting
4
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 22:07:40 -
[24] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Projectile Artillery weapons are not meant for DPS. Their sole purpose is Alpha strikes. Nothing else.
Originally, they might have been designed as such, but it's an archaic design which needs to end. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
758
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 09:31:43 -
[25] - Quote
Optimal range?
This thread lost all credibility, even if it had any. I used to sail across Lowsec in a Tempest w/ 2x Neuts before you were even born - the ship is perfect with the DPS increase.
Umino Iruka wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Projectile Artillery weapons are not meant for DPS. Their sole purpose is Alpha strikes. Nothing else. Originally, they might have been designed as such, but it's an archaic design which needs to end.
What? SORRY?
You honestly have NO idea. You don't.
// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)]
//
[Cruisers Online]
|
Mark Hadden
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
57
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 09:38:20 -
[26] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote:
What is OP?
It has 6 guns.
15% per level to make it slightly better than a normal Tempest, and being better than a Maelstrom by 0.5 effective turrets - It's a NAVY BATTLESHIP, it's supposed to be better than t1 battleships.
CCP is getting rid of tiers, roles is the keyword. |
Rivr Luzade
Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi
1599
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 09:46:29 -
[27] - Quote
Umino Iruka wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Projectile Artillery weapons are not meant for DPS. Their sole purpose is Alpha strikes. Nothing else. Originally, they might have been designed as such, but it's an archaic design which needs to end. No, it does not. It it what makes this weapon what it is. If you want a long-range, more DPS focused weapon, you have to use lasers or railguns. Likewise, if you want immense alpha strikes that rips through a ship's HP with one shot, you have to use projectile Artilleries (or cruise missiles to some extend). Equalizing these distinctly different usage scenarios is not desirable.
Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
|
Umino Iruka
Ultramar Independent Contracting
4
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 12:42:45 -
[28] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Optimal range? This thread lost all credibility, even if it had any. I used to fish for attention on the forums before you were even born - this thread seemed like a perfect chance to do so again.
There, I fixed that for ya.
Mark Hadden wrote:Umino Iruka wrote:
What is OP?
It has 6 guns.
15% per level to make it slightly better than a normal Tempest, and being better than a Maelstrom by 0.5 effective turrets - It's a NAVY BATTLESHIP, it's supposed to be better than t1 battleships.
CCP is getting rid of tiers, roles is the keyword.
Dude, this thread is not that long, try reading it fully next time - the views of the post you referred to have been abandoned and the original post has been modified to reflect that. Also, this has nothing to do with tiers, CCP clearly stated that navy ships are supposed to be better than their t1 counterparts.
Rivr Luzade wrote: No, it does not. It it what makes this weapon what it is. If you want a long-range, more DPS focused weapon, you have to use lasers or railguns. Likewise, if you want immense alpha strikes that rips through a ship's HP with one shot, you have to use projectile Artilleries (or cruise missiles to some extend). Equalizing these distinctly different usage scenarios is not desirable.
No one said anything about equalizing anything, you're jumping to conclusions, and remember this is a thread about a particular HULL (or two) and about giving it a role that is not overshadowed by ships that are simply better in every way.
Equalizing is bad, but what's even more bad, are statements that a certain weapon system in the game is "not meant for dps" as well as saying that weapon system is designed for "alpha strikes and nothing more". Weapon systems are meant to keep their flavor, but not to such an extent so that their dps suffers to the point of becoming just a niche weapon.
The serious drawbacks of projectile weapons is already being adressed through hulls designed to fit them, just like CCP proposed to increase the rate of fire on the Tempest in their own way - this is just a different view on how it could be done with identical dps changes that CCP wants to do (a 12 effective turrets Tempest), only my way gives it a chance to use arty for something other than just alpha.
As far as arty alpha is concerned, it remains the same, Tempest would have a bit less alpha, but arty alpha is better suited for Maelstrom class battleships and Tornados because Tempest has less alpha than those 2 ships even now with it's 5% damage per level bonus.
The argument here revolves around a simple fact that artillery has too many drawbacks at the moment, and about fixing some of those drawbacks with hull bonuses, for example:
Abbadon/Paladin/Nightmare all have 10 effective turrets after their bonuses are applied and can pull over 1000 Tachyon dps with 3 faction heat sinks and both +6% implants
Maelstrom/Vargur have 10.666... effective turrets after their bonuses are applied and pull slightly over 800 1400mm arty dps with 3 faction gyros and both +6% implants
On a side note, Machariel has 11.666... effective turrets after it's bonuses are applied and CANNOT pull even 900 1400mm arty dps with 3 faction gyros and both +6% implants.
These are comparisons of dps only, don't even get me started on damage application...
I'm not saying the dps of these examples should be identical! I'm saying the gap between them is too large EVEN with projectile turret ships having STRONGER dps bonuses than laser boats and this translates into medium artillery guns as well!!!
Fixing this is perfectly viable by adding stronger RoF bonuses to Minmatar hulls (preferably not just the Tempest, but you have to start somwhere).
And to all of you fearing for your double neut Tempests who don't read the fine print, my changes would not be worse than what CCP suggested - with my changes, you would get a few kilometers of optimal over an identical dps bonus, the ship would just be much more viable for fitting arty than it is now.
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1186
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 14:32:54 -
[29] - Quote
Tempest with the proposed changes is brought back to *well-viable* levels. It's a bit sad how many hulllbonuses you have to slap on a ship to make ACs viable but on the tempest, It's going to be one awesome ride if not even pushing it over the edge due to negligible cost of losing one (~70mil or less)
Every smoewhat sentient pvp-person is familiar with the onslaught two heavy neuts - if even unbonused - can create in a smallscale scenario. The Tempest was not as bad as we made it out to be because it had those redeeming qualities. It just sucked at BS-things in general, beyond being moderately quick with an undecisive slot-layout but two utility highs. So you're now getting phenomenal dps at short ranges (iE 15-25k) together with2 neuts or neut/heavy SB, with the mobility of a CBC and the added advantage of BS-sized CBs, props (heat for ages) and repair mods (like XLASBs, LAAR).
Doesn't even need a change to ACs/Arties on the large scale to start with... Small/Large yay, meds nay. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |