Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9729
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:24:00 -
[301] - Quote
Deunan Tenephais wrote: If the problem lies with the guns then the ships themselves are not to blame. Perhaps you should rename the thread, indeed.
Chances are the people complaining about them are trying to use these long range guns at short range and getting upset that they are not as effective. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6077
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 06:52:00 -
[302] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Deunan Tenephais wrote: If the problem lies with the guns then the ships themselves are not to blame. Perhaps you should rename the thread, indeed.
Chances are the people complaining about them are trying to use these long range guns at short range and getting upset that they are not as effective. Oh my, that is pretty bad, then.
They could do with learning how to play eve online a bit ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18717
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 07:21:00 -
[303] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:No its an overall comparison. No, it's a niche comparison. It's as invalid as you claim that fleet comparisons are.
Quote:My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships. No, you look at its individual roles in the multitude of situations it can encounter GÇö including fleets GÇö and see how it fares across all of those situations. Individual attributes are meaningless because only come to life in a larger (and very varied) context. Hell, even if that was the way you made an overall comparison, you still fail at making one since you've not once looked at those individual attributes.
Quote:You can't just make things up to make them true So stop doing that. Stop making up irrelevant comparisons that only look at a minute set of characteristics that are, essentially, meaningless on their own. Try to follow at least some semblance of basic principles, such as either admitting that you're comparing a niche case (making the results impossible to generalise) or do full-spectrum comparisons: a full range of fleet sizes; a full range of fleet compositions; a full range of engagement ranges.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: your generalisations are inherently false because you generalise from a very specific and hugely biased single-case sample; your claims are factually incorrect and/or ridiculously cherry-picked and you petulantly refuse to answer simple questions or support those claims; you keep moving the goal posts when you're (consistently and inevitably) proven wrong. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6077
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 09:17:00 -
[304] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:No its an overall comparison. No, it's a niche comparison. It's as invalid as you claim that fleet comparisons are. Quote:My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships. No, you look at its individual roles in the multitude of situations it can encounter GÇö including fleets GÇö and see how it fares across all of those situations. Individual attributes are meaningless because only come to life in a larger (and very varied) context. Hell, even if that was the way you made an overall comparison, you still fail at making one since you've not once looked at those individual attributes. Quote:You can't just make things up to make them true So stop doing that. Stop making up irrelevant comparisons that only look at a minute set of characteristics that are, essentially, meaningless on their own. Try to follow at least some semblance of basic principles, such as either admitting that you're comparing a niche case (making the results impossible to generalise) or do full-spectrum comparisons: a full range of fleet sizes; a full range of fleet compositions; a full range of engagement ranges. I've said it before and I'll say it again: your generalisations are inherently false because you generalise from a very specific and hugely biased single-case sample; your claims are factually incorrect and/or ridiculously cherry-picked and you petulantly refuse to answer simple questions or support those claims; you keep moving the goal posts when you're (consistently and inevitably) proven wrong. Now you've crossed over into dev abuse when your attempt at history revisionism fell flat on its face when it came in contact with reality. History revisionism on general discussion ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1343
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 09:29:00 -
[305] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:No its an overall comparison. No, it's a niche comparison. It's as invalid as you claim that fleet comparisons are. Quote:My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships. No, you look at its individual roles in the multitude of situations it can encounter GÇö including fleets GÇö and see how it fares across all of those situations. Individual attributes are meaningless because only come to life in a larger (and very varied) context. Hell, even if that was the way you made an overall comparison, you still fail at making one since you've not once looked at those individual attributes. Quote:You can't just make things up to make them true So stop doing that. Stop making up irrelevant comparisons that only look at a minute set of characteristics that are, essentially, meaningless on their own. Try to follow at least some semblance of basic principles, such as either admitting that you're comparing a niche case (making the results impossible to generalise) or do full-spectrum comparisons: a full range of fleet sizes; a full range of fleet compositions; a full range of engagement ranges. I've said it before and I'll say it again: your generalisations are inherently false because you generalise from a very specific and hugely biased single-case sample; your claims are factually incorrect and/or ridiculously cherry-picked and you petulantly refuse to answer simple questions or support those claims; you keep moving the goal posts when you're (consistently and inevitably) proven wrong. Now you've crossed over into dev abuse when your attempt at history revisionism fell flat on its face when it came in contact with reality. Different tactic needed Tippia, this ones becoming predictable and boring.
You're post is so full of nonsense its really impossible to address it without an essay sized reply.
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8087
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 09:33:00 -
[306] - Quote
You need to be podded back to 900k sp. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8087
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 09:34:00 -
[307] - Quote
On all your characters. And kept there permanently. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18717
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 09:44:00 -
[308] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Different tactic needed Tippia, this ones becoming predictable and boring. So how about you change it? How about, instead of unfounded and provably false nonsense, you actually rely onGǪ you knowGǪ data? Structured comparisons? Non-biased samples? Reality? Some fundamental rules of generalisability? Something other than special pleading?
I can understand that you get frustrated when your boring and predictable baseless claims get called out for what they are, and when at every point, you fail to produce anything to support your biases. Well, there's a solution to that: stop making biased, baseless claims.
Quote:You're post is so full of nonsense its really impossible to address it without an essay sized reply. More accurately: you have no way of responding to these simple truths so you have to dismiss them outright and hope that people are foolish enough to think that your lack of argument proves anything in your favour. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1343
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 10:05:00 -
[309] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Different tactic needed Tippia, this ones becoming predictable and boring. So how about you change it? How about, instead of unfounded and provably false nonsense, you actually rely onGǪ you knowGǪ data? Structured comparisons? Non-biased samples? Reality? Some fundamental rules of generalisability? Something other than special pleading? I can understand that you get frustrated when your boring and predictable baseless claims get called out for what they are, and when at every point, you fail to produce anything to support your biases. Well, there's a solution to that: stop making biased, baseless claims. Quote:You're post is so full of nonsense its really impossible to address it without an essay sized reply. More accurately: you have no way of responding to these simple truths so you have to dismiss them outright and hope that people are foolish enough to think that your lack of argument proves anything in your favour. Lol I just wanted to say thank you so much for the "dev abuse" comment in the previous post... gave us a laugh.
I will respond to one of your nonsensical points.
In your previous post you stated something along the lines of 'my use of niche scenarios' and that the comparisons I made were not relevant because they were cherry picked etc etc.
They made me grin since I prefer to stay away from scenario's when it comes to discussing this topic. The Rokh thing while a scenario is certainly not niche. In fact jumping into a system and finding a ship at a gate is pretty common place in the EVE I play. However the focus of that example can squarely be placed at the large turret trying to track a small sig target at close range. That's certainly not a niche scenario and apart from missiles is a factor in every fight involving battleships at close range.
As for the cherry picking its a pretty standard method of balancing. Its easy to see patterns if you follow specific attributes from the smallest ship through the range of ships in game up to the largest. Whether its EHP, sig radius, scan resolution, capacitor amount. It therefore makes sense to compare these attributes against these patterns when looking at battleships vs other ships.
Its also useful to look at the attribute patterns at release and attribute patterns now. Review the changes to the ships (BS) in this case and see how those changes affected the different attributes and subsequently the capabilities of the ships.
I look forward to a completely nonsensical reply from you. I'm sure it will be amusing. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8087
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 10:10:00 -
[310] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:They made me grin since I prefer to stay away from scenario's when it comes to discussing this topic. You don't balance ships based on what they look like on paper. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18717
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 10:37:00 -
[311] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Lol I just wanted to say thank you so much for the "dev abuse" comment in the previous post... gave us a laugh. You really shouldn't, since they can be pretty prickly on that point.
Quote:In your previous post you stated something along the lines of 'my use of niche scenarios' and that the comparisons I made were not relevant because they were cherry picked etc etc.
They made me grin since I prefer to stay away from scenario's when it comes to discussing this topic. So why are you using one as your only real (and provably false) argument? It's a niche argument because you've set up a long-range fleet ship against a close-range brawler in a 1v1 with specific rules about how each is allowed to GÇö indeed must GÇö dictate the engagement. This is about as niche as it gets. It tells us nothing about battleships or cruisers or engagements. It only tells us something about this very specific instanceGǪ which you got wrong anyway.
Oh, and I understand that you want to stay away from scenarios since those are actually able to provide some kind of general pattern, if you include enough of them. After all, a scenario takes all the attributes into account and put them into context GÇö something you are loath to do since it kind of hurts your point. As mentioned, you can't compare attribute to attribute because they are meaningless in isolation. They need to be applied to a real (or at least realistic) set of scenarios, with all the environmental and situational and compound effects those scenarios entail.
Quote:As for the cherry picking its a pretty standard method of balancing. GǪbut we're not talking about balancing GÇö we're talking about your arguments and GÇ£dataGÇ¥, and the immensely broad conclusions you draw from that minute data set. You've cherry picked your data to (incorrectly) come to a conclusion you want, and then you make some grand declamation based on this biased sample.
Quote:Its also useful to look at the attribute patterns at release and attribute patterns now. You mean, accepting the fact that battleships in general have been turned into fleet ships? Yes, that would be useful if it weren't for how it would blow your claims out of the waterGǪ which is why you don't want anyone to do this. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1343
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 10:50:00 -
[312] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Lol I just wanted to say thank you so much for the "dev abuse" comment in the previous post... gave us a laugh. You really shouldn't, since they can be pretty prickly on that point. Quote:In your previous post you stated something along the lines of 'my use of niche scenarios' and that the comparisons I made were not relevant because they were cherry picked etc etc.
They made me grin since I prefer to stay away from scenario's when it comes to discussing this topic. So why are you using one as your only real (and provably false) argument? It's a niche argument because you've set up a long-range fleet ship against a close-range brawler in a 1v1 with specific rules about how each is allowed to GÇö indeed must GÇö dictate the engagement. This is about as niche as it gets. It tells us nothing about battleships or cruisers or engagements. It only tells us something about this very specific instanceGǪ which you got wrong anyway. Oh, and I understand that you want to stay away from scenarios since those are actually able to provide some kind of general pattern, if you include enough of them. After all, a scenario takes all the attributes into account and put them into context GÇö something you are loath to do since it kind of hurts your point. As mentioned, you can't compare attribute to attribute because they are meaningless in isolation. They need to be applied to a real (or at least realistic) set of scenarios, with all the environmental and situational and compound effects those scenarios entail. Quote:As for the cherry picking its a pretty standard method of balancing. GǪbut we're not talking about balancing GÇö we're talking about your arguments and GÇ£dataGÇ¥, and the immensely broad conclusions you draw from that minute data set. You've cherry picked your data to (incorrectly) come to a conclusion you want, and then you make some grand declamation based on this biased sample. Quote:Its also useful to look at the attribute patterns at release and attribute patterns now. You mean, accepting the fact that battleships in general have been turned into fleet ships? Yes, that would be useful if it weren't for how it would blow your claims out of the waterGǪ which is why you don't want anyone to do this. *yawn* |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18717
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 10:51:00 -
[313] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:*yawn* Compelling argument and really convincing proof.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1343
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:01:00 -
[314] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:*yawn* Compelling argument and really convincing proof. One could say "likewise".
Please show me any "proof" that the developers of EvE have had the intention or do have the intention to turn BS into fleet only ships as you claim.
Please take care to remember that the developers have recently stated their intention to make ship classes more mutlirole (combat, attack etc) rather than tiered.
One could correctly point out that given the recent changes to Marauders, the active tanking, inability to RR and immobility that they went in the complete opposite direction in respect of fleet role and that Maruader changes were more aimed at small to medium gangs in respect of pvp.
. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8089
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:02:00 -
[315] - Quote
I used to ask myself if someone could actually be this ********, and then my suspicions were confirmed when I learned that a significant number of people believe the Earth is 6,000 years old. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8089
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:06:00 -
[316] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:One could say "likewise". No, they can't. You're just stupid.
Infinity Ziona wrote:Please show me any "proof" that the developers of EvE have had the intention or do have the intention to turn BS into fleet only ships as you claim. He never said that. You're just stupid.
Infinity Ziona wrote:One could correctly point out that given the recent changes to Marauders, the active tanking, inability to RR and immobility that they went in the complete opposite direction in respect of fleet role and that Maruader changes were more aimed at small to medium gangs in respect of pvp. So what? Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1344
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:08:00 -
[317] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:I used to ask myself if someone could actually be this ********, and then my suspicions were confirmed when I learned that a significant number of people believe the Earth is 6,000 years old. Grrr Tippia... amirite? |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8089
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:09:00 -
[318] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:I used to ask myself if someone could actually be this ********, and then my suspicions were confirmed when I learned that a significant number of people believe the Earth is 6,000 years old. Grrr Tippia... amirite? No. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1344
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:10:00 -
[319] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:One could say "likewise". No, they can't. You're just stupid. Infinity Ziona wrote:Please show me any "proof" that the developers of EvE have had the intention or do have the intention to turn BS into fleet only ships as you claim. He never said that. You're just stupid. Infinity Ziona wrote:One could correctly point out that given the recent changes to Marauders, the active tanking, inability to RR and immobility that they went in the complete opposite direction in respect of fleet role and that Maruader changes were more aimed at small to medium gangs in respect of pvp. So what? No One could. No I'm clearly not.
Yeah he did say that. No I'm clearly not.
So what? They're battleships meaning his claim that BS are supposed to be fleet ships is clearly wrong :) |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8089
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:14:00 -
[320] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:No One could. No I'm clearly not.
Yeah he did say that. No I'm clearly not. I don't know where you get your delusions, laser brain.
Infinity Ziona wrote:So what? They're battleships meaning his claim that BS are supposed to be fleet ships is clearly wrong :) Clearly all three being cruisers a Phobos has the same role as a Thorax or a Deimos. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18719
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:21:00 -
[321] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Please show me any "proof" that the developers of EvE have had the intention or do have the intention to turn BS into fleet only ships as you claim. Why would I prove something I didn't claim?
Quote:They're battleships meaning his claim that BS are supposed to be fleet ships is clearly wrong :) No, they're T2 battleships, meaning they have a specific role in mind which is likely to have little to nothing to do with the role of the T1 hull they're based on. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1344
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:23:00 -
[322] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:No One could. No I'm clearly not.
Yeah he did say that. No I'm clearly not. I don't know where you get your delusions, laser brain. Infinity Ziona wrote:So what? They're battleships meaning his claim that BS are supposed to be fleet ships is clearly wrong :) Clearly all three being cruisers a Phobos has the same role as a Thorax or a Deimos. All three could comfortably be used in a fleet... could be RR'd, mobile...
The Marauder, no. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
18719
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:29:00 -
[323] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:All three could comfortably be used in a fleet... could be RR'd, mobile...
The Marauder, no. Sure it can, at least as much GÇö if not more GÇö than the Phobos.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8089
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 11:35:00 -
[324] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:All three could comfortably be used in a fleet... could be RR'd, mobile...
The Marauder, no. You can use a Marauder in a fleet. I might also point out that when projecting a bubble, HICs move much more slowly and they can't be remotely repaired. (They also can't be RR while using scripted point, but they move at their regular speed then.) But don't let facts get in the way. Latest video - Pandemic Legion titan and supers killed |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9730
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 12:03:00 -
[325] - Quote
It would be interesting to hear what infinity thinks the burst was intended for if not for fleet work. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Arduemont
The State of War.
2879
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 12:15:00 -
[326] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: A thread full of blobbers who never used a battleship for pvp in small / solo scenario. As I have stated before, battleships are fine in blobs because other people pick up your slack.
Compare my killboard to yours. Compare the number of solo Battleship kills I have gotten to yours. Compare the number of Battleships I have killed solo, to yours.
Also, compare the number of Battleships I have lost, to yours.
If your argument is that you use them in small gangs (and are good at it), and therefore your opinion is more valid, then you might want to rethink that one. I don't see any 2 vs 10 battles you won on your killboard. "In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." |
Deunan Tenephais
62
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 12:37:00 -
[327] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Deunan Tenephais wrote: If the problem lies with the guns then the ships themselves are not to blame. Perhaps you should rename the thread, indeed.
Chances are the people complaining about them are trying to use these long range guns at short range and getting upset that they are not as effective. If you are talking about me M. Megafleet, then I don't think 40/70 km is short range, even for large long distance turrets. So, the only advantage in going from medium rail to large rail is the shooting distance, really ? It's a little underwhelming... |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9731
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 12:58:00 -
[328] - Quote
Deunan Tenephais wrote:baltec1 wrote:Deunan Tenephais wrote: If the problem lies with the guns then the ships themselves are not to blame. Perhaps you should rename the thread, indeed.
Chances are the people complaining about them are trying to use these long range guns at short range and getting upset that they are not as effective. If you are talking about me M. Megafleet, then I don't think 40/70 km is short range, even for large long distance turrets. So, the only advantage in going from medium rail to large rail is the shooting distance, really ? It's a little underwhelming...
Its strength is in applying good damage at very long range. You are using the wrong weapons for the job at hand. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
logic principle3
Knights-of-Cydonia
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 13:11:00 -
[329] - Quote
Lets put a cruiser or BC against a mach, vindy, geddon, neut fit tempest, or domi. I am also forgetting an apocalypse, and a rail fit megathron or rokh. The first group of ships all have advantages, such as neuts, incredible speed, range projection, drone warfare, and int he case of the tempest, a small sig radius too. The latter group have incredible range projection and in a good fleet can be webbed/neuted to hell, and these ships can apply damage anywhere from 50km-100km.
...And then there are sniper fits. But granted, tier 3 BC's are a good role for that, although with the advent of MJD's that may change.
T3's naturally will dominate BS's, they are meant to. Saying that, when you are questioning missions, the only T3 that really does well against a L4 is the tengu. This is from experience. The legion struggles with sider drones and can end up dead in the water. The loki is ok but you need to mwd fit it, and its sig tank is gone. |
Deunan Tenephais
62
|
Posted - 2014.01.04 13:20:00 -
[330] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Deunan Tenephais wrote:baltec1 wrote:Deunan Tenephais wrote: If the problem lies with the guns then the ships themselves are not to blame. Perhaps you should rename the thread, indeed.
Chances are the people complaining about them are trying to use these long range guns at short range and getting upset that they are not as effective. If you are talking about me M. Megafleet, then I don't think 40/70 km is short range, even for large long distance turrets. So, the only advantage in going from medium rail to large rail is the shooting distance, really ? It's a little underwhelming... Its strength is in applying good damage at very long range. You are using the wrong weapons for the job at hand. And just to know, could you tell me what is the maximum usable range of large blasters ? Knowing that I prepare my heart to sink inside my chest... |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |