Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
2044
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 20:28:49 -
[31] - Quote
the alternative is 250km range.
but you're right, i dnt even know if thats OP.
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
701
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 20:41:43 -
[32] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:the alternative is 250km range.
but you're right, i dnt even know if thats OP.
Even if it were 250km, it's still limited by lock range, and if you can lock at that range, you're likely in a Bastioned Marauder with little tank, utility, and/or damage application, so you'd lose a lot... So again, probably wouldn't matter. |
chaosgrimm
Universal Production and Networking Services
167
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 21:05:56 -
[33] - Quote
imma address some smallpoint then skip to the end.
I meant ACs, you can use arty as well if you want. It's a discussion about application. If you want to compare TC's to target painters, it would be more like: TC gives a chance to proc on a particular target. When the proc occurs, all turret boats firing at said target use optimal range damage values regardless of where the target is in falloff for the duration of the cycle.
Joe Risalo wrote: Now, back on the topic of TPs.. Tracking comps increase turret applied dps and/or potential DPS at all ranges and for all turrets. TPs do not support long range engagements, thus they even further support the notion that missiles suck at long range combat.
However, as I have said before, if missile engagement efficiency was increased, the topic of applied damage at range would likely be a non-factor.
Lol now here is the big difference...
Tracking Computers do NOT "increase turret applied dps and/or potential DPS at all ranges" by the same amount at all ranges. Not to mention, they only apply to the ship equipped with said activated TC. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
701
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 22:36:22 -
[34] - Quote
chaosgrimm wrote:imma address some smallpoint then skip to the end. I meant ACs, you can use arty as well if you want. It's a discussion about application. If you want to compare TC's to target painters, it would be more like: TC gives a chance to proc on a particular target. When the proc occurs, all turret boats firing at said target use optimal range damage values regardless of where the target is in falloff for the duration of the cycle. Joe Risalo wrote: Now, back on the topic of TPs.. Tracking comps increase turret applied dps and/or potential DPS at all ranges and for all turrets. TPs do not support long range engagements, thus they even further support the notion that missiles suck at long range combat.
However, as I have said before, if missile engagement efficiency was increased, the topic of applied damage at range would likely be a non-factor.
Lol now here is the big difference... Tracking Computers do NOT "increase turret applied dps and/or potential DPS at all ranges" by the same amount at all ranges. Not to mention, they only apply to the ship equipped with said activated TC.
Here's were i believe you're wrong.
Tracking computer DO in fact increase applied dps and/or potential dps. A tracking comp. with no script will increase both, as it give a bonus to range and tracking..... Increased Tracking = Increased Application Increased Range = increased potential
The better your tracking, the more likely you are to hit the target, and the hard you can hit the target The better your range, the closer your target is to optimal, increasing damage, and possibly allowing you to go to a higher damage ammo.
TPs do work for all ships firing on the target, as opposed to just your ship, but this is where ewar comes into play.
If TCs worked for missiles, the effectiveness of TPs for missiles would be a non-factor. TPs and webs are the only things that can increase missile application on a target. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
3176
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 23:24:59 -
[35] - Quote
There are golems that just sit in one spot like a POS gun instead of moving with their MJD? |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
2045
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 23:25:28 -
[36] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:
If TCs worked for missiles, the effectiveness of TPs for missiles would be a non-factor. TPs and webs are the only things that can increase missile application on a target.
Rigs
just sayin
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
701
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 23:29:53 -
[37] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:There are golems that just sit in one spot like a POS gun instead of moving with their MJD?
Yes, but in conjunction with MJD.. Well, if there's a gate anyway...
I MJD out at a triangulation of the warp gate, then bastion up and Hammer down... Once I've almost got everything clear, I back up my s*** and MJD right next to the gate. keep my missiles going on whatever is left, then hit warp.
If there's another gate in the next room, my MJD is usually out of CD, which means i'm free to use it again.
With Bastion, I never have an "oh sh*+" moment where i need to MJD away... Well, in PVE anyway. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
701
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 23:31:03 -
[38] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
If TCs worked for missiles, the effectiveness of TPs for missiles would be a non-factor. TPs and webs are the only things that can increase missile application on a target.
Rigs just sayin
Yup, got those, but they don't make damage application perfect... Still need at least 1 TP, if not 2. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
701
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 23:32:39 -
[39] - Quote
Hey, speaking of tracking computers... Whatever happened to CCP's idea of allowing these work effect missiles?
Was there too much rage QQ in the thread? |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
2045
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 23:48:49 -
[40] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Hey, speaking of tracking computers... Whatever happened to CCP's idea of allowing these work effect missiles?
Was there too much rage QQ in the thread?
no they broke the game when they tried them on sisi iirc
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
701
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 01:08:46 -
[41] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Hey, speaking of tracking computers... Whatever happened to CCP's idea of allowing these work effect missiles?
Was there too much rage QQ in the thread? no they broke the game when they tried them on sisi iirc
Mind explaining?
Not that it matters, I just like info. |
chaosgrimm
Universal Production and Networking Services
167
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 02:11:45 -
[42] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote: Here's were i believe you're wrong.
Tracking computer DO in fact increase applied dps and/or potential dps. A tracking comp. with no script will increase both, as it give a bonus to range and tracking..... Increased Tracking = Increased Application Increased Range = increased potential
The better your tracking, the more likely you are to hit the target, and the hard you can hit the target The better your range, the closer your target is to optimal, increasing damage, and possibly allowing you to go to a higher damage ammo.
Im not disputing that TCs increased applied damage. TC increase your dps potential. I am disputing your original statement: "Tracking comps increase turret applied dps and/or potential DPS at all ranges and for all turrets."
The difference is that they dont do it in equal amounts like TPs do.
In your OP, you are disliking that TPs are subject to falloff. Concerning TCs, the effect a TC has on falloff as measured as a % increase in dps is less effective at close ranges compared to ranges that are further away.
I am asking why you believe missiles should be an exception and receive the same application increase regardless of range while TPs already have other advantages like effecting more than one ship, and missiles arent subject to things like tracking disruption.
Why should missiles get a free pass on application?
Joe Risalo wrote: TPs do work for all ships firing on the target, as opposed to just your ship, but this is where ewar comes into play.
Right, let's bring ewar into play.... So you are using a module that can impact all ships you are working with to improve their applied damage. You are also using a weapon system that is immune to tracking disruptors. But have a problem that your effective DPS goes down with range, just like every main weapon system in the game? Why should missiles get special treatment?
Joe Risalo wrote: If TCs worked for missiles, the effectiveness of TPs for missiles would be a non-factor. TPs and webs are the only things that can increase missile application on a target.
What about rigors and implants? What about also not being subject to disruption? Rapids?
You seem to want max potential damage at max potential range, while other ships are making tradeoffs between projection, tracking, and dps. Why should missiles be so special that they shouldnt make these trades? TP's already offer certain advantages over TCs |
chaosgrimm
Universal Production and Networking Services
167
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 02:14:49 -
[43] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Daichi Yamato wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:
If TCs worked for missiles, the effectiveness of TPs for missiles would be a non-factor. TPs and webs are the only things that can increase missile application on a target.
Rigs just sayin Yup, got those, but they don't make damage application perfect... Still need at least 1 TP, if not 2.
What ship has perfect application? |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
71
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 02:29:57 -
[44] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:That said i dont particularly care about this one way or the other...
Considering i can get Higher damage at range, with better applied damage at all ranges, which means I don't have to sit around and wait for the ships to come to me, which means faster clear time... Yes, there are Golem's that don't torp...
All skills 5, with 5% range, damage, and application implants
Cruise with 1 T2 damage rig - Precision - 741 dps at max target range Fury - 1037 at max target range
Torp with 2x t2 range rigs Javelin - 870 @ 84km Rage - 1306 @ 46.8km Just for a few giggles check your fit with rigor catalysts instead. As a general the reduced explosion radius does more for damage application especially on the smaller targets than the damage rigs does.
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:There are golems that just sit in one spot like a POS gun instead of moving with their MJD? I know it is heresy but some Golem do not even have MJD. |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
2045
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 03:25:02 -
[45] - Quote
i believe there was a test on one of the test servers. they didnt work.
forgive me it was a while ago
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1755
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 04:22:20 -
[46] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:i believe there was a test on one of the test servers. they didnt work.
forgive me it was a while ago I recall a successful test but the missile crowd pitching a fit at the idea of TD's affecting missiles. Since if TC's affect missiles so should TD's. So they withdrew the idea. |
Skydell
Bad Girl Posse Somethin Awfull Forums
652
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 04:30:59 -
[47] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Note that the way almost everything works in EvE is entirely logical for a fluidic system.
Because, you know, physics and stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drqnvQpct88
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
702
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 04:39:59 -
[48] - Quote
Can't argue with that logic... |
TheMercenaryKing
StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome.
317
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 06:53:39 -
[49] - Quote
Light is a wave, waves lose energy over time and also the laser beam covers more target area over distance like a cone (think like a projector). At some point (90km in this case) it ceases to be effective without changing the system. |
Bob Maths
Aliastra Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 13:03:17 -
[50] - Quote
Readers rely on resolving power. Target painters have a falloff because outside of this range the signals generated (whilst they exist) are not substantial to the background radiation of space in this scenario or due to the inherent problem with the reflection of the beam and subsequent dispersion and lack of resolving beyond this limit. |
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
702
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 13:28:43 -
[51] - Quote
TheMercenaryKing wrote:Light is a wave, waves lose energy over time and also the laser beam covers more target area over distance like a cone (think like a projector). At some point (90km in this case) it ceases to be effective without changing the system.
I think everyone understands the general concept of how light works.. That said, the discussion is about whether or not TPs need to be changed in order to become better balanced with other ewar modules and if said Changes would be too powerful of a buff to missiles. |
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
847
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 15:01:35 -
[52] - Quote
1. All forms of EWar (outside of propulsion jamming) have optimal and falloff. Why the exception for target painters? 2. Longer range missiles tend to apply their damage better than shorter range missiles. As such, they tend to have less need for target painter support. 3. Contrary to popular belief, target painters help turrets apply damage too. Do you really want make battleship guns better able to pop frigates at range? 4. Module balance in EvE tends to be centered more around PvP than PvE. Believe me when I say that longer range target painters would throw PvP balance rather out of whack, especially when coupled with certain Minmatar bonuses.
You're entitled to not like target painters in their current form, but that dislike doesn't justify upsetting the overall balance of things.
-1.
CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking.
Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook.
I want to create content, not become content.
|
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
847
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 15:05:46 -
[53] - Quote
chaosgrimm wrote:What ship has perfect application? A ship firing light missiles against a stationary battleship armed with polarized weapons would have perfect application (no damage lost to motion, size, resists, or random chance).
This is an extreme example I know, but in general ships will almost never have "perfect" application.
CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking.
Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook.
I want to create content, not become content.
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
702
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 16:08:16 -
[54] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote: 4. Module balance in EvE tends to be centered more around PvP than PvE. Believe me when I say that longer range target painters would throw PvP balance rather out of whack, especially when coupled with certain Minmatar bonuses.
This is a good argument to why no... This is this type of comment that I was looking for..
It's difficult to determine the value of a module in comparison to others when the applied effects are completely different.
IE - Jamming vs painting
As it sits, in my eyes, jamming is a much more effective form of ewar than TPs. However, i've never been part of a fleet where TPs were a large part of the fleet doctrine. They've always been a second thought on Bombers, or that ship just happens to have that bonus, so use it.
As far as their effectiveness, It's difficult to determine... |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
121
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 17:50:33 -
[55] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote: 4. Module balance in EvE tends to be centered more around PvP than PvE. Believe me when I say that longer range target painters would throw PvP balance rather out of whack, especially when coupled with certain Minmatar bonuses.
This is a good argument to why no... This is this type of comment that I was looking for.. It's difficult to determine the value of a module in comparison to others when the applied effects are completely different. IE - Jamming vs painting As it sits, in my eyes, jamming is a much more effective form of ewar than TPs. However, i've never been part of a fleet where TPs were a large part of the fleet doctrine. They've always been a second thought on Bombers, or that ship just happens to have that bonus, so use it. As far as their effectiveness, It's difficult to determine...
No its not difficult to determine. you know what they do and how much they do it by. You know the tracking formula for guns and missiles. You will see that outside of web range a TP will improve everyone dps on that ship within a class size or 2 (webs being better as it slows the target which effects tracking and being able to be at a proper range)
A TC or TE only help the ships that have them equipped.
as for range in pve just use links. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
704
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 18:00:51 -
[56] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote: 4. Module balance in EvE tends to be centered more around PvP than PvE. Believe me when I say that longer range target painters would throw PvP balance rather out of whack, especially when coupled with certain Minmatar bonuses.
This is a good argument to why no... This is this type of comment that I was looking for.. It's difficult to determine the value of a module in comparison to others when the applied effects are completely different. IE - Jamming vs painting As it sits, in my eyes, jamming is a much more effective form of ewar than TPs. However, i've never been part of a fleet where TPs were a large part of the fleet doctrine. They've always been a second thought on Bombers, or that ship just happens to have that bonus, so use it. As far as their effectiveness, It's difficult to determine... No its not difficult to determine. you know what they do and how much they do it by. You know the tracking formula for guns and missiles. You will see that outside of web range a TP will improve everyone dps on that ship within a class size or 2 (webs being better as it slows the target which effects tracking and being able to be at a proper range) A TC or TE only help the ships that have them equipped. as for range in pve just use links.
I was referring more to their effectiveness compared to other forms of ewar.
Webs give turrets better applied damage than TPs Scrams can shut off MWDs and lock the target on grid Jams can remove one or more targets from being able to apply damage at all. damps and TDs can have the same general effect as jams (in a different way)
TPs can potential increase applied damage to the targeted ship.
It sounds powerful, on paper, but in fleets I've always seen other ewar to be more preferred. TPs are just thrown in there cause you either have extra slots, or a bonus to TPs.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
123
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 18:26:47 -
[57] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Lady Rift wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote: 4. Module balance in EvE tends to be centered more around PvP than PvE. Believe me when I say that longer range target painters would throw PvP balance rather out of whack, especially when coupled with certain Minmatar bonuses.
This is a good argument to why no... This is this type of comment that I was looking for.. It's difficult to determine the value of a module in comparison to others when the applied effects are completely different. IE - Jamming vs painting As it sits, in my eyes, jamming is a much more effective form of ewar than TPs. However, i've never been part of a fleet where TPs were a large part of the fleet doctrine. They've always been a second thought on Bombers, or that ship just happens to have that bonus, so use it. As far as their effectiveness, It's difficult to determine... No its not difficult to determine. you know what they do and how much they do it by. You know the tracking formula for guns and missiles. You will see that outside of web range a TP will improve everyone dps on that ship within a class size or 2 (webs being better as it slows the target which effects tracking and being able to be at a proper range) A TC or TE only help the ships that have them equipped. as for range in pve just use links. I was referring more to their effectiveness compared to other forms of ewar. Webs give turrets better applied damage than TPs Scrams can shut off MWDs and lock the target on grid Jams can remove one or more targets from being able to apply damage at all. damps and TDs can have the same general effect as jams (in a different way) TPs can potential increase applied damage to the targeted ship. It sounds powerful, on paper, but in fleets I've always seen other ewar to be more preferred. TPs are just thrown in there cause you either have extra slots, or a bonus to TPs.
webs and scrams are short range. jams are unreliable and the larger the gang the less useful they are and like TD's and damps don't stop drones (also missiles for TD's). Damps in a medium sized gang need to be bonused to be at all useful.
Jams and damps need there dedicated ships. TD's are good if you fight turrets if not they are 100% useless.
They have no defensive ability. The t2 that have bonus to them also have bonus to web range which is one of the best ewar.
TP's tend to be harder to fit |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
704
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 19:14:03 -
[58] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Lady Rift wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Bronson Hughes wrote: 4. Module balance in EvE tends to be centered more around PvP than PvE. Believe me when I say that longer range target painters would throw PvP balance rather out of whack, especially when coupled with certain Minmatar bonuses.
This is a good argument to why no... This is this type of comment that I was looking for.. It's difficult to determine the value of a module in comparison to others when the applied effects are completely different. IE - Jamming vs painting As it sits, in my eyes, jamming is a much more effective form of ewar than TPs. However, i've never been part of a fleet where TPs were a large part of the fleet doctrine. They've always been a second thought on Bombers, or that ship just happens to have that bonus, so use it. As far as their effectiveness, It's difficult to determine... No its not difficult to determine. you know what they do and how much they do it by. You know the tracking formula for guns and missiles. You will see that outside of web range a TP will improve everyone dps on that ship within a class size or 2 (webs being better as it slows the target which effects tracking and being able to be at a proper range) A TC or TE only help the ships that have them equipped. as for range in pve just use links. I was referring more to their effectiveness compared to other forms of ewar. Webs give turrets better applied damage than TPs Scrams can shut off MWDs and lock the target on grid Jams can remove one or more targets from being able to apply damage at all. damps and TDs can have the same general effect as jams (in a different way) TPs can potential increase applied damage to the targeted ship. It sounds powerful, on paper, but in fleets I've always seen other ewar to be more preferred. TPs are just thrown in there cause you either have extra slots, or a bonus to TPs. webs and scrams are short range. jams are unreliable and the larger the gang the less useful they are and like TD's and damps don't stop drones (also missiles for TD's). Damps in a medium sized gang need to be bonused to be at all useful. Jams and damps need there dedicated ships. TD's are good if you fight turrets if not they are 100% useless. They have no defensive ability. The t2 that have bonus to them also have bonus to web range which is one of the best ewar. TP's tend to be harder to fit
the fact that you're always going to choose a web over a TP is my general point. There should be thought behind it.
It should be a meaningful choice on why you would choose one over the other. Right now the general consensus is, webs are better. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
123
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 19:18:02 -
[59] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote: Other quotes removed quote limit
the fact that you're always going to choose a web over a TP is my general point. There should be thought behind it.
It should be a meaningful choice on why you would choose one over the other. Right now the general consensus is, webs are better.
webs are better. they are also limited to an optimal of 10km unmodified. where TP's are at 45km and another 90km if your feeling lucky.
|
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces
168
|
Posted - 2014.12.09 19:24:32 -
[60] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:chaosgrimm wrote:What ship has perfect application? A ship firing light missiles against a stationary battleship armed with polarized weapons would have perfect application (no damage lost to motion, size, resists, or random chance). This is an extreme example I know, but in general ships will almost never have "perfect" application.
Missile have a delay in damage so while you can sit 200kms away, good luck sniping someone. Also unlike guns if some thing comes straight at me with guns like 1400s I can kill it fairly easy...missiles dont have that advantage as direction doesn't matter only the size and speed.
They do have their drawbacks and they are huge depending on use
"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |