Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
117
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 01:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
I began this game in 2007, back then everyone flew blasters with 90% webs, and those ships crushed any fits that tried to do anything different.
Then "need for speed" hit, then the matari guns got buffed; after that only idiots flew blasters; they couldnt get in range, couldnt track when they were in range, took cap and were unable to switch damage types, all of which were remedyed by their minmatar counterparts.
fast forward 3 years or so and blasters receive a buff. extra tracking, extra damage, less cap usage, easier fitting, more agile gallente ships.
Several people claimed that it would not be enough on the forums.
My question to you, where they right?
we've had 8 months to sort out the fits and the new meta game, has the blaster boost been enough?
If not, what would you do to bring blasters up to where they need to be? |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
352
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 02:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
I think blasters are fine at the moment, plenty of dps when it can be applied... only one thing :P the ships flying them, they could still use some looking at (not the windicator ofc) |
Hrett
Quantum Cats Syndicate
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 02:38:00 -
[3] - Quote
In general, I think they are pretty good now. Mediums (at least) still need a slight tracking boost. They still have tracking issues when orbiting inside their optimal against equal sized ships.
And of course, the ships need a bit of tweaking, but they are working on that. |
Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
71
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 05:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
Blasters are perfectly usable at the moment, although I think most would agree that autocannons are still better. This stems primarily from the fact that no one likes to commit to a fight any more. Also, given that spare high slots are almost always filled with neuts, capless weapons are a huge advantage right now. |
Cpt Branko
Zawa's Fan Club
21
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 07:55:00 -
[5] - Quote
Hrett wrote:In general, I think they are pretty good now. Mediums (at least) still need a slight tracking boost. They still have tracking issues when orbiting inside their optimal against equal sized ships.
This is the hallmark of complete piloting failure. Orbiting against equal sized ships in blaster optimal? Do you not like doing full DPS?
Hrett wrote: And of course, the ships need a bit of tweaking, but they are working on that.
Yes, some medium ships are sub-par since they only have one bonus, and one worthless bonus (rep amount, especially when you tack it on a 5 lowslot ship, is just :worthless:).
|
Traejun DiSanctis
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 08:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
Eternal Error wrote:Blasters are perfectly usable at the moment, although I think most would agree that autocannons are still better. This stems primarily from the fact that no one likes to commit to a fight any more. Also, given that spare high slots are almost always filled with neuts, capless weapons are a huge advantage right now.
Well said. A blaster Harpy can hang with pretty much any frig out there in terms of damage output, and it boasts a beefy tank too. An Enyo also kicks ass.
That said, other than those two, I'll take A/C's everyday and twice on Sunday. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
117
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 08:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
maybe blasters are more popular on frigates because basically everyone has to commit to the fight, no matter what frigate youre in?
I always thought that they should switch the damage output and ranges of autocannons and blasters, so blasters are the fight in falloff medium range ships and autocannons are the in your face damage machines.
This would make the ships who dont have to commit (blasters) not fast enough to guarantee an escape and the ships which are fast enough to escape would be forced into a range where they MUST commit. |
Bouh Revetoile
Barricade.
38
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 11:49:00 -
[8] - Quote
Sigras wrote: This would make the ships who dont have to commit (blasters) not fast enough to guarantee an escape and the ships which are fast enough to escape would be forced into a range where they MUST commit.
When you have to commit, you don't care about being fast or not, because you commit ; your speed is then useless.
Blasters are fine, but railguns need some more tweek I think. |
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
33
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 11:53:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sigras wrote:maybe blasters are more popular on frigates because basically everyone has to commit to the fight, no matter what frigate youre in?
I always thought that they should switch the damage output and ranges of autocannons and blasters, so blasters are the fight in falloff medium range ships and autocannons are the in your face damage machines.
This would make the ships who dont have to commit (blasters) not fast enough to guarantee an escape and the ships which are fast enough to escape would be forced into a range where they MUST commit.
gallente ships currently are nearly as fast as minmatar ships before you apply any rigs to them.
Blasters have no problems the problem is people are psycological beings taht are affected by the FLAVOR OF THE SEASON effect.
Not so long ago amar were considered oebrpowered and now peopel complain about them being weak.
My low sec character is having quite good results with blasters, but you need to work on the scenarios where you excel, liek small groups and warp the blaster ships after the tackling to land on top of enemy. |
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
210
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 14:32:00 -
[10] - Quote
Seishi Maru wrote: gallente ships currently are nearly as fast as minmatar ships before you apply any rigs to them.
TBH this is the only problem with gallente ships; speed penalties, ESPECIALLY on active tanking rigs, have got to go. |
|
Batelle
French Defence Union
90
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 14:36:00 -
[11] - Quote
Sigras wrote:I began this game in 2007, back then everyone flew blasters with 90% webs, and those ships crushed any fits that tried to do anything different.
Sure blasters were great with the web bonus, but I don't remember anyone actually using gallente ships all that often. All I recall is 300m isk polycarb rigs, gisti a-type mwd crows, and typhoons that went 6 k a second and capped out anything in a minute with heavy nosferatu. My reaction to the tier system and skill tree overhaul https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=899560#post899560 |
CorInaXeraL
Order of the Silver Dragons Silver Dragonz
42
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 14:43:00 -
[12] - Quote
I enjoy flying my blaster-boats around on my HAC pilot. Always have (2005) and always will. They're just....fun. Something about locking up, cuddling in and orbiting within a spit-on-your-windshield range and slamming Void into another hull....mmm, bliss. |
Hrett
Quantum Cats Syndicate
121
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 16:24:00 -
[13] - Quote
Cpt Branko wrote:Hrett wrote:In general, I think they are pretty good now. Mediums (at least) still need a slight tracking boost. They still have tracking issues when orbiting inside their optimal against equal sized ships.
This is the hallmark of complete piloting failure. Orbiting against equal sized ships in blaster optimal? Do you not like doing full DPS? Hrett wrote: And of course, the ships need a bit of tweaking, but they are working on that.
Yes, some medium ships are sub-par since they only have one bonus, and one worthless bonus (rep amount, especially when you tack it on a 5 lowslot ship, is just :worthless:).
Yeah. That is the point. You don't do 'full' (or close to theoretical - it was like 65% when I ran the numbers witha thorax with electrons orbiting a shield Naga) DPS inside optimal when orbiting with the shortest ranged weapon system. That means orbiting and/or optimal is crap for blaster ships. I guess you can always just approach, overheat and pray (which I do too) but the lack of transversal from orbiting makes blaster ships survivability is even worse.
I guess when the weapon system that (at least I think) was designed to be used in close orbit doesn't really work that well inside it's its close orbit optimal range - then its not really an 'optimal' range any more is it? Its sub optimal. Tracking still needs a slight buff. |
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
520
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 16:44:00 -
[14] - Quote
Sigras wrote:I began this game in 2007, back then everyone flew blasters with 90% webs, and those ships crushed any fits that tried to do anything different.
Then "need for speed" hit, then the matari guns got buffed; after that only idiots flew blasters; they couldnt get in range, couldnt track when they were in range, took cap and were unable to switch damage types, all of which were remedyed by their minmatar counterparts.
fast forward 3 years or so and blasters receive a buff. extra tracking, extra damage, less cap usage, easier fitting, more agile gallente ships.
Several people claimed that it would not be enough on the forums.
My question to you, where they right?
we've had 8 months to sort out the fits and the new meta game, has the blaster boost been enough?
If not, what would you do to bring blasters up to where they need to be?
Like it or not here's my opinion:
-Blasters were already good at gate/station camping before the buff
-Blasters got OMGFPWN at gates/station camping after buff
-Frigate sized blasters were already good, meds bad and large meh outside docking/jumping range before buff. What do we have now? -OMGFPWN blaster frigates, med sized blasters are still bad except on Proteus because "BONIFACIO" , large ones got usable outside gate/station
What's making them still not my first choice when I undock for solo pvp (live in null)? -because tehre's nothing I do with those I can't do with a shield fitted ship with better engagement options and tanking abilities.
I love my blaster Enyo, just can't get rid of it but then I dock and see my Harpy and suddenly look like a sad panda.
I love Talos, hell such a great ship shield tanked and a pure ganker with an XL-ASB...ho wait, it's supposed to be an armor ship, welp, doesn't matter uses blasters right?
My mega is blastastic!! -when I sit that gate with full bait tank you can be sure I'll always fish something my fellow mates manage to kill, because I'm too slow to ever catch them despite using Null and hitting those trollfaces at 40km Yep I know I'm doing it all wrong, I'm a noob yadyada, throw me tomatoes if that makes you happy . Yes I do love a little better my blasters than a few years ago, no they will not be my first choice just because they can spit high dmg at close range, because my first thinking for solo goes to my survivability and apply decent dmg with engagement options, witch blaster ships are bad at. brb |
advii
Kossu and Keppana Inc.
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 23:29:00 -
[15] - Quote
Blasters are fine. Maybe not as versatile as the other weapon systems but in the right conditions they do their job excellently. Prime example would be wormholes where the engagement pretty much always starts at 0-5km.
Also, I don't think fat armortanked ships were ever meant to be great solo ships. "Hey I have half the max speed of the enemy and have web/scram fited ccp why I not win kite ships?" Different races and fittings have different roles. If you want to successfully solo you better be fast, agile and have atleast 20km range on your guns.
I do agree the supposedly solo-intended, active tank bonused gallente ships are kind of flawed, though. Most of the things you can catch will kill you if you go toe-to-toe, and most of the stuff you could kill, you can't catch. A slight buff to their velocity, agility or possibly scan resolution would be ok in my book. Also, if you're ever caught by a superior force, which is likely to happen, you have no GTFO ability unless you get lucky with ECM drones. They can still be good (and fun!) if you're lets say 1v2 or 1v3 and they think they can kill you with smaller short ranged ships. You maybe end up killing a couple or all of them before you explode.
I'm sure I fail to see this from all perspectives so feel free to discuss.
TL;DR: Armor tank+blasters = often bad for solo, excellent if you have fast/long range tackle in fleet or if you ever plan to PvP in WH space.
In other news: Buff the Legion. Thing is essentially a Zealot with more EHP, unless you go HAMs (needs more grid/extra low!)
/incredibly incoherent post |
Jack Miton
Bite Me inc Exhale.
382
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 02:44:00 -
[16] - Quote
Blasters were good before the changes and are even better now. Not much more to say...
|
Cpt Branko
Zawa's Fan Club
25
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 11:24:00 -
[17] - Quote
Cpt Branko wrote: This is the hallmark of complete piloting failure.
Hrett wrote: Yeah. That is the point. You don't do 'full' (or close to theoretical - it was like 65% when I ran the numbers witha thorax with electrons orbiting a shield Naga) DPS inside optimal when orbiting
I rest my case.
Hrett wrote: Tracking still needs a slight buff.
No, it does not.
Various blasterboats do need fixes to be better then now, and to make rail configurations make sense, but what it certainly does not need is a tracking buff. People which cannot fly their ships deserve no buffs. |
Tara Read
The Generic Pirate Corporation Fusion.
42
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 12:02:00 -
[18] - Quote
Sigras wrote:I began this game in 2007, back then everyone flew blasters with 90% webs, and those ships crushed any fits that tried to do anything different.
Then "need for speed" hit, then the matari guns got buffed; after that only idiots flew blasters; they couldnt get in range, couldnt track when they were in range, took cap and were unable to switch damage types, all of which were remedyed by their minmatar counterparts.
fast forward 3 years or so and blasters receive a buff. extra tracking, extra damage, less cap usage, easier fitting, more agile gallente ships.
Several people claimed that it would not be enough on the forums.
My question to you, where they right?
we've had 8 months to sort out the fits and the new meta game, has the blaster boost been enough?
If not, what would you do to bring blasters up to where they need to be?
Shield Talos. All I gotta say....
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
715
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 16:07:00 -
[19] - Quote
Cpt Branko wrote: Various blasterboats do need fixes to be better then now, and to make rail configurations make sense, but what it certainly does not need is a tracking buff. People which cannot fly their ships deserve no buffs.
What exactly would you want from rails? Bear in mind that rails already perform as fine as beams - or equally bad, which is essentially the same in this case. 14 |
Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
74
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 16:31:00 -
[20] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Cpt Branko wrote: Various blasterboats do need fixes to be better then now, and to make rail configurations make sense, but what it certainly does not need is a tracking buff. People which cannot fly their ships deserve no buffs.
What exactly would you want from rails? Bear in mind that rails already perform as fine as beams - or equally bad, which is essentially the same in this case. They're entirely too difficult to fit on most setups. |
|
Gibbo3771
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
149
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 16:37:00 -
[21] - Quote
There was never a problem with small blasters (I am looking at you Taranis) but the Med's were a nightmare, struggling to fit a rack of electrons and MAR II's on a brutix without near prefect fitting skills, now you can fit a rack of ions with some mixed electrons with ease.
The null buff was definitely the best thing they have done.
They were "fine" before but now they are more inline, however it is still a bit broke in some places.
A cyclone can achieve 450dps tank, 680dps, can fit a rack of highest tier of AC, the 425 and a set of 3 hams. Where the brutix has to fit a lower tier of guns, to get the same active tank, has no where near the same range, cap stability and damage selection.
But then you can go ahead and bring this back even further and have a look at the atrocity of the prophecy, sure it can fit a massive tank but does very little DPS, cant fit a web to help with zero tracking bonus due to the need of a cap booster, or you fit AC's/blasters and do **** poor DPS anyways.
So are blasters in line now?
Yep but too bad the ships are not and never will be. Everytime you dont like my comments/posts the terrorists win and your a disgrace to your country. |
Cpt Branko
Zawa's Fan Club
25
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 17:32:00 -
[22] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Cpt Branko wrote: Various blasterboats do need fixes to be better then now, and to make rail configurations make sense, but what it certainly does not need is a tracking buff. People which cannot fly their ships deserve no buffs.
What exactly would you want from rails? Bear in mind that rails already perform as fine as beams - or equally bad, which is essentially the same in this case.
For medium rails to be as awesome as medium artillery / HMLs, and not crappy like beams?
Nah, it's just that some ships (mostly various T1 ships) could use a little more fitting, that's all, would help both blaster and rail fits. Plus an actually sensible bonus for the Brutix would be nice. Etc. Nothing major. |
Hrett
Quantum Cats Syndicate
122
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 20:11:00 -
[23] - Quote
Cpt Branko wrote:Cpt Branko wrote: This is the hallmark of complete piloting failure.
Hrett wrote: Yeah. That is the point. You don't do 'full' (or close to theoretical - it was like 65% when I ran the numbers witha thorax with electrons orbiting a shield Naga) DPS inside optimal when orbiting
I rest my case. Hrett wrote: Tracking still needs a slight buff.
No, it does not. Various blasterboats do need fixes to be better then now, and to make rail configurations make sense, but what it certainly does not need is a tracking buff. People which cannot fly their ships deserve no buffs.
So, I am not saying you are wrong - its entirely possible that I have unrealistic expectations - but are you saying that medium electron blasters should have poor tracking against a BC inside their tiny optimal range when orbiting a larger, shield tanked ship? Stated another way - you are saying they are designed to fight in falloff when orbiting? Again - I admit my expectations might be unreasonable so I am trying to learn here. What orbit should I set for a thorax against a BC so I can get the most efficiency out of my guns? Just under optimal (which is what I do)? In falloff? If i am supposed to be fighting in falloff when orbiting, please tell me. Instead of calling me a complete piloting failure, I would love some education here. There is always room to learn, and I would particularly like the opinion of an expert in minmatar ships and weapons because you will have a different perspective.
I'm not trolling here. Please educate me (or if anyone else wants to give me some advice, I'd take that too). Just figure to fight in falloff when orbiting with blasters? |
Cpt Branko
Zawa's Fan Club
25
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 21:22:00 -
[24] - Quote
Very simple. Unless you have a pressing need to try to mitigate damage by increasing transversal, don't orbit.
I mean hypothetically if you orbit someone who is using worse-tracking guns you will suffer less DPS reduction then he will, but in case you have dps/ehp superiority in webrange, don't orbit.
|
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
136
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 21:28:00 -
[25] - Quote
If you really want want to use orbit against a Tier3 BC, just orbit at 2km or so and should have no issues tracking.
