Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Wu Lan
Logistical Services
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 03:02:00 -
[1] - Quote
Has anyone else noticed that t2 beam lasers are now more powerful than t2 pulse lasers? was this intended? With the other weapon systems, the short range weapons are still more powerful than the long range ones. |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2478
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 03:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
Compare the tracking.
Yes, it was intended. CCP wanted to do something ~new~. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Wu Lan
Logistical Services
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 03:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
yes, I'm aware that ALL medium turrets had thier tracking reduced and their dps increased. but lasers are the only one where the long range version became more powerful than the short range. (medium rails had tracking reduced even more than medium beams). |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2478
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 03:18:00 -
[4] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3533864#post3533864
CCP Fozzie wrote: Yes it's intended. We thought for a while about whether the deviation from tradition was a problem but concluded that doing it this way will create a much better set of challenges for pilots to solve. The tracking and fitting difficulties of Beams make for good gameplay if and only if you provide a big enough reward for the effort expended overcoming them.
Rails are not impacted as badly by bad tracking because they have extremely long range (especially on bonused ships). They and up doing somewhat less damage than beams, at somewhat more range, and while being somewhat easier to fit. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Wu Lan
Logistical Services
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 03:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
ok. was mainly just wondering if was intended. obviously it was. thanks. |
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
87
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 03:25:00 -
[6] - Quote
So now your choice is between max possible damage or the ability to consistantly apply damage. As well as range. The circumstances to apply the full damage of the medium beam are pretty narrow. |
Vrenth
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
35
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 16:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote:So now your choice is between max possible damage or the ability to consistantly apply damage. As well as range. The circumstances to apply the full damage of the medium beam are pretty narrow.
I look at these changes as a godsend. Now we can have long range without our dps being hit by using scorch. The tracking on beams is still decent enough due to their medium sig factor. They won't be useful in brawling range unless you have dual webs on something, but if your in brawling range with beams you did something wrong. |
Plastic Psycho
Necro-Economics
390
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 16:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
This has set my main a quandry... He's been starting to play with energy turrets, and hasn't figured out if he wants to brawl or snipe. This is going to force his hand to one camp or the other; no more muddling-about in the middle ground. |
Yabba Addict
The Lost Minmatar Legion LEX LEGIONEM
72
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 18:53:00 -
[9] - Quote
I like it, this should give fleet doctrines a decent kick in the rear.
Plus it also has rl instances as well, sniper rifles are massivley more powerful than handguns |
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
898
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 18:57:00 -
[10] - Quote
Beams are a special case.
-Rails have vastly more range than blasters, as do HMLs compared to HAMs
-Artillery has more alpha than autos
-Beams have the lowest range of long-range weapon systems and pulses have the longest. This creates a lot of overlap which doesn't exist in other weapon systems, which is why beams always did more damage than other long-range weapons.
Beams are now actually better in their primary range just like rails are better in their primary range than blasters, and artillery is better at its primary range than autos. |
|
Vrenth
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
35
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 19:21:00 -
[11] - Quote
Kahega Amielden wrote:Beams are a special case.
-Rails have vastly more range than blasters, as do HMLs compared to HAMs
-Artillery has more alpha than autos
-Beams have the lowest range of long-range weapon systems and pulses have the longest. This creates a lot of overlap which doesn't exist in other weapon systems, which is why beams always did more damage than other long-range weapons.
Beams are now actually better in their primary range just like rails are better in their primary range than blasters, and artillery is better at its primary range than autos.
Now if they only made this true for battleship weapons. I want my large failguns to deal 1100 dps. |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
461
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 19:28:00 -
[12] - Quote
Yabba Addict wrote:I like it, this should give fleet doctrines a decent kick in the rear.
Plus it also has rl instances as well, sniper rifles are massivley more powerful than handguns
You know I never understood why that was the case. Surely the energy in the bullet is dependent on the explosive charge that launches it, not the barrel or anything else. The accuracy I can understand being dependent on that. |
Murk Paradox
Red Tsunami The Cursed Few
462
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 19:29:00 -
[13] - Quote
My navy omen thanks you.
(Alternatively, my beam zealot is insane!) "But my favourite visual experience in Eve was a pipebombing run on a digital projector. Sure, the aliasing can never match the perfection of a 2160p image - but you can't beat a five metre space volcano on your wall." - Lord Maldoror(RnK)
|
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
60
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 20:12:00 -
[14] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Yabba Addict wrote:I like it, this should give fleet doctrines a decent kick in the rear.
Plus it also has rl instances as well, sniper rifles are massivley more powerful than handguns You know I never understood why that was the case. Surely the energy in the bullet is dependent on the explosive charge that launches it, not the barrel or anything else. The accuracy I can understand being dependent on that.
The swirl of the bullet acts as a kinetic energy upholding force, making it take a more prolonged collision with air to slow it down. It's the same effect that makes a spinning top harder to topple.
This spin is caused by the rifling in the barrel which is more extensive in the long barrel of a rifle, causing a rifle bullet to spin faster and resist the slowing traction of air.
At least this is how I think it works... |
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
149
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 21:05:00 -
[15] - Quote
The Spod wrote:Victoria Sin wrote:Yabba Addict wrote:I like it, this should give fleet doctrines a decent kick in the rear.
Plus it also has rl instances as well, sniper rifles are massivley more powerful than handguns You know I never understood why that was the case. Surely the energy in the bullet is dependent on the explosive charge that launches it, not the barrel or anything else. The accuracy I can understand being dependent on that. The swirl of the bullet acts as a kinetic energy upholding force, making it take a more prolonged traction with air to slow it down. It's the same effect that makes a spinning top harder to topple. This spin is caused by the rifling in the barrel which is more extensive in the long barrel of a rifle, causing a rifle bullet to spin faster and resist the slowing traction of air. At least this is how I think it works...
Round from a sniper bullet is hella bigger (heavier) than a handgun bullet - thus more kinetic energy upon impact.
More explosive force behind the sniper bullet (more gunpowder or propelling charge) also means more velocity vis a vis a handgun bullet - thus more kinetic energy upon impact.
Gun nuts could give a way more detailed answer, but that's what it boils down to.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
359
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 21:05:00 -
[16] - Quote
The Spod wrote:Victoria Sin wrote:Yabba Addict wrote:I like it, this should give fleet doctrines a decent kick in the rear.
Plus it also has rl instances as well, sniper rifles are massivley more powerful than handguns You know I never understood why that was the case. Surely the energy in the bullet is dependent on the explosive charge that launches it, not the barrel or anything else. The accuracy I can understand being dependent on that. The swirl of the bullet acts as a kinetic energy upholding force, making it take a more prolonged traction with air to slow it down. It's the same effect that makes a spinning top harder to topple. This spin is caused by the rifling in the barrel which is more extensive in the long barrel of a rifle, causing a rifle bullet to spin faster and resist the slowing traction of air. At least this is how I think it works... That affects accuracy. What affects velocity is the longer barrel gives the exploding gases longer to push the bullet before it reaches the end and they escape around it. Meaning the bullet leaves the muzzle at a higher velocity. Final velocity being a function of acceleration*time. |
Lelith Hellebron
43
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 23:47:00 -
[17] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Yabba Addict wrote:I like it, this should give fleet doctrines a decent kick in the rear.
Plus it also has rl instances as well, sniper rifles are massivley more powerful than handguns You know I never understood why that was the case. Surely the energy in the bullet is dependent on the explosive charge that launches it, not the barrel or anything else. The accuracy I can understand being dependent on that.
You're more or less correct about the relevance of the properties of rounds, you're just making erroneous assumptions about ballistic weapon classes and their respective calibers. Go look up a .50 caliber bullet (loaded into the ubiquitous .50 cal sniper rifle, and certain very large machine guns), and compare it to the 9mm bullet; a very common handgun caliber.
It should quickly become obvious that what are commonly considered 'sniper rifles' are 'more powerful' because they're designed to chamber and withstand the firing of significantly more robust ammunition.
Alternatively, look up a 30.06 round (a high velocity, high accuracy, low caliber 'sniper' round) and compare it to a .44 magnum hollow point bullet (ammo for a popular handheld revolver). In this case, the handgun round is much more destructive, though the sniper rifle might still be considered more lethal as the nature of the weapon encourages careful (deadly) shot placement.
After a bit of google-fu, I've found that the well-known Desert Eagle handgun seems to be able to match the .50 cal sniper rifle in destructive power, at least at short range, with the .50 Action Express ammunition. Admittedly I didn't do much research, though, so I might be making some erroneous assumptions myself. :p
As a side note, It never ceases to amaze me just how much of the magic of guns and ballistics is contained in the bullet. Guns themselves are little more than glorified human interface devices that merely allow us to suggest what we might like the bullets to do. I am a leaf on the wind... Watch how I soar! |
MeestaPenni
Nova Force
278
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 23:51:00 -
[18] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Surely the energy in the bullet is dependent on the explosive charge that launches it, not the barrel or anything else.
It actually is the barrel. An equal measure of powder with an equally measured bullet will achieve more speed and power in a longer barrel. It's a pressure thingy....a longer barrel builds up a bit more.
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
I am not Prencleeve Grothsmore. |
silens vesica
Corsair Cartel
2019
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 01:05:00 -
[19] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Yabba Addict wrote:I like it, this should give fleet doctrines a decent kick in the rear.
Plus it also has rl instances as well, sniper rifles are massivley more powerful than handguns You know I never understood why that was the case. Surely the energy in the bullet is dependent on the explosive charge that launches it, not the barrel or anything else. The accuracy I can understand being dependent on that. The longer the barrel, the more time to accelerate. Also, rifle cartridge charges are generally much larger than pistol charges - the heavier barrel allows much higher chamber pressures (== greater velocity). Tell someone you love them today, because life is short. But scream it at them in Esperanto, because life is also terrifying and confusing.
Didn't vote? Then you voted for NulBloc |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
784
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 02:50:00 -
[20] - Quote
It works the same way with the theoretical principle of a railgun. The longer the barrel, the more time the magnetic accelerators have to effect the projectile before it's free.
Same thing with a gun. Like others have said, the longer the barrel (of a gas operated weapon, anyway) the more time the build up of explosive pressure that propels the bullet has to effect the projectile. More force applied over more time is more distance.
Now, for a laser, this has nothing whatsoever to do with projectiles. Energy is only really effected by how much of it is put out, in how tight of a beam. So only the focusing element and the power output and cycle time have anything to do with it. Thus, barrels are not a big deal for lasers. (Plasma theory, hilariously, does use barrels since it uses a magnetic field to store ionized gas)
Most military lasers (Raytheon for the win) look like those little sticky lights they sell on TV, but bigger. Just a dome with a focusing element showing. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |