TwinfireBeam

  • Arkheias
    Arkheias
    Potential Threat
    Joined Jun 2015 Posts: 71
    I just messed with the ship calc and came up with the following results:

    Targeting Computer III + Volatile Fuel III + Xeno Rupture Beam II gives:
    4670t / 389 dps = 12.005 t/dps

    Xeno Twinfire Beam IV by itself gives:
    3123t / 231 dps = 13.519 t/dps

    You can make a lot of stupid builds with the Xeno Rupture Beam II before you come up with anything worse than a build with Xeno Twinfire Beams.
  • Jim Bo
    Jim Bo
    Strike-force Captain
    Joined Jan 2016 Posts: 691
    Saladman said:
    If you actually divide it out.... Rupture 1,2 and 3 are all 11.6,11.6,11.7 ton/dps... Twinfire1,2 is 10.24, 11.2 ton/dps... twinfire wins there. The speed and range are the same...The only advantage Rupture has is that it can be used on Xeno....
    Heavy Rupture 2 is 1:8.3

    ...so I guess if you don't have the Heavy Rupture, then Twinfire is marginally better... marginally. Hardly worth it... I wonder what the fit time is tho?
  • M.V.K.0
    M.V.K.0
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Jan 2017 Posts: 1,010
    edited 12 Oct 2017, 2:33AM
    Arkheias said:
    I just messed with the ship calc and came up with the following results:

    Targeting Computer III + Volatile Fuel III + Xeno Rupture Beam II gives:
    4670t / 389 dps = 12.005 t/dps

    Xeno Twinfire Beam IV by itself gives:
    3123t / 231 dps = 13.519 t/dps

    You can make a lot of stupid builds with the Xeno Rupture Beam II before you come up with anything worse than a build with Xeno Twinfire Beams.
    Yea, but say finally so far for what has "still" been, is that Twinfire fires faster, say even towards a 1-2 ratio would still say least for every 3rd, would be a shot fired for equal 1-1 dps for that say single weapon, not a half for between turns for total add up for the average. 

    And with ships in equal worth still say take 10 shots fired to win against on a ship to ship basis, Twinfire think is ahead by least 3-4 shots by then for the samething. 

    Which is like a 25-40% say practical increase with "average-max" included, maybe some minimal. 

    Then amount of mounts per weapon per mass per dps would still say they isn't any mass least for the mount when mount as full used, which probably still will.

    Catch someone early in say one way more then another, Rapture could win, otherwise think still not towards still equal means. because remember, one mass to many and it all is gone for being any good.


    Thanks,

    MVK
  • zparadis
    zparadis
    Strike-force Captain
    Joined Mar 2017 Posts: 756
    Jim Bo said:
    Saladman said:
    If you actually divide it out.... Rupture 1,2 and 3 are all 11.6,11.6,11.7 ton/dps... Twinfire1,2 is 10.24, 11.2 ton/dps... twinfire wins there. The speed and range are the same...The only advantage Rupture has is that it can be used on Xeno....
    Heavy Rupture 2 is 1:8.3

    ...so I guess if you don't have the Heavy Rupture, then Twinfire is marginally better... marginally. Hardly worth it... I wonder what the fit time is tho?
    Quote the dps all you want. we need to test it first. Rupture suffers from long charge up times, so quite a  bit of its dps could be wasted due to target moving out of range. Twinfire reduces that problem, at least.
  • Saladman
    Saladman
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Sep 2016 Posts: 230
    edited 12 Oct 2017, 11:11AM
    Arkheias said:
    I just messed with the ship calc and came up with the following results:

    Targeting Computer III + Volatile Fuel III + Xeno Rupture Beam II gives:
    4670t / 389 dps = 12.005 t/dps

    Xeno Twinfire Beam IV by itself gives:
    3123t / 231 dps = 13.519 t/dps

    You can make a lot of stupid builds with the Xeno Rupture Beam II before you come up with anything worse than a build with Xeno Twinfire Beams.
    I was talking about regular Twinfire,... not zeno... where do you see the zeno specs?

  • Saladman
    Saladman
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Sep 2016 Posts: 230
    Jim Bo said:
    Saladman said:
    If you actually divide it out.... Rupture 1,2 and 3 are all 11.6,11.6,11.7 ton/dps... Twinfire1,2 is 10.24, 11.2 ton/dps... twinfire wins there. The speed and range are the same...The only advantage Rupture has is that it can be used on Xeno....
    Heavy Rupture 2 is 1:8.3

    ...so I guess if you don't have the Heavy Rupture, then Twinfire is marginally better... marginally. Hardly worth it... I wonder what the fit time is tho?
    Compareing Regular Twinfire to Heavy Rupture... hmmm... has anyone seen heavy twinfire specs? Where?
  • Mabari
    Mabari
    Potential Threat
    Joined Aug 2015 Posts: 55
    anyone who remembers the day Manifold was launched will do well to remember stats on paper mean **** all. Lets wait until every cutter out there is equipped with it before judging it
  • blindcyde
    blindcyde
    Potential Threat
    Joined Jan 2015 Posts: 64

    @Saladman said:
    Jim Bo said:

    Saladman said:

    If you actually divide it out.... Rupture 1,2 and 3 are all 11.6,11.6,11.7 ton/dps... Twinfire1,2 is 10.24, 11.2 ton/dps... twinfire wins there. The speed and range are the same...The only advantage Rupture has is that it can be used on Xeno....

    Heavy Rupture 2 is 1:8.3

    ...so I guess if you don't have the Heavy Rupture, then Twinfire is marginally better... marginally. Hardly worth it... I wonder what the fit time is tho?

    Compareing Regular Twinfire to Heavy Rupture... hmmm... has anyone seen heavy twinfire specs? Where?

    Yes, the specs for the heavy twinfire and xeno twinfire are in the tech preview video

  • Saladman
    Saladman
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Sep 2016 Posts: 230
    I dont see the specs for those there..... all I can find is the regular Twinfire.... Regular twinfire versus Regular Rupture.. twinfire has better specs... it will be interestuing to see how the actual weapons perform.
  • blindcyde
    blindcyde
    Potential Threat
    Joined Jan 2015 Posts: 64

    There's also pics in the dynasty discussion thread

  • blindcyde
    blindcyde
    Potential Threat
    Joined Jan 2015 Posts: 64

    https://puu.sh/xVhV9/552c23a9eb.png

    Let's see if that link works lol

  • M.V.K.0
    M.V.K.0
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Jan 2017 Posts: 1,010
    So far in shear Dps the Twinfire just loses out to the Xeno Raptures, all other say scenarios provides more dps without overall cost and contrast for compare.

    And instead of say the 5-7 Variants of Rapture, there will only be 4 for Twinfire.


    Thanks,

    MVK
  • Ersha66
    Ersha66
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Mar 2016 Posts: 158
    The real problem is not on damage but on weight :V really not worthy, not when to mount some of these you must roam like a glass cannon
  • M.V.K.0
    M.V.K.0
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Jan 2017 Posts: 1,010
    Ersha66 said:
    The real problem is not on damage but on weight :V really not worthy, not when to mount some of these you must roam like a glass cannon
    But in terms with weight is still saying for mounts can make up for any weight differences. And essentially for what will always be limited by mounts weight usually makes no concern. As such for each mount then say amounts to dps for the difference.

    Would be nice if weight was the only factor to say for any total mounts then a set of mounts, but does not say work that way and if it was we'd probably have to say something that it did.


    Thanks,

    MVK
  • Night.owl
    Night.owl
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Jul 2016 Posts: 270
    Think one of the trip ups we have is assuming just because a weapon is released at the same time as X ship, it is meant for use on X. I suspect in this case, the weapon should go on cutters to show its effectiveness.

    As for Rupture being 'better', the Twinfire II has a dps/mass of 11.3 while the normal Ruptures sit at 11.6 so a very slight improvement. Heavy Rupture IIs are at 8.3 though so it's in the middle between a Rupture and a Heavy Rupture. Xeno Twins though.... ug... 13.6 dps/mass.

    The only good use I can think of for such a superheavy weapon is if weapons slots are limited and you still got lots of mass and you want to convert the extra mass into dps with a 'small' penalty in efficiency to make up for the lack of weapons slots. Otherwise, go Ruptures.
  • dom.friant
    dom.friant
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Sep 2014 Posts: 1,461
    edited 13 Oct 2017, 2:18PM
    Mabari said:
    anyone who remembers the day Manifold was launched will do well to remember stats on paper mean **** all. Lets wait until every cutter out there is equipped with it before judging it
    Night.owl said:
    Think one of the trip ups we have is assuming just because a weapon is released at the same time as X ship, it is meant for use on X. I suspect in this case, the weapon should go on cutters to show its effectiveness.

    While I agree to some extent, that isn't as true as it used to be with xeno and farming very much based on gearing. To me it is obvious that this weapon is "supposed" to be used with the battleship based on how the blitz reapers rush and  circle our fleets... it's demonstrated right in the event video. The problem is who wants to build such a short range battleship as it will be awful for anything else. I agree that I think both twinfire and rupture beam are better suited to cutters, and maybe cruisers. So that begs the question, what do we put on the Enforcer instead? Especially if we want to use it to farm blitz reapers? Shatter is mostly likely going to miss... though the way the reapers bunch together maybe it might work.

