| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 71 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Takeshi Yamato
   |
Posted - 2009.03.14 20:54:00 -
[481]
Ac's are downsized. So 800mm AC's would be the equivalent to Ion Blasters.
|
Cohkka
Celestial Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 20:54:00 -
[482]
 Originally by: Goumindong
1. You're just as tackled as anything else
2. So are other ships unless the other gang is megathrons. See "its funny that you're complaining that a weakness of megathrons is that it can get shot by megathrons" if all the enemy ships are laser ships then all the laser ships are just as much in range.
3. You have as strong a buffer tank as anyone else bar a single ship.
1. No. I gave the points, you didn't adress them.
2. I use realistic gangs in mind, with diffrent ship classes and racial weaponsystems.
3. You're talking about the Hype. I was talking about blaster ships in general.
I know it has been said at least a million times in other threads, but you're twisting/avoiding a point as it suits you.
Don't speak english, just F5, F5, F5... |
sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Delinquent Habits
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 20:58:00 -
[483]
Originally by: Goumindong
If you're inside web range then they're inside web range.
If you're not getting shot at then you can minimize trasnversal. If you're getting shot at then you maximizing transversal gives you a lower reduction in DPS than they take shooting at you.
So. If you're being shot at then the reduction in DPS agaisnt you is more than the reduction in DPS against them. If you're not being shot at you have the best ability to reduce transversal and increase DPS.
End result: You're wrong, again.
Firstly blasters operate within web range and as such need to hold ships within that range, the web nerf has reduced that ability.
Also the difference in tracking between BS blasters and BS pulse is not close to being significant enough to make a difference considering the available targets for BS. Along with the fact that transversal is virtually irrelevant in BS gang combat.
FACT: The web nerf effected blaster ships most as they relied on webs and operated in web range the most.
End result: You're a clueless paper tiger who uses useless 1 v 1 statistics that are worthless in gang combat.
Originally by: Goumindong
And what ability do amarr ships have to burn away and warp off?
The fact that they operate way outside point and web range is a huge benefit and gives the gang the ability to disengage a lot more easily than the gang of ships that need to be within 10km of the primary.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
Ig Neus
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 22:29:00 -
[484]
If we are to make a serious discussion on Battleships gang fights, please do not pretend that ANY Battleship using close range weapons (including Pulses with Scorch) has enough distance to be able to escape.
People do not use Battleships to tackle. They use specialized ships that will tackle you, cannot be hit by a Battleship and often operate outside Neut Range (Specialized Interceptors or Gallente Recons). At 0.0 things get even worse since there are bubbles. The whole argument that Blaster ships get tackled more easily is true but the difference is minimal when you factor how slow any Battleship (and especially Buffer Tanked Amarr Battleship) is and how faster are the ships that will tackle it.
There is one valid point against Blasters in this thread :
The damage difference is not enough to compensate for the range difference when you have to move during fight.
As I already said this is mainly due to current form of tanking and Hyperion's problems with it, as well as (imo) to the weakness of Hyperion by itself. We keep comparing 7 Blasters to 8 Lasers.
Nerf Buffer Tanking, buff Hyperion (1 more low and more Powergrid) and all is well.
|
Ad Valorem
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 22:35:00 -
[485]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Ad Valorem
The problems appear to be with tracking since the web nerf but as Marn and others have pointed out there are also range and ammo problems which compound this. AND most people are comparing blasters using the Megathron, a ship with a huge tracking bonus.
Except its not true. The web nerf hurt ships with lower tracking more than it hurt ships with higher. And blasters have the best tracking of any weapon system in the game. Its more or less tied with autocannons. Ironically you mention the Megathron, because the tracking bonus on the Megathron is actually less valuable to it in reducing transversal when needed and increasing it when needed than the second web that the Hyperion can field. This means that of the two available blasterboats the Megathron tracks the worse.
Please, re-read what I wrote and this time try to understand it. You have a bad enough reputation for not taking the salient points on board and spouting your own agenda. I am saying that ts not simply a tracking problm but a combination of many weaknesses in blasters that has made them a second class weapon system.
Do you use blasters? Have you ever flown a blaster battleship? Too many (2) people in this thread are speaking from experience they have with EFT and Sisi. |
Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 23:26:00 -
[486]
Originally by: Ad Valorem
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Ad Valorem
The problems appear to be with tracking since the web nerf but as Marn and others have pointed out there are also range and ammo problems which compound this. AND most people are comparing blasters using the Megathron, a ship with a huge tracking bonus.
Except its not true. The web nerf hurt ships with lower tracking more than it hurt ships with higher. Follwed by more rubbish......
Your reply.
You'll never get him to take any well made and salient points on board.
He's only interested in playing word game and trolling blaster threads.
He doesn't even fly blaster boats.
His reputation proceeds him.
Regards
Mag's |
Captator
Yakuza Corp
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 23:46:00 -
[487]
What are peoples' thoughts on medium and small blasters?
I am not going to speak for larges, as I don't regularly use BS let alone blaster BS, but I am not having any problems with medium (particularly) nor small blasters. In fact, I find that orbiting to lower the target's hitchance (or damage if a missile ship) works quite well, with void M still hitting a cruiser sized target with a transversal between 100-200m/s (depending on if they are moving, and if I have web).
If this is echoed by others, is it almost a simple ratio of speed versus effective range versus effective damage, that is skewed against larger blasters (or rather blaster BS)?
|
Ig Neus
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 23:55:00 -
[488]
Edited by: Ig Neus on 15/03/2009 00:02:22
Small Blasters are great. In fact Gallente have extremely good tech 2 Frigates (Taranis, Iskur).
Medium Blasters are great as well on their own. Other than Rupture and Vexor (Droneship) no other Cruiser even gets close to a Plated Thorax with Medium Electrons for Cruiser gangs.
The problem with Medium Blasters is the ships to put them on, other than the Thorax. Brutix is a nice Battlecruiser but still it is a Tier 1 one. In fact it is the only Tier 1 Battlecruiser that gets used that much since it is comparable with Tier 2 ones but still it does not reach their level. Gallente Tier 2 BC is Myrmidon which is a Droneship so not really a good platform to judge Medium Blasters.
When it comes to HACs Deimos does the most damage and will generally own other HACs at 1v1 (5 medium ECM drones help a lot with that). The problem is that if you are going to get into Blaster range in a HAC, in 90% of cases you could do that in a Battlecruiser, doing more damage, having about the same tank and paying a small fraction of its price. That's why Deimos is considered a bad ship.
Edit :
Quote:
Ig is on the right track re: hype buff or buffer nerf but both solutions would lead to more epic whines, and I can't help feeling its a case of using a sword instead of a scalpel.
I have no problem with epic whines! Go go, add stacking penalties to Trimarks and/or Plates! :P
|
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Blackguard Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.03.14 23:56:00 -
[489]
Originally by: Captator
What are peoples' thoughts on medium and small blasters?
Med blasters are passable, but in most situations you'd be better off with something else *cough*lasers*cough. I don't care for small blasters. That said, I do care about large blasters. :)
-Liang
--
Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
www.kwikdeath.org |
Ad Valorem
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 00:01:00 -
[490]
Small blasters are fine, medium blasters are pretty good too, taking Ig Neus' points into consideration. I think throughout this thread it was stated a few times that the problems are only game breakingly evident on battleships. |
|
|
Fistme
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 02:07:00 -
[491]
Edited by: Fistme on 15/03/2009 02:14:02
Originally by: Captator
What are peoples' thoughts on medium and small blasters?
Small Blasters work almost perfectly. They have the advantage of commonly being strapped to ships that take full advantage of their strengths. Examples would be the taranis, Ishkur, and to a lesser extent the enyo.
Medium Blasters also work great on their t1 hulls, Thorax, vexor, Brutix. The issue is that the t2 hulls available for medium blasters really fall short in many situations. The Deimos may be great 1v1 against another hac with ecm drones but in any kind of reasonable gang combat you're going to die almost instantly. Weak tank coupled with point blank range = you're in serious trouble unless you have ewar support. The Astarte also suffers from some of these same issue. Your taking a ship that generally has 50-60k ehp and a 300-400 dps active tank into an arena in which it's slight speed and agility advantages over a bs mean next to nothing because you will probably be double webbed and eaten.
I think that there are a couple ways to "fix" the Deimos and Astarte. First and formost would be a re-evaluation of their fall off bonus. With a weapon system that is mixed between optimal and falloff I think the bonus needs to be increased to allow the use of null and neutrons to 20km range pre rigs. I think increasing the falloff bonus from 10% to 12.5% or 15% per level could make the Deimos have a fantastic role outside of web range w/o stepping on the toes of the zealot. As for the Astarte more specificly, another low slot could really make this ship shine. Also give the t2 BCs the hp boost that was given to their t1 counterparts!!! A Brutix having more raw hp than it's t2 brother is silly imho.
|
Xela Dioved
Minmatar
Black Panzers
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 03:11:00 -
[492]
Originally by: heslookinatu
Edited by: heslookinatu on 08/03/2009 12:08:46
I have been finding lately that no fleets are wanting the blaster ships, the deimos is next to useless compared to other HAC's, the brutix is outclassed by other BC's, thorax is meh etc.
Is it in my best interest to train for the stabber/vaga/munin or amarr if i am more interested in using guns and high dps?
The vaga and stabber look like very fun ships to fly, pilgrim looks awesome, hurricane looks fun etc.
Thoughts? I am basically looking for a good gun race with decently speedy ships and good solo ships (speedy isn't required but it obviously makes it more fun i currently only fly inties)
This reads like, 'I want to fly Minmatar, but need approval'.
Approved.
Fleet stabber is also a nice ship.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 04:26:00 -
[493]
17 pages and nothing constructive.  Goumindong (what kind of name is that anyway?) trolling as usual. People who have never flown blaster ships (blaster BS in particular) like NightmareX trying to tell blaster pilots how to best fix/use/balance their ships (lol?).
People like Chalsto who have years of experience using blaster ships and blaster based BS in particular are trying to tell you how it really works and everyone insists on arguing with them and telling them that what they know to be true from first hand experience is not.
The QR web change uncovered a crippling deficiency (for blasters, large sized in particular) in the tracking formula, but on top of this is the issue of other weapon systems having the same equivalent performance as blasters or eclipsing them all together in practical application and leaving them with no purpose or role to fill.
Traditionally I'm a blaster pilot, but I've taken it upon myself to experience every race first hand at it's maximum levels for the express purpose of understanding the subtle nuances and differences of fighting with each type. You can't truly understand using a system until you've seen it from both sides.
That being said, the Abaddon, Apoc and Geddon far out perform the Megathron and Hyperion, for both PVP and PVE, regardless of short or long range fits. I compare Amarr to the blaster ships in particular because they're the most similar- armor tanked gun based ships.
The concept of blaster based ships is simple: to do so much peak damage per second that once they're in range they absolutely crush anything they're shooting. Blasters don't need more range, blaster ships don't need any sort of crutch like MWD bonuses or cap bonuses or whatever. They need massive *massive* damage bonuses and more peak damage from blasters themselves and a fixed tracking formula that will allow targets to be tracked up close.
Damage has been reduced multiple times, EHP has been increased multiple times, peak tanks have been increased multiple times and other weapons (lasers in particular) are able to come to within 5-10% of the peak performance of blasters at their native operating ranges. All of these issues have come together to reduce blaster's performance niche to zero.
Compound the above issues with CCP's determination to completely eliminate solo PVP with it's agility changes and so on, and the roles for blaster ships (and blaster BS in particular) have been completely eliminated.
These days I fly a Navy Blasterthron or Kronos when I'm in a gang just because I can't stomach how boring flying an Abaddon or Geddon is to fly. And I won't even get into how much more superior the Abaddon/Paladin is in PVE vs. Gallente ships. A Tach Paladin is just absolutely insane for PVE.
Tl;DR: make blasters more of what they should be: super high DPS, short range, high tracking. Not more of what other stuff is.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 04:48:00 -
[494]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Firstly blasters operate within web range and as such need to hold ships within that range, the web nerf has reduced that ability.
I remember when people said that laser ships sucked because they had to hold people within their range and couldn't. And i remember telling them that that was not the case, the only have to hold the target there long enough to kill it, or do enough damage that it dies before it can leave. Its the same for blaster ships, do not pretend its any different.
Quote:
FACT: The web nerf effected blaster ships most as they relied on webs and operated in web range the most.
The web nerf generally negatively effected larger ships more than smaller ones. It generally negatively effected lower tracking ships more than higher tracking ships. While blaster battleships are indeed larger ships they are not lower tracking ships. You're mistaking a general balance point of "battleships can no longer wtf pwn anything smaller than them inside web range" with a general balance point between lasers and blasters.
Quote:
The fact that they operate way outside point and web range is a huge benefit and gives the gang the ability to disengage a lot more easily than the gang of ships that need to be within 10km of the primary.
distance is time. how long does 45km(Actually its 17km) give you to decide whether or not you need to leave or not? 5 seconds? 10 seconds?
How long does it take you to align and warp out? (12 seconds in an abaddon) How long to jump out when you're sitting at zero on a gate?
Originally by: Ad Valorem
Please, re-read what I wrote and this time try to understand it.
I understood exactly what you were saying, it was just wrong. So i corrected it. Now, do you have an argument as to why I am wrong, or are you going to decry my supposed bias like all the other folks who have no argument except emotion and rhetoric?
Quote:
Too many (2) people in this thread are speaking from experience they have with EFT and Sisi.
So what you're saying is that anecdotal information is what you use instead of reasoned argument in determing which is better?
Quote:
Sorry Goum if I come across as flaming but between you and NightmareX derailing and trolling every thread on blasters I think you need it. You've made your points, leave or post constructively.
I've posted constructively in every thread on this nature, "posting constructively" does not mean "agreeing with the people who i agree with". I am sorry but I will not roll over and die for the three people who wish to see their weapon platform boosted, and instead will use rational examination to come to conclusions.
You're going to have to live with that.
Originally by: Ephemeron
Tempest can fit 2x heavy neuts, with 650s, with a 1600mm plate it would make short work of Hyperion in most cases
Tempest is much more versatile for general PvP than a Hyperion. And what I'm arguing is that this advantage in versatility is clearly more important than a small, 8-16% advantage in raw dps
So what you're saying is that despite your earlier claim the tempest cannot fit the 800mm autocannons as you claimed it could?
The tempest is only as versatile if you refit it, which you have the same ability to do as the Hyperion.
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 04:48:00 -
[495]
Originally by: Cohkka
As you said, you can't have the best of both worlds.
And lasers don't have it. So why do you want hybrids to?
Originally by: Ig Neus
do not have EFT here so I cannot be 100% sure about the Rokh but I am sure that a Maelstrom can fit a really strong active tank with XL Booster and a Cap Injector powering it that can perma run as long as it has Cap Boosters, while fitting its version of neutrons (800mm ACs).
Final numbers and capability matters. The Hyp can fit relatively massive tanks with great DPS while sporting a full tackle. The Maelstrom can fit an impressive tank with decent dps, but all it is is an impressive tank, it provides nothing else.
|
Comrade Bliss
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 06:35:00 -
[496]
This thread is actually quite good if you scroll over nightmare and beans and various other indvidials post and read the stuff more sane people have written....
Looking for a block button like ingame
I have no experience with large blasters but i really would make love to my Electron ecm combo Thorax if i could. Soloing bc's is the most fun iv'e ever had in eve
As a Race i think Gallente is doing awesome they shouldn't have a blaster buff just get pulses in line with the other weapon systems and problem is solved but i can find in my heart to let amarr have some fun as they sucked for quite a few years from what i understand when talking with older players....
Life is a grave...Dig it... |
Raimo
Gallente
Wrath of Fenris
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 08:02:00 -
[497]
Originally by: Fistme
I think that there are a couple ways to "fix" the Deimos and Astarte. First and formost would be a re-evaluation of their fall off bonus. With a weapon system that is mixed between optimal and falloff I think the bonus needs to be increased to allow the use of null and neutrons to 20km range pre rigs. I think increasing the falloff bonus from 10% to 12.5% or 15% per level could make the Deimos have a fantastic role outside of web range w/o stepping on the toes of the zealot. As for the Astarte more specificly, another low slot could really make this ship shine. Also give the t2 BCs the hp boost that was given to their t1 counterparts!!! A Brutix having more raw hp than it's t2 brother is silly imho.
Improving the Falloff bonus of the Deimos is actually not a bad idea. Just give it a 4th mid while you're at it! ;)
---
|
Ad Valorem
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 10:30:00 -
[498]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Ad Valorem
Please, re-read what I wrote and this time try to understand it.
I understood exactly what you were saying, it was just wrong. So i corrected it. Now, do you have an argument as to why I am wrong, or are you going to decry my supposed bias like all the other folks who have no argument except emotion and rhetoric?
No, you didn't understand it at all - I will repeat it one last time. You thought I was talking about tracking by itself and your feeble answer illustrates this. I was talking about a combination of factors,including tracking. I thought it was very clear but perhaps english is not your first language. Your answer cherry picked the tracking statement and even then you failed to disprove it. In answer to your question, again if you reread what I said you will see I specifically mention at least one other poster who provides comments on why you are wrong. In this case I provided a statement you have not disproven, and others have provided evidence which I pointed out, I'm not trawling 17 pages of your garbage to quote it for you.
Quote:
Too many (2) people in this thread are speaking from experience they have with EFT and Sisi.
Originally by: Goumindong
So what you're saying is that anecdotal information is what you use instead of reasoned argument in determing which is better?
Where is your reasoned argument? You have provided absolutely zero of value to this discussion. You have taken what I said and tried to turn it back on me, but you have NO experience and NO evidence to support you point.
Quote:
Sorry Goum if I come across as flaming but between you and NightmareX derailing and trolling every thread on blasters I think you need it. You've made your points, leave or post constructively.
Originally by: Goumindong
I've posted constructively in every thread on this nature, "posting constructively" does not mean "agreeing with the people who i agree with". I am sorry but I will not roll over and die for the three people who wish to see their weapon platform boosted, and instead will use rational examination to come to conclusions.
You're going to have to live with that.
I would rather you did not agree with me, so we can have a constructive discussion, so don't try and twist or take my comments out of context (again). You moaned loudest about getting amarr buffed didn't you? I agreed Amarr needed a buff then. Now you are unwilling to consider balancing another weapon system. No one wants blasters OP, hence I have disagreed with some proposals that would lead to that, but a general rebalancing is definitely warranted.
BTW, words like 'rational examination to come to conclusions' might sound good, but you have NOT done that at all - you don't follow arguments or take anything in context. As I said before you have made your point, you seem incapable of making a coherent argument against others points so either start USING 'rational examination to come to conclusions' or leave. Try it out on TQ. Think about what people are trying to say before you spout your nonsense and display your ignorance.
I've made my point so I'll bow out of this thread. All this is in the interests of balance. |
Fistme
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 10:35:00 -
[499]
Originally by: Raimo
Originally by: Fistme
I think that there are a couple ways to "fix" the Deimos and Astarte. First and formost would be a re-evaluation of their fall off bonus. With a weapon system that is mixed between optimal and falloff I think the bonus needs to be increased to allow the use of null and neutrons to 20km range pre rigs. I think increasing the falloff bonus from 10% to 12.5% or 15% per level could make the Deimos have a fantastic role outside of web range w/o stepping on the toes of the zealot. As for the Astarte more specificly, another low slot could really make this ship shine. Also give the t2 BCs the hp boost that was given to their t1 counterparts!!! A Brutix having more raw hp than it's t2 brother is silly imho.
Improving the Falloff bonus of the Deimos is actually not a bad idea. Just give it a 4th mid while you're at it! ;)
I highly disagree on the 4th mid. A 4th mid on the deimos would make it a faster more agile BC w/o the sacrifice that most Cruisers have to make between mobility and semi cap warfare proof. I think that longer range on t2 blasters ships would give them gang performance beyond the point of suicide. Mobility + small margin of error would make the blaster deimos a fun and productive ship to fly.
What i find as an even more simple solution is to simply increase the falloff bonus on null to allow it to strike at even greater ranges. You could simply remove the optimal bonus and increase the falloff bonus of the ammo by 125-150%. Scaled damage at a reasonable range.
|
Nero Septimus
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:00:00 -
[500]
Edited by: Nero Septimus on 15/03/2009 11:01:53
Get a Pilgrim with Neuts, Tracking disruptors, and Drones. And a passive plate "tank".
Edit: Just realised that you after a gun ship. In that case get a Munnin or a Zealot.
pilrgim would probably own both those ships tho :)
|
|
|
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy
Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:30:00 -
[501]
Edited by: NightmareX on 15/03/2009 11:41:36
Hmmm. I told earlier that it was my last reply, but meh, gonna add this to.
Well yeah.
If you only look at the raw paper DPS for Lasers and Blasters, then yes, Blasters doesn't do many % more DPS than Lasers in web range, that's true.
But why say Lasers are better because of the range advantage they have and because they have almost indentical paper DPS than Blasters?. I wouldn't. Because if you take the armor omni tanks into the picture, the DPS on Blasters will get a bit more than just some few %.
On paper Lasers are better, and they are better because they have more advantages than Blasters have advantageas. But that's until you take the armor omni tanks into the picture.
Then everything turns out a little better for Gallente with Blasters even when they have way shorter range than Lasers. That's how i see it.
I don't get some of the peoples in this topic why they are saying booohooo, Blasters are only do some few % better DPS than Lasers in web range, and it's not worth it today.
You still forget the armor omni tanks. When you take the armor omni tanks into the picture, the raw DPS on Blasters will get around 30% better than Lasers have. And it's because of the damage types the different weapons are doing.
And Amarr BS'es have got a bit more EHP to counter that up. Seems pretty balanced to me.
You cannot change that fact.
Anyone wanna prove me wrong about that ?.
And also, why boost Blasters that are balanced with Autocannons and Missiles?. Boost Blaster and you have to boost Autocannons and Missiles to.
Why not do the easy way of just nerfing Lasers (1 weapon type) instead of boosting 3 weapon types?.
Because there is no reason to boost 3 weapon types to get them in line with Lasers, instead of just nering Lasers a little to get them in line with the 3 other weapon types.
Seems pretty clear to me on what's needed to be done here.
I'm not saying that even when Lasers have the range advantage, it doesn't mean i'm saying they are overpowered or any better than Blasters, Autocannons or Missiles.
EDIT: sophisticatedlimabean, you better not respond to this post. If i see that you respond to my topic with any bull**** here, i will report you. I want someone that can give me good reasons on what i have told here.
I want someone that can prove me wrong for example without having to take my kills from omg bugged Battleclinic and without taking sisi in the replies to me here.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Delinquent Habits
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:37:00 -
[502]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 15/03/2009 11:41:59
Originally by: Goumindong
I remember when people said that laser ships sucked because they had to hold people within their range and couldn't. And i remember telling them that that was not the case, the only have to hold the target there long enough to kill it, or do enough damage that it dies before it can leave. Its the same for blaster ships, do not pretend its any different.
Cos 45km of optimal dmg is what blasters get is it?....stfu.
Originally by: Goumindong
distance is time. how long does 45km(Actually its 17km) give you to decide whether or not you need to leave or not? 5 seconds? 10 seconds?
How long does it take you to align and warp out? (12 seconds in an abaddon)
I suppose you playing with EFT all the time means you do not know that piulots with good range are always going to be aligned...
All you need do is click warp and you are gone, while blaster ships are always in point range if not web range as well.
Go find another thread to troll with you amarr bias.
Originally by: NightmareX
tldr
Proly the same worthless rubbish you have been posting from the start anyway....
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy
Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:43:00 -
[503]
Edited by: NightmareX on 15/03/2009 11:44:40
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: NightmareX
tldr
Proly the same worthless rubbish you have been posting from the start anyway....
Did you read that i wrote under EDIT?.
Answer me now or get reported.
You have 20 mins to answer me on what i have said before i send in a report for just trolling without giving ANY reasons.
12.03 EVE time your time is up. So you better hurry.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
Raimo
Gallente
Wrath of Fenris
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:44:00 -
[504]
Originally by: Fistme
Originally by: Raimo
Originally by: Fistme
I think that there are a couple ways to "fix" the Deimos and Astarte. First and formost would be a re-evaluation of their fall off bonus. With a weapon system that is mixed between optimal and falloff I think the bonus needs to be increased to allow the use of null and neutrons to 20km range pre rigs. I think increasing the falloff bonus from 10% to 12.5% or 15% per level could make the Deimos have a fantastic role outside of web range w/o stepping on the toes of the zealot. As for the Astarte more specificly, another low slot could really make this ship shine. Also give the t2 BCs the hp boost that was given to their t1 counterparts!!! A Brutix having more raw hp than it's t2 brother is silly imho.
Improving the Falloff bonus of the Deimos is actually not a bad idea. Just give it a 4th mid while you're at it! ;)
I highly disagree on the 4th mid. A 4th mid on the deimos would make it a faster more agile BC w/o the sacrifice that most Cruisers have to make between mobility and semi cap warfare proof. I think that longer range on t2 blasters ships would give them gang performance beyond the point of suicide. Mobility + small margin of error would make the blaster deimos a fun and productive ship to fly.
Hmm. The 4th mid would be best used for a shield buffer, not cap boosting FYI. That would be some mean mobility/ gank/ buffer...
---
|
sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Delinquent Habits
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:46:00 -
[505]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 15/03/2009 11:47:24
Originally by: NightmareX
Edited by: NightmareX on 15/03/2009 11:44:40
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: NightmareX
tldr
Proly the same worthless rubbish you have been posting from the start anyway....
Did you read that i wrote under EDIT?.
Answer me now or get reported.
You have 20 mins to answer me on what i have said before i send in a report for just trolling without giving ANY reasons.
12.03 EVE time your time is up. So you better hurry.
You have been Reported for using foul language in the initial post and for constant trolling/threats/harassment.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy
Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:48:00 -
[506]
Edited by: NightmareX on 15/03/2009 11:55:32
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: NightmareX
Edited by: NightmareX on 15/03/2009 11:44:40
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: NightmareX
tldr
Proly the same worthless rubbish you have been posting from the start anyway....
Did you read that i wrote under EDIT?.
Answer me now or get reported.
You have 20 mins to answer me on what i have said before i send in a report for just trolling without giving ANY reasons.
12.03 EVE time your time is up. So you better hurry.
You have been Reported for using foul language in the initial post and for constant trolling/harassment.
Thank you for reporting your self there.
Hahaha, i'll just wait until the forum mods see what i wrote and then what you have written.
Mmmmm, nice one.
Anyways, you have 15 mins to answer me now.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Delinquent Habits
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:50:00 -
[507]
Originally by: NightmareX
troll
Reported for off topic harassment/threats.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy
Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:55:00 -
[508]
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: NightmareX
troll
Reported for off topic harassment/threats.
The post has been reported.
Return to forum
Happy now?.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Delinquent Habits
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:57:00 -
[509]
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 15/03/2009 11:57:32
Originally by: NightmareX
troll
Yawn..reported for harrasment/trolling ect ect.
My views may reflect those of my corp/alliance, but if you wanna know for sure ask em for gods sake. |
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy
Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.03.15 11:59:00 -
[510]
Edited by: NightmareX on 15/03/2009 12:06:42
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 15/03/2009 11:57:32
Originally by: NightmareX
troll
Yawn..reported for harrasment/trolling ect ect.
Where do i troll or do harassment here?: LINK. It was YOU that started to troll now.
Don't you have other things to do than trolling whatever i ask or tell?.
Maybe that's only proving that your very very bitter on me because i asked about something that i have a very good points on and also pointed out some very good facts.
Now, can i get some points, facts, reasons or good explanations on what i asked HERE?.
Remember, i didn't include crying and whining into the questions. Points, facts, reasons or good explanations is NOT with crying and whining included.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 71 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |