EVE Search - Projectiles

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Projectiles

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cheekie Minmatar	Posted - 2009.05.06 03:45:00 - [1] I did some looking for this topic but have not seen an actual response from dev on what is to become of this. Are they looking into these rubber bands that shoot paper wads? My wife throws rocks for more damage than these and they usually land 2 feet in front of her. CCP you can not see me but if you could you would feel ashamed by my stink eye I am giving you. CCP are you looking into these?
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.06 06:57:00 - [2] Projectile weapons are fine , why should ccp look into these?
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.05.06 07:13:00 - [3] Originally by: Naomi Knight Projectile weapons are fine , why should ccp look into these? Rather a lot of people disagree Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.06 07:21:00 - [4] Originally by: RedSplat Originally by: Naomi Knight Projectile weapons are fine , why should ccp look into these? Rather a lot of people disagree And they are all wrong. If something needs to be changed are the op lasers. Whats wrong with projectile weapons anyway?
Jalif Black Sinisters	Posted - 2009.05.06 07:30:00 - [5] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: RedSplat Originally by: Naomi Knight Projectile weapons are fine , why should ccp look into these? Rather a lot of people disagree And they are all wrong. If something needs to be changed are the op lasers. Whats wrong with projectile weapons anyway? Amarr fanboy detected.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.06 07:34:00 - [6] Originally by: Jalif Amarr fanboy detected. Lol you couldnt be farther on from the truth :P
Lewyrus Jugis Modo Utopia Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.05.06 08:18:00 - [7] For starters: low base damage and fighting in falloff reduces DPS (at opti+falloff you do 37,5% of paper DPS [tracking and sig not included]), falloff don't change with higher tiers (IMO it should change with all guns), arty has abysmal optimal and ammo cap, hiest tier AKs virtually identical with mid tiers...
Shadow Devourer	Posted - 2009.05.06 08:25:00 - [8] Arty is majorly borked. But ACs? I'm not so sure.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.06 08:59:00 - [9] Originally by: Lewyrus For starters: low base damage and fighting in falloff reduces DPS (at opti+falloff you do 37,5% of paper DPS [tracking and sig not included]), falloff don't change with higher tiers (IMO it should change with all guns), arty has abysmal optimal and ammo cap, hiest tier AKs virtually identical with mid tiers... For starters ac still do more dmg at optimal+falloff than blasters do. Nobody forces you to fight at optimal+falloff --> go closer for better dmg. You start from the wrong angle, it is the lower tier guns that doesnt change falloff they should have less falloff. Arties have the same optimal as beas or around that but better falloff. Yeah they have a small clip size thats all what should be changed. 1400mm arty is in the same tier as the 425mm rail or mega beam laser. And look at projectiles pros: no cap use , ac are so easy to fit , can change dmg type to some extend , huge alpha which is much better than dps in most fleet ops and add the matar ships advantages: better speed and agility , lower signiture , much more cap stable with buffer tank , faster lock time , easy to fit If you would be right then there would be more ferox/brutix than hurricanes in pvp. Muninns and hurricanes are awesome with arty fits. Or vaga+ hurricane with ac fits. Nothing is wrong with med projectiles. Large projectiles: tempests are very good in snipe fleets , little module lag and the alpha matters much more than dps. Large ac-s same with large blasters , where do you want to use them anyway?
MalarEnares Decemviri	Posted - 2009.05.06 09:06:00 - [10] Quote: tempests are very good in snipe fleets Haha.
ollobrains Caldari State Inc. People for Organised Peace	Posted - 2009.05.06 09:09:00 - [11] projectiles are fine just orbit in close or use artys
CaperPuts Minmatar Life. Universe. Everything.	Posted - 2009.05.06 09:22:00 - [12] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Lewyrus For starters: low base damage and fighting in falloff reduces DPS (at opti+falloff you do 37,5% of paper DPS [tracking and sig not included]), falloff don't change with higher tiers (IMO it should change with all guns), arty has abysmal optimal and ammo cap, hiest tier AKs virtually identical with mid tiers... For starters ac still do more dmg at optimal+falloff than blasters do. Nobody forces you to fight at optimal+falloff --> go closer for better dmg. You start from the wrong angle, it is the lower tier guns that doesnt change falloff they should have less falloff. Arties have the same optimal as beas or around that but better falloff. Yeah they have a small clip size thats all what should be changed. 1400mm arty is in the same tier as the 425mm rail or mega beam laser. And look at projectiles pros: no cap use , ac are so easy to fit , can change dmg type to some extend , huge alpha which is much better than dps in most fleet ops and add the matar ships advantages: better speed and agility , lower signiture , much more cap stable with buffer tank , faster lock time , easy to fit If you would be right then there would be more ferox/brutix than hurricanes in pvp. Muninns and hurricanes are awesome with arty fits. Or vaga+ hurricane with ac fits. Nothing is wrong with med projectiles. Large projectiles: tempests are very good in snipe fleets , little module lag and the alpha matters much more than dps. Large ac-s same with large blasters , where do you want to use them anyway? First, I'd like to say I'm fine with AC's, but not fine with Artillery. 1. Blasters do more DPS at optimal + Falloff. I don't know what you're talking about. 2. You're absolutely right that projectiles don't use any cap, but Minmatar ships have a lower base cap/recharge so there really is no advantage here. Yeah I suppose if you're drained completely dry you could still keep shooting... but you'll probably be dead anyways. Here's my problem with artillery: There's nothing special about it. It's supposed to be the "Alpha king" yet Tachyons have comparable alpha, but with better range and MUCH better DPS. Artillery gets a lot more Falloff than the other guns, but even fighting a little in falloff hurts alpha quite substantially. It has by far, the worst tracking out of any long range weapon. Worst optimal and effective range (Ties with Mega Beams technically, but I generally fit Tachyons over Beams 90% of the time) Worst DPS by quite a bit. Now let's go back to one of your points: Fleet fights (I do not participate in fleet warfare much anymore) No cap use on artillery? Why does this matter? You generally fit the biggest buffer possible in hopes to survive at least two volleys from the enemy fleet. You are not going to be using much, if any, cap during fleet fights. Now with range, when you have the lowest base optimal and you put a mod or two on that increases optimal... compared to the other ship with say, 20km more, the range gap is going to increase between the two weapon systems. Where does this weapon excel exactly? In fleet fights, a Tempest with 6 1400mm II's does make a good, cheap, alpha ship. But so does the Apocalypse, and it gets a 25% bonus to optimal and can fire out to nearly 250km with no problems. The solution isn't always to nerf other ships and modules. A damage multiplier buff with an increased RoF (Giving it similar/same DPS) and giving it a noticeable alpha difference would be nice. My two cents.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.06 09:35:00 - [13] Blaster does less dmg at ac's optimal+falloff :P No cap use is significant especially when hybrid/laser bs can cap out themselves within minutes just by firing their guns.Where you dont run out are the fights which lasts less than 3 minutes where alpha>> dps. And even in cruiser size no cap use let you use your mwd much more frequently or longer period , which is good. Tachion is overpowered pls dont compare arties to that , compare it to the 425mm rail or mega beam. Most fc-s try to set up warp ins for tempest/mega optimals , so it doesnt matter much if it has lower optimal than the apoc/rokh. And with better speed and more cap for mwd you can escape from bubbles much easier and faster. I wish my rails would have as much alpha as the arties. If ccp decides to boost arties they have to boost rails/ missiles aswell.
Bonny Cloud	Posted - 2009.05.06 10:09:00 - [14] I¦ve come to the conclusion that you have no idea about what you are talking.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.06 10:11:00 - [15] Originally by: Bonny Cloud I¦ve come to the conclusion that you have no idea about what you are talking. Must be because your conclusion is wrong :P
Resalan	Posted - 2009.05.06 11:33:00 - [16] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: RedSplat Originally by: Naomi Knight Projectile weapons are fine , why should ccp look into these? Rather a lot of people disagree And they are all wrong. If something needs to be changed are the op lasers. Whats wrong with projectile weapons anyway? why nerf laser when you can boost projectile and hibrid?
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2009.05.06 11:57:00 - [17] I've seen alliance e-mails asking people NOT to bring Tempests to fleet fights. Arty needs an increase in the dmg multiplier to bring back some alpha after the HP buff. Increase the ROF to keep DPS the same. Change the bonuses on one Minmatar BS to make it the sniper choice. Ab optimal range bonus on the mael for example...
Veryez	Posted - 2009.05.06 12:34:00 - [18] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Bonny Cloud I¦ve come to the conclusion that you have no idea about what you are talking. Must be because your conclusion is wrong :P Actually his conclusion isn't Naomi, yours is. Had you read the thread acking for suggestions, you would have moticed that large projectiles, especially large Artillery, is thought by most to be underpowered and in need of help. Somehow you think you know more than the people who answered in that thread, which is actually rather amazing since you obviously don't use large projectiles. A few years back I thought lasers needed the boost they got when CCP nerfed all ship's EM resistance, then I started using them. They are amazing, their cap use is a minor hinderance at best is today's buffer tanking age, easliy overcome with a cap booster. Sure if you tried to active tank their cap use would be significant, but active tanking in EvE is not nearly as good as buffer tanking after the revelations boosts, and we all know that. No, projectiles and minmatar large ships need a boost, I can fly Minmatar, Caldari and Amarr Battleships and can safely say that minmatar are last on my list. Both the weapons and the ships need a boost, here's what I suggest: 1) All minmatar Battleships lose the ROF bonus. 2) The ROF Bonus gets rolled into large AC and Artillery base stats. 3) New bonuses to replace the ROF bonus: Mael - 10% optimal Tempest - 7.5% tracking Phoon - 10% falloff Vargur - 5% damage - the only ship that gets a raw boost in DPS(and god knows it also needs about 1700 more PG) Panther - 7.5% tracking As far as large projectiles go: 1) Give EMP back it's missing damage (yes take it from the long range ammo) and swap EMP and fusion so that fusion is the highest damage ammo. 2) Bump up the damage on 800's, jumping from 650's to 800's is a much smaller increase in DPS (percentage wise it's around 5% increase in DPS) that any other short ranged gun, 800's need a bit more damage (like a 3% increase (or a total of 8% increase in DPS) thus keeping scaling closer to pulses and/or blasters (15% and 12% increase respectively)) 3) Triple the clip size of ALL artillery (it would still have the smallest clip size, but would be closer). 4) Increase the damage of all Artillery by 20% - while this won't make up for the revelations boosts and rigs, it will go a long way toward helping out. CCP put this on SiSi and let us try it out, no new models, no new annimations, yet NEEDED improvements to the worst line of battleships. You asked for suggestions, please take the time to listen.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.06 13:20:00 - [19] Do you have any idea how absurdly overpowered would be the projectiles with these changes?
fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm	Posted - 2009.05.06 13:23:00 - [20] Edited by: fuxinos on 06/05/2009 13:24:51 Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: RedSplat Originally by: Naomi Knight Projectile weapons are fine , why should ccp look into these? Rather a lot of people disagree And they are all wrong. If something needs to be changed are the op lasers. Whats wrong with projectile weapons anyway? Lasers are the best balanced weapon atm, Blasters/Projectiles should be balanced around them. Your logic to only "nerf, nerf, nerf" is outdated.
lecrotta Minmatar lecrotta Corp	Posted - 2009.05.06 14:33:00 - [21] Forgetting DDD proofing ect and just fitting for general med gang snipe ops. Range vs DPS comparison. The APOC with 3 x HS can lock and hit at 240-249km optimal for 401 turret dps (3707 volley DMG). The ROKH with 3 x MS can lock and hit at 249km optimal for 321 turret dps (1688 volley DMG). The MEGA with 3 x MS can lock and hit at 190-200km optimal for 351 turret dps (1847 volley DMG). The MAEL with 3 x GS can lock and hit at 152km optimal for 380 turret dps (2763 volley DMG). At the MEGAS 190-200km optimal the MAEL gets 167-199 turret DPS. At 210km the MEGA gets 278dps the MAEL gets 110dps. At 220km the MEGA gets 203dps the MAEL gets 72dps. At 230km the MEGA gets 125dps the MAEL gets 42dps. At 240km the MEGA gets 67dps the MAEL gets 23dps. At 249km the APOC gets 366dps the MEGA gets 32dps the MAEL gets 13dps. Obviously the ROKH gets to do its max turret dmg out to 249km. TRACKING Im using stats from standardly fitted ships using T2 long range ammo. TachII's (apoc) 0.00516. T2 RAILS (mega) 0.00490. T2 RAILS (rokh) 0.00301. T2 Arte (mael) 0.00281. PS: The figures i used have the rokh, mael and apoc using 8 guns. For those who are about to fly into the thread with a emoragerant about how difficult it is to fit a apoc with 8 guns: 1. Meh it can be done. 2. Even with 7 guns it gets the same turret DPS as the 7 gun MEGA but with better tracking AND much longer optimal.
ArmyOfMe The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.05.06 14:56:00 - [22] please find another thread to troll naomi
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.05.06 15:14:00 - [23] I have one point to make here, rather than engaging in discussion again about a subject done to death with people that aren't interested in discussion, only pushing an agenda. NO CAP USE IS NOT AN ADVANTAGE WHEN AC'S OR ARTY IS FIT ON MINMATAR BOATS. Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Commander Vic Minmatar Ioncross	Posted - 2009.05.06 16:47:00 - [24] Originally by: RedSplat I have one point to make here, rather than engaging in discussion again about a subject done to death with people that aren't interested in discussion, only pushing an agenda. NO CAP USE IS NOT AN ADVANTAGE WHEN AC'S OR ARTY IS FIT ON MINMATAR BOATS. Yeah, it's sad that the capless guns are only a real advantage when you stick them on Gallente or Amarr ships. If you stop shooting your lasers for 10 seconds will your cap recharge? Projectiles have to stop shooting for 10 seconds to reload, so what's the difference? As for the other 'advantages' of Projectiles & Minmatar Ships... meh. The ships aren't much faster with a few exceptions. Once you get into BC/BS the speed and agility advantage is irrelevant except in a case where that extra few m/s means you get back to the gate with <10% structure instead of popping, of course since you probably have lower EHP than everybody else they would have survived in that case too. The balance issue of projectiles vs all other weapons is present at all sizes, not just large & x-large. The problem is when you're dealing with small & medium turrets the difference is less extreme so when you see smaller numerical differences you assume they're pretty equal. However, on a frigate a difference of 10 DPS on a ship with 4000 EHP is no better than a difference of 100 DPS on a ship with 40000 EHP. Also, keep in mind that there is no module to increase falloff (there is a rig though). Would the Amarr pilots be happy if there was no longer a module to increase optimal? Let's not even discuss the fact that there is a way to decrease falloff with ewar... And why, if there is a skill to reduce cap use on weapons that use no ammo is there not also a skill to reduce ammo use on weapons that use no cap?
jaws104	Posted - 2009.05.06 17:26:00 - [25] Think this kind of highlights the problem --Maelzors with BS V 25% rof bonus arty is still outdamaged by megabeams on a maelstrom. Cue 'but look at your cap' brigade
Muad' Dib Gallente Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2009.05.06 17:44:00 - [26] Originally by: RedSplat I have one point to make here, rather than engaging in discussion again about a subject done to death with people that aren't interested in discussion, only pushing an agenda. NO CAP USE IS NOT AN ADVANTAGE WHEN AC'S OR ARTY IS FIT ON MINMATAR BOATS. It is when you do level 5's ... that pretty much in itself should say how ***ed large projectiles are. --- I smack just for myself. Your signature file is to large. Please note: we do not allow signature files larger than 24000 bytes - Fallout
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2009.05.06 18:07:00 - [27] Originally by: Naomi Knight Do you have any idea how absurdly overpowered would be the projectiles with these changes? Actually, they wouldn't be all that much more powerful than they are now.... and they'd still be significantly less powerful than lasers. I can't decide if that says something about how ****ed over large projectiles (and arty in general) is or how amazingly overpowered lasers are compared to the other weapons platforms. -Liang
arbiter reborn	Posted - 2009.05.06 18:39:00 - [28] actually i love not too have to put a capbooster on my phoon
Pvt Public7 Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.07 03:02:00 - [29] Boost projectiles. --- SWA was here IAC is a loser
Veryez	Posted - 2009.05.07 03:38:00 - [30] Originally by: Naomi Knight Do you have any idea how absurdly overpowered would be the projectiles with these changes? Actually I know exactly how close to being balanced they would be. And If I were revising projectiles I would remove the ROF bonus from ALL minmatar ships, and put it into the weapons. Would that change anything, would it effect balance - not directly. But it would allow minmatar ships to have more useful bonuses. For instance I would add: For dedicated AC boats - 10% falloff per level (note again not change in DPS here, just impacting range) For dedicated Artillery boats - 10% optimal per level (allowing the dropping of a target computer perhaps, but still no change in DPS) For boats that can do either - 7.5% tracking per level (slightly inferior to either above, but fitting with CCP's idea of versatility) For split weapon systems - 5% damage per level (very controversal I know, and it would have to be tested on sisi, but split weapons systems are hurt by needing 2 damage mods to have the same effect as 1 on non-split ships, so it should be looked at - I thought of this for the phoon, but falloff might be better since the ship gets a large amount of DPS from drones) If you flew minmatar, you would quickly realize that they do best when they can 1) control range and/or 2) minimize damage. Cruiser and frigate sized minmatar ships are very good at controling range, thus they are currently balanced and I would think long and hard before changing their stats. The significant nerfs to EW and NOS hurt minmatar battleships ability to mitigate damage, and they never had the speed advantage to dictate range, thus their poorer performance against their peers. I'm not saying that blasters and rails don't need help, but they should get their own thread. Lasers are fine, and since I am against nerfs of any kind, I would rather see projectiles and hybrids brought up. Once you fly ships you begin to see their faults as well as strengths. Minmatar battleships have sub-par damage and sub-par tanking compared to other battleships. The Mael can field a good tank, but in general active tanking battleships are frowned upon in larger groups. The others are meh. Lastly for those at CCP that point to the old arguement of the apoc (etc.) being better than minmatar ships using projectiles if the weapons were boosted, I ask a simple question - Why are you balancing Minmatar Weapons and Ships based on how others would use them? Who really cares? So what if the Abad is a better tempest than a tempest? The result is that the Tempest should get nerfed? Certainly there are other ways to accomplish this. This line of thinking is what lead to every minmatar ship NEEDING a ROF bonus just to be competitive. So in effect you removed one ship bonus from every minmatar ship because you were afraid of how amarr ships would perform using lower cap weapons (minmatar weapons wern't capless until revelations, but they always used the lowest amounts of cap). That line of thinking was ok (at best) while active tanks were better than passive ones, but is almost 3 years behind the times. CCP you have dragged your feet long enough. You asked for balance ideas and got them. Many, many people are tired on minmatar battleships and artillery being second rate. Yes we've all cross trained because we want to be competitive in our ships, but some of us would like to actually fly ships like the Tempest again.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.