    I will be very interested to see if there is a marauder version of twinfire beam released alongside a marauder battleship...
    Because I like the Condor!
    http://i.imgur.com/80deZPv.png
  • Night.owl
    Night.owl
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Jul 2016 Posts: 270

     So that begs the question, what do we put on the Enforcer instead? Especially if we want to use it to farm blitz reapers? Shatter is mostly likely going to miss... though the way the reapers bunch together maybe it might work.

    Switch to cruisers? lol.
    I used to have a fleet of rupture annihialators but I ripped them all out for other weapons and started using cruisers for reapers instead when the entire fleet had to sit out a fight with another alliance. Simply useless vs Net battleships.
    These days, you need to design your fleet for dual purpose, pvp and pve. If you really, really want to though, you can try loading them with Novas or Vector/NETs since they are Battleships and can use VF.
    I got one strange idea I like to try out for pvp once I got the time (hahaha) is an arrestor/beam cap/shatter. My thinking is the arrestor holds the enemy ship for the short time it takes for the shatter to hit. Will test it out eventually. One day. **** kixeye refit times.

  • dom.friant
    dom.friant
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Sep 2014 Posts: 1,461
    edited 13 Oct 2017, 2:42PM
    Night.owl said:

     So that begs the question, what do we put on the Enforcer instead? Especially if we want to use it to farm blitz reapers? Shatter is mostly likely going to miss... though the way the reapers bunch together maybe it might work.

    Switch to cruisers? lol.
    I used to have a fleet of rupture annihialators but I ripped them all out for other weapons and started using cruisers for reapers instead when the entire fleet had to sit out a fight with another alliance. Simply useless vs Net battleships.
    These days, you need to design your fleet for dual purpose, pvp and pve. If you really, really want to though, you can try loading them with Novas or Vector/NETs since they are Battleships and can use VF.
    I got one strange idea I like to try out for pvp once I got the time (hahaha) is an arrestor/beam cap/shatter. My thinking is the arrestor holds the enemy ship for the short time it takes for the shatter to hit. Will test it out eventually. One day. **** kixeye refit times.

    Pretty much. I never built a rupture beam annihilator and have used mostly cruisers on reapers like you say. On a whim I did build one annihilator with impulse and beam cap 3 (which could take advantage of the beam capacitor's warm up reduction), but it lacks the dps to really take on the higher levels. I completely agree with the dual purpose fleets statement, so which is why I'm really disappointed we got such a short range weapon. Something along the lines of a higher dsp vector would have been much preferable. 

    I like your idea by the way... I can see how that could work... and I'm wondering if something like that might work with these blitz reapers... very tempted to try....
    Because I like the Condor!
    http://i.imgur.com/80deZPv.png
  • RavenDrakar
    RavenDrakar
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Jul 2013 Posts: 1,116
    But with the release of Maurader tech they really want you building separate fleets for PVE and PVP.  They want you to spend that money and burn those coins for builds.  


    Death flies on the wings of the Blackbird of ****.
  • Nightmare Deathlock
    Nightmare Deathlock
    Unicorn Overlord
    Joined Oct 2014 Posts: 8,616

    @RavenDrakar said:
    But with the release of Maurader tech they really want you building separate fleets for PVE and PVP.  They want you to spend that money and burn those coins for builds.  

    The issue here is there is barely any hulls for pvp at this time. People will still use the "PvE" hulls for PvP... For months until marauders have a decent amount of seperate hulls to use. Maybe if kixeye just launched an entire set of marauder ships or just gave us chips that convert a basic hull to marauder tech things would be far easier to handle and kix gets a **** load of money cause nearly everyone has marauder tech almost immediately

    born in sector 1100

    alliance: LORD (VC only)

    VC: lv42 base (only game worth playing) likes to mess with noobs. loves being an insector (who doesnt? lol)

    BP: lv46 base (i think) retired

    WC: lv14 base (i think) hate this game...

  • Saladman
    Saladman
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Sep 2016 Posts: 230
    Like a Marauder Special...
    Fill that third slot...

  • Saladman
    Saladman
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Sep 2016 Posts: 230
    edited 13 Oct 2017, 4:44PM
    Night.owl said:

     So that begs the question, what do we put on the Enforcer instead? Especially if we want to use it to farm blitz reapers? Shatter is mostly likely going to miss... though the way the reapers bunch together maybe it might work.

    Switch to cruisers? lol.
    I used to have a fleet of rupture annihialators but I ripped them all out for other weapons and started using cruisers for reapers instead when the entire fleet had to sit out a fight with another alliance. Simply useless vs Net battleships.
    These days, you need to design your fleet for dual purpose, pvp and pve. If you really, really want to though, you can try loading them with Novas or Vector/NETs since they are Battleships and can use VF.
    I got one strange idea I like to try out for pvp once I got the time (hahaha) is an arrestor/beam cap/shatter. My thinking is the arrestor holds the enemy ship for the short time it takes for the shatter to hit. Will test it out eventually. One day. **** kixeye refit times.

    Ruptures on Battleships do work against Reapers.... about the only place I would use a rupture on a BS...(down goes that "dual purpose")... I also like you aresstor holds them while my big DPS hits them idea.... The arrestor and shatter being of different ranges...though.. the range of the shatter is "wasted".... What about replace the shatter with a shorter range  but higher DPS/ton weapon.... Xeno Seeker has best DPS/ton in the game right now I think.. THis allows the said ship to also be anti squadron (another purpose)  Think Ima add aresstor beams to my Supressors!
  • RavenDrakar
    RavenDrakar
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Jul 2013 Posts: 1,116

    @RavenDrakar said:
    But with the release of Maurader tech they really want you building separate fleets for PVE and PVP.  They want you to spend that money and burn those coins for builds.  

    The issue here is there is barely any hulls for pvp at this time. People will still use the "PvE" hulls for PvP... For months until marauders have a decent amount of seperate hulls to use. Maybe if kixeye just launched an entire set of marauder ships or just gave us chips that convert a basic hull to marauder tech things would be far easier to handle and kix gets a **** load of money cause nearly everyone has marauder tech almost immediately

    That's a very good idea grounded in logic
    Which is why Kixeye didn't think of it. 
    Death flies on the wings of the Blackbird of ****.
  • Nightmare Deathlock
    Nightmare Deathlock
    Unicorn Overlord
    Joined Oct 2014 Posts: 8,616

    @RavenDrakar said:
    Nightmare Deathlock said:

    @RavenDrakar said:

    But with the release of Maurader tech they really want you building separate fleets for PVE and PVP.  They want you to spend that money and burn those coins for builds.  

    The issue here is there is barely any hulls for pvp at this time. People will still use the "PvE" hulls for PvP... For months until marauders have a decent amount of seperate hulls to use. Maybe if kixeye just launched an entire set of marauder ships or just gave us chips that convert a basic hull to marauder tech things would be far easier to handle and kix gets a **** load of money cause nearly everyone has marauder tech almost immediately

    That's a very good idea grounded in logic
    Which is why Kixeye didn't think of it. 

    Lol yeah and they thought up the Mark system which does that exact thing xD how does a chip change a hulls paint and upgrade everything? XD

    born in sector 1100

    alliance: LORD (VC only)

    VC: lv42 base (only game worth playing) likes to mess with noobs. loves being an insector (who doesnt? lol)

    BP: lv46 base (i think) retired

    WC: lv14 base (i think) hate this game...

  • TheDude84
    TheDude84
    Minor Nuisance
    Joined Feb 2016 Posts: 135
    edited 13 Oct 2017, 5:20PM
    Congratulations Kixeye.

    After soooo many people use the Rupturebeam on their Annihilators (actually i never(!) encountered even one because of its overwhelming range and the sheer fact that beams on Battleships suck you make theexact same mistake again.

    Another Battleshipweapon that wont ever be used on a battleshipbecause it is completely unusuable for this shiptype. Its an ice Kutter or Cruiserweapon, but not for Battleships.

    Whatwas the design idea behind such a short ranged weapon? Did you forget that Battleships actually get a rangebonus and are used by virtually everyone as a sniping/kiting platform?
    I actually have two elites that do over 2700dps each. they work great in pve which is what they were designed for. kix don't care if we fight each other anymore, they have us too wrapped up in farming for their content spam. if you want to pvp AND pve you're going to have to build double the fleets like all the rest of us. Also you'll have to coin like a **** if you want to play for more than 10 minutes every day.
    The problem with this game is the power curves. Just look at the graphs I made. Said no vega conflict player ever
  • M.V.K.0
    M.V.K.0
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Jan 2017 Posts: 1,010
    TheDude84 said:
    Congratulations Kixeye.

    After soooo many people use the Rupturebeam on their Annihilators (actually i never(!) encountered even one because of its overwhelming range and the sheer fact that beams on Battleships suck you make theexact same mistake again.

    Another Battleshipweapon that wont ever be used on a battleshipbecause it is completely unusuable for this shiptype. Its an ice Kutter or Cruiserweapon, but not for Battleships.

    Whatwas the design idea behind such a short ranged weapon? Did you forget that Battleships actually get a rangebonus and are used by virtually everyone as a sniping/kiting platform?
    I actually have two elites that do over 2700dps each. they work great in pve which is what they were designed for. kix don't care if we fight each other anymore, they have us too wrapped up in farming for their content spam. if you want to pvp AND pve you're going to have to build double the fleets like all the rest of us. Also you'll have to coin like a **** if you want to play for more than 10 minutes every day.
    Yes, 2-4 Fleets think is minimal requirements for anything practical. As such think that alot of people would avoid such energy weapon ship builds at first since having two ships would make up for the distance differences.


    Thanks,

    MVK
  • zparadis
    zparadis
    Strike-force Captain
    Joined Mar 2017 Posts: 756
    M.V.K.0 said:
    TheDude84 said:
    Congratulations Kixeye.

    After soooo many people use the Rupturebeam on their Annihilators (actually i never(!) encountered even one because of its overwhelming range and the sheer fact that beams on Battleships suck you make theexact same mistake again.

    Another Battleshipweapon that wont ever be used on a battleshipbecause it is completely unusuable for this shiptype. Its an ice Kutter or Cruiserweapon, but not for Battleships.

    Whatwas the design idea behind such a short ranged weapon? Did you forget that Battleships actually get a rangebonus and are used by virtually everyone as a sniping/kiting platform?
    I actually have two elites that do over 2700dps each. they work great in pve which is what they were designed for. kix don't care if we fight each other anymore, they have us too wrapped up in farming for their content spam. if you want to pvp AND pve you're going to have to build double the fleets like all the rest of us. Also you'll have to coin like a **** if you want to play for more than 10 minutes every day.
    Yes, 2-4 Fleets think is minimal requirements for anything practical. As such think that alot of people would avoid such energy weapon ship builds at first since having two ships would make up for the distance differences.


    Thanks,

    MVK
    We keep telling you that nobody understands you. When are you going to listen?
  • M.V.K.0
    M.V.K.0
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Jan 2017 Posts: 1,010
    edited 13 Oct 2017, 6:45PM
    zparadis said:
    M.V.K.0 said:
    TheDude84 said:
    Congratulations Kixeye.

    After soooo many people use the Rupturebeam on their Annihilators (actually i never(!) encountered even one because of its overwhelming range and the sheer fact that beams on Battleships suck you make theexact same mistake again.

    Another Battleshipweapon that wont ever be used on a battleshipbecause it is completely unusuable for this shiptype. Its an ice Kutter or Cruiserweapon, but not for Battleships.

    Whatwas the design idea behind such a short ranged weapon? Did you forget that Battleships actually get a rangebonus and are used by virtually everyone as a sniping/kiting platform?
    I actually have two elites that do over 2700dps each. they work great in pve which is what they were designed for. kix don't care if we fight each other anymore, they have us too wrapped up in farming for their content spam. if you want to pvp AND pve you're going to have to build double the fleets like all the rest of us. Also you'll have to coin like a **** if you want to play for more than 10 minutes every day.
    Yes, 2-4 Fleets think is minimal requirements for anything practical. As such think that alot of people would avoid such energy weapon ship builds at first since having two ships would make up for the distance differences.


    Thanks,

    MVK
    We keep telling you that nobody understands you. When are you going to listen?
    When you manage to actually say something else for a change, which I don't think is possible.


    Thanks,

    MVK
  • RaniRahn
    RaniRahn
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Sep 2015 Posts: 1,393
    edited 13 Oct 2017, 9:12PM
    M.V.K.0 said:
    When you manage to actually say something else for a change, which I don't think is possible.


    Thanks,

    MVK
    For the love of **** STOP WRITING forever please!

    Wait G O D is swear word? :smiley:
    52 45 38 67 54 6b 39 55 49 45 4a 56 57 53 42 44 54 30 6c 4f 55 79 45 3d
  • M.V.K.0
    M.V.K.0
    Incursion Leader
    Joined Jan 2017 Posts: 1,010
    edited 13 Oct 2017, 7:03PM
    RaniRahn said:
    M.V.K.0 said:
    When you manage to actually say something else for a change, which I don't think is possible.


    Thanks,

    MVK
    For the love of **** STOP WRITING forever please!
    If I still said you're welcome for not, would that make any sense?? I'm saying no so far, but could be wrong still of course, but probably not..but here we go..


    Thanks,

    MVK
Sign In or Register to comment.