Then again as Cpt says, you should only orbit if you need to mitigate incoming DPS and even then it's situational - if you're active tanked and the enemy is buffer tanked, then orbit is your friend. On the other hand, if you're in a buffer ship and fighting an active tanked ship, you want to use keep at range to apply full damage and break them faster, as you have a limited time to kill them before your buffer runs out.
Blasters have no issue tracking ships of the same ship class and if people orbitting frigates could hit frigates with Medium Blasters, then people who actually know how to pilot their ships would smash frigates left, right and center with little difficulty.
Tl;dr: Blasters are in a much better place than they were pre-buff, now they are a completely viable option on the Dominix (Mediums so no damage bonus) and the Myrmidon (no turretdamage bonus). |
Hrett
Quantum Cats Syndicate
122
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:21:00 -
[26] - Quote
Well, thanks for both of your replies. They are helpful. But I am talking about fighting a BC with a cruiser, so there is a need to mitigate DPS. ;).
Im not saying a cruiser should win such a battle against a BC often, im just saying medium electrons should be able to track larger (shield tanked) targets inside their optimal better than they do now. I dont have EFT here, but I think an orbit of 2k puts you into falloff with AM (and it might even with null). Reducing your poor tracking reduced DPS even further, and increasing the dps on you.
I fly almost exclusively armor Gallente, so I rarely have a speed advantage. I note that Branko flies exclusively minimatar, and the times I have run into Suleiman he flys lots of stuff (I fly your arty Cane fit, btw, when haters won't let me bring Gallente to a fleet). I guess the point I am trying to make is that Minmatar ships can mitigate damage by fighting in falloff with their range advantage - it reduces the projectile DPS, but it will still be better than other weapon systems at that range so it reduces incoming dps. Gallante ships have to mitigate damage by orbiting close inside our tiny optimal - otherwise fighting in our falloff not only nerfs our dps, but it puts us in optimal range of other weapon systems at a range they can track us better and it increases their dps. I just think we should track better inside our optimal against a larger target (especially if it's shield tanked), or it's not really 'optimal.'
Again, perhaps my expectations are unrealistic. There is always the old 'approach, overheat and pray' I guess. ;) |
Cpt Branko
Zawa's Fan Club
27
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 00:43:00 -
[27] - Quote
Well, yes. Although I fly Minmatar almost exclusively, I often flew it blaster-style* with plate, using 425s + Hail M, which as you may imagine leads to having horrible tracking for something which fights at 1km. Tracking isn't a problem to solve, as long as you have web+scram and can actually kill your target up close.
The thing is, if you don't have in webrange superiority and just have to orbit, then yes you have some problems with tracking.
Still, if you are fighting vs something with BS guns like the mentioned Naga in a Thorax and it does not have a web and you do, you orbit, or manually pilot to increase transversal, at 1.5km or so which is still in your optimal and he won't be able to hit you well enough, while you will be able to hit him just fine. You have an order of magnitude or more better tracking then something with BS guns has, so you don't need a lot of angular velocity to make him unable to hit effectively.
If you are fighting a regular BC then you are toast, of course. That isn't anything new.
*While you can kite Gallente, you more or less have to either fight Amarr either up close or outside of point range. Same actually applies vs Caldari ships very often. So this is not as crazy as it sounds, at least for Minmatar T1 hulls. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Suicides-R-Us Celsetial Being
93
|
Posted - 2012.07.19 13:53:00 -
[28] - Quote
Blasters are working well on non broken hulls atm however the truth is that almost all t1 combat ships are going to be reworked in the next 6+ months so looking at what we have atm is not a realistic outlook as to how blasters will be working in the near future. What we can do is look at the new Incursus and Atron and speculate how the balance team intends to adjust the rest of the blaster lineup.
I'd speculate more grid for the rax enabling 1600 med blaster fits w/o acr or rcu. I'd also speculate at least 1 more slot (low) going to the Brutix as well as minor increase to base hp values and fitting. |
Katalci
Creative Cookie Procuring Veto Corp
100
|
Posted - 2012.07.20 01:19:00 -
[29] - Quote
Hrett wrote:Instead of calling me a complete piloting failure, I would love some education here. Orbit if you have better relative tracking to your opponent; hit approach or keep at range if you don't. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |