| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Ignatious Mei
    |
Posted - 2008.08.28 18:18:00 -
[91]
Edited by: Ignatious Mei on 28/08/2008 18:18:42
 Originally by: Kunming
Well the thread is mostly about blasters and gallente at close range, 50km and rail guns hardly fit into that catagory.
Anyways blasters should work efficiently at close range as good as pulse work at its medium range. Pulse will work at its optimal and will start missing once you close in, but with blasters its the case that not only do you have a hard time hitting stuff in your optimal range you will miss all the time when the target is out of the optimal range!
True, the thread is about blasters. I was trying to offer a alternative to blasters since they are getting nerfed. After the patch hits I think you will see a LOT less blaster boats. I myself will be using either a rail mega or a Domi.
|
The Djego
Minmatar
merovinger inc
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 19:32:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
/me cut the 300 m/s thing because it was to long
Why? Because you don't consider that alot of ships will be going slower post patch then pre patch. So 300m/s will generally be less (on some ships the speed changes are extremely large) after patch.
The second thing you don't consider is that in alot of cases being webbed will also mean being warp scrambled (ie, your mwd will not work in webrange). That will decrease the general post patch within-web-range-speed to ALOT less then post patch.
With that in mind the web nerf is not all that dramatic as some of you like to make people belive.
The only real problem has been the missiles on the test server and they are being looked at naturally. Other then that the changes are great and will make way for more strategical encounters.
Yes ships are slower, but not 3 times slower, leading to increased speed in web Range and make it harder to control Range or avoid Tracking issues.
Also MWDing in web range is to control range(or leave Web Range again), it donŠt realy helps to tank because of the Signature Penalty.
For example a Thorax vs a Rupture the Distance between 3-6km matters alot, since non Large Blasters can be outranged in Web range preaty easy(loosing 40-50% of the Damage to range is mostly a game over condition for the blaster ship). Even on the BS level the higher range disfavours the Blaster in general more than other Weapons giving other ships/weapons a advantage with the weaker Web, if your MWD is dead and you are 8km away from a Gedon, you simply loose the Damage advantage while the Gedon still maintain his Range advantage and can start hitting long before the Mega can do so(at least for a acceptalt Damage), on equal Skill levels the Gedon will win(also most ships with superior Range and a at least average Tank).
Deactivation of the MWD also hurts Blaster ships more than other Ships\Weapons simply because of the reason that the Blaster ship have to be in a specific distance to use his DPS. The ship allready donŠt orbit to not reduce his damage. If you are to close you loose damage to tracking, if you are to fare away you loose Damage to range. With the Web changes in a Blaster ship you have to make the decision if you use range to counter Tracking(Damage loose vs Tracking gain) or go close to couter Damage loose of Range(Damage gain vs Tracking loose) that realy makes it kind of unpredictalbe(even if the pilote makes no mistakes till web Range a simple wrong decision of him or a unpredictable move/fitting of the other ship will screw him easy).
Blaster ships donŠt have a superior Tank(if they do so they loose her superior Damage), they donŠt have superior Range all they got is superior Damage(that is not this superior since the EM nerf and the Torp Boost). If they canŠt aplay this superior Damage or can be easy outranged/outtracked in Web Range they simply loosing the point over other ships that can tank better or hit further in the end.
I tested a lot with Lasers to, and have to say I didnŠt have problems, the other ship takes longer to close, and you only have to care about tracking not about range in Web range, by this the decision is easy, keep range as long as possilbe and try to outrange a Target close.
At the missles I can agree, they need some tweeking under the new system.
----
Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Amantus
Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
|
Wardeneo
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 19:44:00 -
[93]
so on the matter that blaster boats are gona suck, what race do you think will kick ass after nano nerf patch???
|
Boz Well
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 19:53:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Wardeneo
so on the matter that blaster boats are gona suck, what race do you think will kick ass after nano nerf patch???
Amarr will continue to be an excellent race overall, and Caldari will also be in good shape unless CCP really makes drastic missile changes.
|
Psiri
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 23:02:00 -
[95]
I think the idea of nerfing nanos is a healthy one, HOWEVER they should have just crippled the snake implants, polycarbons and faction mods and left the ship stats as they are. That way HAC's would still be able to pick their fights to a large exent but their targets would actually be able to fight back for once.
This way nanos would not only become available to more players, due to its vastly reduced costs. But it'd no longer be the sheer invulnerability it is now. Even if someone brings the counters like a minnie recon, large neuts, ECM and warrior II's the nano pilot still has a good chance to get away thanks to how the mechanics in this game work.
As for gallente, now their HACs will be about as useful as Caldari's are today, the Domi will still be a great ship but the Mega certainly looses its place as the classic solopwnmobile. But when looking at the minnies I can't say that I feel sorry for you gallente pilots.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 07:06:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Psiri
I think the idea of nerfing nanos is a healthy one, HOWEVER they should have just crippled the snake implants, polycarbons and faction mods and left the ship stats as they are. That way HAC's would still be able to pick their fights to a large exent but their targets would actually be able to fight back for once.
Nope, youre way off. The reason they nerfed nano across the board is not to kill off the 1 in 10000 HG snaked t2 poly carbed ship. It was to kill off general nanoing of EVERYTHING. CCP did it the right way actually, because the problem was NOT single extreme nano ships breaking eve. The real problem was huge fleets of nano ships that only needed t2 fitting to get enough speed.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] Support Barrage |
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 08:41:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Birkinz on 29/08/2008 08:42:28
Edited by: Birkinz on 29/08/2008 08:41:36
"Ya, it's not that pulse track better, it's simply they have a lot more range. While blasters have to make their way up to the target (this will be tougher post patch) and then fight at close range, it's thus more difficult for them to track their enemy, not simply because of their tracking attribute but mainly because of the range they're trying to fight at. This is compounded by the fact that CCP is nerfing webs, making it much more difficult to track at those close ranges.
If you get up on a pulse, or AC, battleship, don't expect it to do any better. The difference is that the other two races have the option to fight at distance and still deal nice damage (especially Amarr)."
Good Points, but I think the range thing is overdone. I get over 1K dps off just my blasters so killing a cruiser even deep in falloff is not a problem. A HAC maybe more problematic as I have had them tank me now but I would rather have the chance to hit them even if it is not that much and use drones then watch them orbitting at ludicrous speeds.
Presumably a double webbed BC/BS can be hit fine, especially if they only have single web on you? I am not familliar with the Minnie BSs but I didn't think the damage was that amazing in Falloff and Blasters on the mega can hurt even in falloff and defiantely in web range.
Amarr and Caldari always have the range advantage so flying straight at them in a gallent BS isnt the best idea unless you are using ECM drones. Which will still work fine.
Maybe minnie BS will get the boost they need by being able to fit double web and being faster?
|
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 08:59:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 29/08/2008 08:59:48
I'm an optimist.
CCP has been reading the constructive 20-page thread and is going to fix the hole in tracking formula. Do that and blaster-boats tracking woes are gone forever.
Then they're going to implement some tweaks to agility/mass to ensure they don't loose too much speed post patch, or are going to boost the damage output to justify the new closing times to target.
--------------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 09:03:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 29/08/2008 08:59:48
I'm an optimist.
CCP has been reading the constructive 20-page thread and is going to fix the hole in tracking formula. Do that and blaster-boats tracking woes are gone forever.
Then they're going to implement some tweaks to agility/mass to ensure they don't loose too much speed post patch, or are going to boost the damage output to justify the new closing times to target.
What hole?
-----------------------------------------
[Video] Support Barrage |
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 09:06:00 -
[100]
This hole - The tracking formula doesn't take this into account at all.
--------------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 09:07:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Birkinz
Good Points, but I think the range thing is overdone.
The range problem is not just "can Gallente hit at range X?", it's "why should I fly Gallente instead of Amarr?". The simple fact is you shouldn't. The damage gap between blasters (and ACs) and pulse lasers is just too small. Compare the ships:
Megathron, trimark/plate + neutrons/CNAM: 1250 dps @ 5km optimal, 13k falloff
Megathron, trimark/plate + neutrons/Null: 1050 dps @ 10km optimal, 16k falloff
Armageddon, pulse/locus, ANMF: 1170 dps @ 20km optimal, 10km falloff
Armageddon, pulse/locus, Scorch: 1000 dps @ 61km optimal, 10km falloff
So for a staggering 80 dps difference, the Megathron gets 25% of the Armageddon's optimal with high damage ammo, and a pathetic 16% with long-range ammo. Tracking doesn't redeem the Megathron, the Amageddon hits just fine at anything over 10km. And it only gets worse once you consider travel time, at anything over point blank range, the Armageddon will be putting damage on target while the Megathron is still trying to get into range. And once it gets there, few targets are going to survive long enough for the Megathron's small damage advantage to catch up.
The same problem repeats itself across all classes, if you want a close range ship, you go with missiles or lasers. If you want a long range ship, you go with the Caldari railboats. Which Gallente ship do I actually want to fly?
Is it the blaster ships? No, as said above, lasers are far superior in the gank role.
Is it the drone boats? No, except the Dominix. Thanks to the Dominix's ability to use everything from frigate to battleship size weapons, all other drone boats are redundant. The Dominix is just one ship, and it doesn't save an entire race.
Is it the support ships? Maybe. The Ares is the best interceptor, but interceptors are being nerfed to "who cares which one you fly, just pick the one that looks pretty on your suicide run" status alongside interdictors. The Arazu is decent and getting better with the webscram change.
So out of all the Gallente sub-capital ships, we have a staggering three ships that I actually want to see in my fleet: the Arazu, Ares and Dominix.
 |
Kano Sekor
Amarr
The Movement
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 09:12:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
This hole - The tracking formula doesn't take this into account at all.
Plx add the hole that tracking shouldnt be an issue for a fast ship orbitting a near stationary ship, since its turrets whouldnt need to move at all (almost).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 09:26:00 -
[103]
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 29/08/2008 09:28:17
Originally by: Kano Sekor
Originally by: Gabriel Karade
This hole - The tracking formula doesn't take this into account at all.
Plx add the hole that tracking shouldnt be an issue for a fast ship orbitting a near stationary ship, since its turrets whouldnt need to move at all (almost).
This is very true, and likewise a ship rotating on the spot would be able to match a targets orbit.
I imagine the current problem there is (and I'm speculating here) the game models all the turrets as a simple point at the centre of a sphere (the ship), rather than objects on the surface of the sphere. That point can translate along any axis as the sphere does, so that transversal velocities can be modelled, but unlike an object on the surface of the sphere, rotation can't be incorporated.
--------------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 09:36:00 -
[104]
Merin those are good points and I dont disagree, but the thread was about the gallente being usable after the patch. The problems you list are true now as well as post patch.
Its just I believe the mega will still work after the patch because of the option to fit double web.
If the damage gets boosted I will be very pleased but I think it would be even better if they increased the size of the drone bay on the Mega and Hype. I think this is more in keeping with the Gallente style and would be extremely useful.
I would love to be able to fit heavy ECM drones and some damage drones for example even lights. Although I won't complain if blaster damage gets boosted.
|
Torskelrak
Gallente
Captain Y-Wabs Sunday Pirates
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 09:44:00 -
[105]
My 2p's worth here haha
To me Im not really bothered because it isnt the first time somethings been nerfed and it wont be the last, The shifting of power might once again change, maybe for the better, maybe for the worse.
All in all im a gallente pilot and i love a nano ishtar but bring back the days of up close and personal!!
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 09:53:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
The range problem is not just "can Gallente hit at range X?", it's "why should I fly Gallente instead of Amarr?". The simple fact is you shouldn't. The damage gap between blasters (and ACs) and pulse lasers is just too small. Compare the ships:
Megathron, trimark/plate + neutrons/CNAM: 1250 dps @ 5km optimal, 13k falloff
Megathron, trimark/plate + neutrons/Null: 1050 dps @ 10km optimal, 16k falloff
Armageddon, pulse/locus, ANMF: 1170 dps @ 20km optimal, 10km falloff
Armageddon, pulse/locus, Scorch: 1000 dps @ 61km optimal, 10km falloff
So for a staggering 80 dps difference, the Megathron gets 25% of the Armageddon's optimal with high damage ammo, and a pathetic 16% with long-range ammo. Tracking doesn't redeem the Megathron, the Amageddon hits just fine at anything over 10km. And it only gets worse once you consider travel time, at anything over point blank range, the Armageddon will be putting damage on target while the Megathron is still trying to get into range. And once it gets there, few targets are going to survive long enough for the Megathron's small damage advantage to catch up.
This - all the Megathron pilots who use Null L, for instance - in order to be able to deliver damage without having to be on top of someone - would be better off using AN Multifrequency on a Armageddon up to 20km (or Scorch outside 20km). The only place where a Megathron has any sort of advantage is from 6km or closer, making a Mega inferior in all cases where it doesn't straight out land on top of a single target - and that's right now, on TQ.
Minmatar BS don't even have a sweet spot to begin with.
De-facto increasing distance (by lowering speeds all around, thanks to the MWD nerf to 500%, which is both not needed and nerfs conventional ships) only makes the existing issue worse, as the Megathron now requires more time to reach its sweet spot - where it will have a 80 DPS advantage.
Web nerf in reality only impacts the solo Megathron pilot attacking smaller ships; which does hurt, but doesn't really kill the ship*. What kills the ship is its performance in attacking other battleships, where it simply cannot make up for its range disadvantage by a very minor damage increase.
A number of Amarr buffs and the Caldari torp buff got us to the point where it simply doesn't make sense (on TQ) to fly a Megathron unless you want a solo BS and even then there are good alternatives. It's totally obsolete for gangs.
*Being able to easily murder everything smaller while flying a battleship thanks to 90% webs was broken - the only argument people have was 'don't get within 13km range if you're in something smaller', which translates to 'if it isn't a BS, nano it'.
Sure, 60% webs might be too weak, but a 75% web would be quite fine imo. You'll still be able to defend and kill that cruiser pilot - short-range HACs might give you some issues.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint |
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:02:00 -
[107]
Are the tanks the same? In the Merin example doesnt the Mega have a lot more armor as it seems to be using Trimarks where the Geddon is using Locus rigs? Doesn't that make a difference?
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:06:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Birkinz
Merin those are good points and I dont disagree, but the thread was about the gallente being usable after the patch. The problems you list are true now as well as post patch.
Yes, now you realize the fundamental truth here: Gallente already suck. The patch is just making this fact even clearer, to the point that even the most dedicated Gallente players can't deny it.
Quote:
Its just I believe the mega will still work after the patch because of the option to fit double web.
A double 60% web is worse than a single 90% web. If the Megathron can't out-perform the Armageddon with the 90% web, how is it going to do better with a weaker web?
Quote:
For me, Amarr and Caldari should be better in fleet/gang situations and I think the Minnie BSs will be better post patch too due to being faster, fitting some missiles and being able to put on double webs.
Minmatar battleships are in the same situation. The only differnce is they have less range AND less dps. That speed advantage is only really going to be useful for fighting Gallente ships, just to add insult to injury.
Quote:
Edit: looking again at your post, perhaps they should just boost Null? Slightly shorter range but more damage then scorch?
Honestly, I have no idea. Blasters are just so fundamentally broken right now, I doubt it's that simple a fix.
Quote:
Edit: Merin, what will you do about AB cruisers in the Geddon?
Blow them up at 60km, and put 5x Ogre IIs on them if they get close. AB cruisers are nowhere near fast enough to out-track an Armageddon at the range it's supposed to fight at.
And besides, that's what anti-support ships are for, to protect the battleships from things like that.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:07:00 -
[109]
Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 29/08/2008 10:08:11
Originally by: Birkinz
Are the tanks the same? In the Merin example doesnt the Mega have a lot more armor as it seems to be using Trimarks where the Geddon is using Locus rigs? Doesn't that make a difference?
There's somewhat of a tank differnce, about 90k EHP to 60k EHP, due to a combination of rig differences and comparing a tier 1 ship to a tier 2 ship (the tier difference is why I didn't compare it to the Abbadon, that's just overkill). But since offense is fundamentally better than defense, it's a trade I'm more than willing to make. The Mega will burn all of that armor advantage just trying to get into range, so it's not really too helpful.
|
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:12:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
The range problem is not just "can Gallente hit at range X?", it's "why should I fly Gallente instead of Amarr?". The simple fact is you shouldn't. The damage gap between blasters (and ACs) and pulse lasers is just too small. Compare the ships:
Megathron, trimark/plate + neutrons/CNAM: 1250 dps @ 5km optimal, 13k falloff
Megathron, trimark/plate + neutrons/Null: 1050 dps @ 10km optimal, 16k falloff
Armageddon, pulse/locus, ANMF: 1170 dps @ 20km optimal, 10km falloff
Armageddon, pulse/locus, Scorch: 1000 dps @ 61km optimal, 10km falloff
So for a staggering 80 dps difference, the Megathron gets 25% of the Armageddon's optimal with high damage ammo, and a pathetic 16% with long-range ammo. Tracking doesn't redeem the Megathron, the Amageddon hits just fine at anything over 10km. And it only gets worse once you consider travel time, at anything over point blank range, the Armageddon will be putting damage on target while the Megathron is still trying to get into range. And once it gets there, few targets are going to survive long enough for the Megathron's small damage advantage to catch up.
This - all the Megathron pilots who use Null L, for instance - in order to be able to deliver damage without having to be on top of someone - would be better off using AN Multifrequency on a Armageddon up to 20km (or Scorch outside 20km). The only place where a Megathron has any sort of advantage is from 6km or closer, making a Mega inferior in all cases where it doesn't straight out land on top of a single target - and that's right now, on TQ.
Minmatar BS don't even have a sweet spot to begin with.
De-facto increasing distance (by lowering speeds all around, thanks to the MWD nerf to 500%, which is both not needed and nerfs conventional ships) only makes the existing issue worse, as the Megathron now requires more time to reach its sweet spot - where it will have a 80 DPS advantage.
Web nerf in reality only impacts the solo Megathron pilot attacking smaller ships; which does hurt, but doesn't really kill the ship*. What kills the ship is its performance in attacking other battleships, where it simply cannot make up for its range disadvantage by a very minor damage increase.
A number of Amarr buffs and the Caldari torp buff got us to the point where it simply doesn't make sense (on TQ) to fly a Megathron unless you want a solo BS and even then there are good alternatives. It's totally obsolete for gangs.
*Being able to easily murder everything smaller while flying a battleship thanks to 90% webs was broken - the only argument people have was 'don't get within 13km range if you're in something smaller', which translates to 'if it isn't a BS, nano it'.
Sure, 60% webs might be too weak, but a 75% web would be quite fine imo. You'll still be able to defend and kill that cruiser pilot - short-range HACs might give you some issues.
Well they are still using 60% on multiplicity, not sure if that is now a 'hard' number for webs or if that's flexible for change.
I would still like to see them playing around with the tracking formula, the ideas in the blaster thread for modifying sig radius would have overall meant a big increase in hitting Battleships up close (virtually 100% hits as it should be - you're attacking a km-sized target), a bit of decrease in damage to cruisers up close compared to TQ, but not the Sisi cruiser invulnerability (you're still firing at an aircraft carrier sized target afterall), and virtually no damage to frigates unless multi-webbed and multi-painted.
--------------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
|
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:16:00 -
[111]
"A double 60% web is worse than a single 90% web. If the Megathron can't out-perform the Armageddon with the 90% web, how is it going to do better with a weaker web?"
I meant against smaller ships. Your fits rely on Ogre IIS which make them vulnerable to ECM fits on a 1V1. You may not fight in these situations but I do making the mega a better choice as long as I can kill cruisers with double webs or a web + tracking enhancer. If it turns out that I cant well then that will be an issue.
That EHP difference is pretty big merin, 60K to 90K is much bigger then the difference in damage at range.
In a gang the Geddon out performs, but I would argue the mega is better since it can have the big tank and the damage as well as selscting damage type. Does it make the geddon obsolete?
|
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:18:00 -
[112]
Edited by: Birkinz on 29/08/2008 10:19:08
"I would still like to see them playing around with the tracking formula, the ideas in the blaster thread for modifying sig radius would have overall meant a big increase in hitting Battleships up close (virtually 100% hits as it should be - you're attacking a km-sized target), a bit of decrease in damage to cruisers up close compared to TQ, but not the Sisi cruiser invulnerability (you're still firing at an aircraft carrier sized target afterall), and virtually no damage to frigates unless multi-webbed and multi-painted."
I would like to see this happen. It sounds right.
|
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:22:00 -
[113]
Allso Merin, on your geddon do you have a speed mod or a cap booster, I am assuming speed mod due to the rigs?
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:39:00 -
[114]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 29/08/2008 10:39:53
A trimarked geddon outperforms it. EHP is roughly the same, it has a serious damage at range advantage (and range advantage in general) and is only disadvantaged in the 6km bracket damage-wise.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint |
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:40:00 -
[115]
Edited by: Birkinz on 29/08/2008 10:40:35
Fair enough, I thought that does it have cap problems? or do you go for a cap booster instead of a speed mod? or is it fine? I dont fly geddons so I am not sure.
|
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 10:45:00 -
[116]
I seem to be having trouble fitting the geddon due to CPU shortage? Any advice?
|
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 11:06:00 -
[117]
Edited by: Birkinz on 29/08/2008 11:06:49
With a co-pro in 1 of the lows I can fit a nice set up on the geddon. And I see what people mean about the range.
The only advantage seems to be if you can leverage the extra mid with a web or a tracking enhancer etc. Not sure if I would like the Geddon solo post patch though.
Wouldn't fly one in a bigger gang, but then that was always the case.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 11:12:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: Birkinz
Good Points, but I think the range thing is overdone.
The range problem is not just "can Gallente hit at range X?", it's "why should I fly Gallente instead of Amarr?". The simple fact is you shouldn't. The damage gap between blasters (and ACs) and pulse lasers is just too small. Compare the ships:
Megathron, trimark/plate + neutrons/CNAM: 1250 dps @ 5km optimal, 13k falloff
Megathron, trimark/plate + neutrons/Null: 1050 dps @ 10km optimal, 16k falloff
Armageddon, pulse/locus, ANMF: 1170 dps @ 20km optimal, 10km falloff
Armageddon, pulse/locus, Scorch: 1000 dps @ 61km optimal, 10km falloff
So for a staggering 80 dps difference, the Megathron gets 25% of the Armageddon's optimal with high damage ammo, and a pathetic 16% with long-range ammo. Tracking doesn't redeem the Megathron, the Amageddon hits just fine at anything over 10km. And it only gets worse once you consider travel time, at anything over point blank range, the Armageddon will be putting damage on target while the Megathron is still trying to get into range. And once it gets there, few targets are going to survive long enough for the Megathron's small damage advantage to catch up.
Are you serious? Your whole comparison is total bogus. Who the heck fits locus rigs on a geddon? Youre trying to shoe horn a ship into something it isnt made for just to prove a point you dont have.
If youre going to compare ships, atleast fit them like people fit them and not eft fantasy fits.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] Support Barrage |
Birkinz
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 11:17:00 -
[119]
Back on topic, did we discuss tracking enhancer in the mid. does this do enough to hit a single webbed AB cruiser? and what about target painters?
|
royal killer
Amarr
The Funkalistic
|
Posted - 2008.08.29 12:49:00 -
[120]
Edited by: royal killer on 29/08/2008 12:50:47
Originally by: El Yatta
Originally by: royal killer
How about just increasing a little bit blaster's optimal and falloff  ? So that way it can at least do any damage while it ''tries'' to get to the target.
If you increase the falloff enough to be workable, they just become ACs with worse damage types, better damage and cap use. It would be either making AC's useless, or making blasters identical.
If you increase the optimal enough to be workable, they just become pulse lasers.
The weapon types, especially at bs level close range, are moderately balanced for range, actually, and have a nice distinctino where each has its own ability to find a "sweet-spot" agains the other.
The problem is tracking, under the new web rules. You have a situation where a one-size smaller ship can out-track a big ship, and get under its guns. This is FINE. However, blasters are an exception. With blasters, the small ships can both /kite/ the blasters, due to their extreme short range, AND out-track them up close, when webbed. This doesn't work for pulses, and thus there's a preferred option. A small ship knows "****ing hell, I need to get under that geddon's guns". On TQ, vs a mega it goes "I dont wanna do that! Stay at range!". On test, it now goes "lol, I can go anywhere I want".
The blaster ship should be kited, the pulse or ranged ship, out-tracked. Thus, blasters need a HUGE tracking boost to rectify this, otherwise they become killable by anything.
Well, I didn't mean no 50 km range with Null L like with Scorch L Maybe like 20 km's tops.
Edit: Even I think that's a little bit too much, but you get my point .
--------------------
|
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |