EVE Search - SBs buffed- check. Nag updated- check. Blasters reviewed?...

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

SBs buffed- check. Nag updated- check. Blasters reviewed?...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.19 08:13:00 - [1] Now that the Devs have addressed just about every top concern on the short list of things to do (Falcons, Stealth Bombers, the Nag, Agility) how about we take a look at blasters already? Or is everyone just going to keep their collective heads in the and and hope the issue goes away? Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
D'Artagnan Bladerunners KIA Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.19 09:36:00 - [2] How about they look at projectiles first as that issue had by far the most votes and has been ignored.
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.19 10:03:00 - [3] Negative. ___________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008 ^Third Times a Charm^
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.19 10:24:00 - [4] Originally by: D'Artagnan How about they look at projectiles first as that issue had by far the most votes and has been ignored. So the votes were tallied and there is an official count that shows projectiles had the most votes? AWESOME! Where is it? Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Narfas Deteis	Posted - 2009.05.19 10:31:00 - [5] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Now that the Devs have addressed just about every top concern on the short list of things to do (Falcons, Stealth Bombers, the Nag, Agility) how about we take a look at blasters already? Or is everyone just going to keep their collective heads in the and and hope the issue goes away? You should train missiles. They are so awesome.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.19 10:38:00 - [6] Originally by: Narfas Deteis Originally by: Bellum Eternus Now that the Devs have addressed just about every top concern on the short list of things to do (Falcons, Stealth Bombers, the Nag, Agility) how about we take a look at blasters already? Or is everyone just going to keep their collective heads in the and and hope the issue goes away? You should train missiles. They are so awesome. My missile skills are maxed. Spec skills at 4, support skills at 5. I love my missile ships. What is your point? Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Grez Minmatar Core Contingency	Posted - 2009.05.19 10:43:00 - [7] Edited by: Grez on 19/05/2009 10:43:03 I agree, they should buff Amarr. In all seriousness though, give them a tracking boost and be done with it. --- Grez: I shot the sheriff Kalazar: But I could not lock the Deputy BECAUSE OF FALCON
JonnyKay Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.19 11:49:00 - [8] hows about they fix both Projectiles and Blasters? (imho projectiles have been waiting years for a buff though so quit yer whinging)
eliminator2 Gallente Annihilate. Shock Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.19 11:51:00 - [9] Originally by: JonnyKay hows about they fix both Projectiles and Blasters? i agree
Selassie M	Posted - 2009.05.19 12:06:00 - [10] Edited by: Selassie M on 19/05/2009 12:18:27 What's the problem with the most powerful weapon of this game? A blaster ranis blasts almost everything around on 1v1. On the other hand with decent rocket skills, tech II launchers one hits 50 dps @6km on a malediction... They are just decorative. So look at rockets first.

Arcadia1701 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.19 12:14:00 - [11] I cant believe people still think blasters are somehow broken... Blasters are fine, they totaly ** anything when in range.. im afraid there has to be a trade off to haveing the most powerfull weapon in the game - eg - short range. My sig> Post with your main, or don't post at all.** My Skills
Rivqua Caldari Omega Wing R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2009.05.19 12:24:00 - [12] Edited by: Rivqua on 19/05/2009 12:24:37 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Now that the Devs have addressed just about every top concern on the short list of things to do (Falcons, Stealth Bombers, the Nag, Agility) how about we take a look at blasters already? Or is everyone just going to keep their collective heads in the and and hope the issue goes away? From one side, I can see how it would make it more "fun" if blasters tracked better. From the other side, I also see the penalites one would have to give blasters, if one was to buff their performance further. Currently, everyone whines about blasters, but I have not seen a single person make a comprehensive and balanced list of things to change, that while buffing their tracking, would still keep them in check and not overpower them further whitin their current "strong" area. Consider, that when you are asking for a tracking buff, you are (implied) also asking for it to have more fitting difficulties, or alot more cap usage, or less range with null. I belive I grasp the plight of the blaster pilots, but I also think the matter is too complicated for a small post, it would need a pretty comprehensive balance document to work out all the possible side effects. Things to consider: * Damage type vs base resist characteristics. * The monster that is the Rokh, who already has a 38km killzone of blaster death and presumably best tracking at those ranges, with best dps in it's class. * The Megas already boosted tracking, should it be changed, if we buff blasters, to something else? What in that case.... The fact that blasters currently enjoy a full assortment of close range weapons (3 sizes x 3 grades) which already gives the most options in possibility to match range vs dps vs fitting requirements, and the fact that electrons already are extremly easy to fit while doing great dps and track fantastically. The fact that blasters do great damage without ship bonuses, and don't require cap bonused ships, which enables them to be fit on non-gallente boats with great success. How does a buff to blaster tracking factor into the decision making when people chose to outfit their non-gallente ships. I am not saying that I have done all this, although I do have ideas, of course. I am saying, those who feel the most for blaster changes, need to make such a document, if they are to be able to defend their positions, and make good points, so good, that the CSM picks up, and takes them to CCP in their next term even. Before that, all this spamming, and numbers, are maybe not irrelevant, but are loose points of data, without the whole picture taken into consideration. _________________ - Rivqua - --- R.E.P.O. ---
Dave Tehsulei Green Peace.	Posted - 2009.05.19 13:07:00 - [13] What exactly is wrong with blasters? ------- Forum \| Website
D'Artagnan Bladerunners KIA Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.19 13:14:00 - [14] Edited by: D''Artagnan on 19/05/2009 13:14:12 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: D'Artagnan How about they look at projectiles first as that issue had by far the most votes and has been ignored. So the votes were tallied and there is an official count that shows projectiles had the most votes? AWESOME! Where is it? 1. minmatar projectiles (artilleries, autocannons, regardless of size - 102 2. minmatar ships (capitals, bs, recons, and so on) - 93 3. general re-balance of regions (complaints about risk / reward of highsec, lowsec, and 0.0, mostly missions) - 62 4. blasters - 61 5. t2 ammunition (typically short-range, but complaints were about it in general) - 57 6. rockets - 31 7. sov, pos, and the resulting 0.0 warfare - 27 8. non-ECM ewar (typically, boost it) - 27 9. ecm drones specifically - 20 That was the list from the last count in the balancing thread. The projectile/Minnie problem accounts for 195 of those votes vs the 61 for blasters. While this is not an "official" count its still a count and it clearly shows there is a problem with projectiles and Minnie's. Which the community want addressed before blasters.
Tibi Zoners	Posted - 2009.05.19 13:56:00 - [15] Owned. *
Narfas Deteis	Posted - 2009.05.19 13:58:00 - [16] Originally by: D'Artagnan While this is not an "official" count its still a count and it clearly shows there is a problem with projectiles and Minnie's. Which the community want addressed before blasters. Nah, it means Caldari whiners gave up and Minnie took the lead in Whine Race.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.19 14:55:00 - [17] Originally by: Dave Tehsulei What exactly is wrong with blasters? I have the same question to. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Ulstan	Posted - 2009.05.19 15:29:00 - [18] Originally by: JonnyKay hows about they fix both Projectiles and Blasters? (imho projectiles have been waiting years for a buff though so quit yer whinging) I think Rockets are hosed worse than either projectiles or blasters. And being a much more narrowly used weapons system, they would be even easier to fix!
Chi Quan Perkone	Posted - 2009.05.19 19:47:00 - [19] Originally by: D'Artagnan 1. minmatar projectiles (artilleries, autocannons, regardless of size - 102 2. minmatar ships (capitals, bs, recons, and so on) - 93 3. general re-balance of regions (complaints about risk / reward of highsec, lowsec, and 0.0, mostly missions) - 62 4. blasters - 61 5. t2 ammunition (typically short-range, but complaints were about it in general) - 57 6. rockets - 31 7. sov, pos, and the resulting 0.0 warfare - 27 8. non-ECM ewar (typically, boost it) - 27 9. ecm drones specifically - 20 That was the list from the last count in the balancing thread. The projectile/Minnie problem accounts for 195 of those votes vs the 61 for blasters. While this is not an "official" count its still a count and it clearly shows there is a problem with projectiles and Minnie's. Which the community want addressed before blasters. well, it looks like blasters will be fixed before projectiles/minnies, since ccp seemed to start from the bottom up. ---- Ceterum censeo blasters need some tracking love
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.05.19 21:04:00 - [20] Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Dave Tehsulei What exactly is wrong with blasters? I have the same question to. currently the op think that the web nerf made it impossible to hit other ships. And that thier tracking (ignoring transversal I suppose) is not up to par with the other weapons.

Forge Lag	Posted - 2009.05.19 21:31:00 - [21] What would you trade in for better tracking? Is the demand of precise piloting really the biggest issue with blasters? Can it be that blasters just do not have any special redeeming quality any more, not even as gimmicky as the capless property of ACs?
Irida Mershkov Gallente War is Bliss	Posted - 2009.05.19 21:32:00 - [22] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Dave Tehsulei What exactly is wrong with blasters? I have the same question to. currently the op think that the web nerf made it impossible to hit other ships. And that thier tracking (ignoring transversal I suppose) is not up to par with the other weapons. It is closer to the fact that by the time a blaster user has burned up into the fight, the other weapons specifically Pulse Lasers have already dealt not far off the damage of the blaster user, without having to shoot towards the target. Plus our tracking sucks a fat one for such a close range weapon (boost tracking! not range! I like short range!), and that our dps isn't that far off Pulse Lasers once you've started to deliver damage. That's my take on it anyhow.
Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2009.05.19 21:33:00 - [23] Both blasters and autocannons should receive a tracking boost. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.19 22:40:00 - [24] Edited by: NightmareX on 19/05/2009 22:44:49 Originally by: Irida Mershkov Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Dave Tehsulei What exactly is wrong with blasters? I have the same question to. currently the op think that the web nerf made it impossible to hit other ships. And that thier tracking (ignoring transversal I suppose) is not up to par with the other weapons. It is closer to the fact that by the time a blaster user has burned up into the fight, the other weapons specifically Pulse Lasers have already dealt not far off the damage of the blaster user, without having to shoot towards the target. Plus our tracking sucks a fat one for such a close range weapon (boost tracking! not range! I like short range!), and that our dps isn't that far off Pulse Lasers once you've started to deliver damage. That's my take on it anyhow. That's a stupid way to compare Blasters to something. If a Blaster Mega is 60 km from an Abaddon and then starts to MWD towards the Abaddon, then it's the pilot who are stupid for doing that if he get killed long time before the Abaddon even hits 50% armor. It's not the Blasters fault that Lasers have taken butt loads more damages than Blasters would do before the Blaster Mega are in web range. It's all about thinking when you enter a fight. It's about landing on top of the enemies. Ofc it will be something different if you are getting a gang warped on you. But that's how the game is. Personally i have been 50 km from a Geddon in a Blaster Mega. I was already in 70% armor when i started to MWD towards him. But because of the resists to EM and Thermal, i got into the web range on him and i then had like 40% armor left. And guess what?. I managed to kill him while i only had 25% structure left. Simply because he melted pretty fast to me once i was in web range. Yes, it's about taking risks. But then, no risks = no fun. EDIT: Once again. Blasters does NOT need a tracking boost. Because the real problem is in the tracking formula only. Fix that one and then lets see. And also. Is there really any points to have the webs nerfed to 60% if you all want a tracking boost to Blasters?. We are just getting back to where we was before the web nerf then. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Mister Falcon	Posted - 2009.05.19 22:41:00 - [25] Bellum in blaster whine non-shocker
TimMc Gallente Brutal Deliverance	Posted - 2009.05.19 23:18:00 - [26] Meh its not that big of an issue, especially as I just finished training lasers.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.05.20 01:25:00 - [27] Edited by: MotherMoon on 20/05/2009 03:16:32 damn forums ate my post :(
london Gallente Dark-Rising	Posted - 2009.05.20 03:06:00 - [28] Posting in support of Bellum and blasters.
R Mika	Posted - 2009.05.20 03:47:00 - [29] They need to look at all weapons. There are problems across the board.
holyone Gallente Destructive Influence KenZoku	Posted - 2009.05.20 04:10:00 - [30] I'd be happy if Gallente just got a few boats that were very decent Railgun-platforms, as it is at the moment, the Gallente HACs are the worst of the lot (for fleet engagements) due to one being geared for blaster combat, the other for drones.

Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2009.05.20 05:55:00 - [31] Originally by: NightmareX Yes, it's about taking risks. But then, no risks = no fun. I and many others, may take you more seriously, if you didn't tell us about risk free fights on sisi. Regards Mag
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.20 07:12:00 - [32] Blasters are simply without a role right now. If you want to deal DPS, you get a Geddon or Abaddon, even in web range. Armageddon 7x MP II (AN MF/Scorch) 100mn MWD I, Hvy Cap Booster II, Faint Disruptor 1600 RT, N-Type EANM, 2x ANP II, DC II, 3x HS II 3x Trimark I 5x Ogre II ~90K EHP, 855 turret DPS Abaddon 8x MP II (AN MF/Scorch) 100mn MWD I, Hvy Cap Booster II, Disruptor II, Web II 1600 RT, EANM II, N-Type EANM, DC II, 3x HS II 2x Energy Metastasis, Trimark 5x Hammerhead II, 5x Warrior II ~106K EHP, 916 Turret DPS Megathron 7x Neutron II 100mn MWD I, Hvy Cap Booster II, Faint Disruptor, Fleeting Web 2x 1600 RT, EANM II, DC II, 3x MFS II 3x Trimarks 5x Ogre II ~102K EHP, 935 Turret DPS Maelstrom 8x 800mm AC II (RF EMP/Barrage) 100mn MWD I, Hvy Cap Booster II, DG XL, 2x Invuln II, Disruptor II 3x Gyro II, TE II, DC II 3x Ambit I 5x Hammerhead II, 5x Vespa EC-600 ~69K EHP, 805 Turret DPS Now, why bother going through all this? Well, it's simple: Pulse lasers have almost completely subsumed the blaster niche: close range damage dealing. Consider the following graph (plug it into excel/OOo if you wish) - it illustrates effective turret DPS against a Raven at certain ranges (neglecting resistances, which we will momentarily cover). A line appears on this graph when: - A ship reaches "peak" DPS - A new ship takes "top damage dealer" - Every 5km meters \| Thron - AM \| Thron - Null \| Abaddon - MF\| Geddon - MF \| Mael - EMP \| Mael - Hail 4500 \| 932.6 \| 733.1 \| 919.0 \| 622.6 \| 687.8 \| 465.5 5000 \| 934.2 \| 737.4 \| 924.7 \| 662.3 \| 709.3 \| 522.0 5700 \| 930.0 \| 741.7 \| 930.2 \| 704.3 \| 730.1 \| 582.2 8700 \| 843.0 \| 750.0 \| 940.9 \| 792.8 \| 757.1 \| 669.3 9600 \| 799.8 \| 751.1 \| 942.4 \| 805.7 \| 754.9 \| 661.6 10000 \| 778.8 \| 751.5 \| 942.9 \| 810.4 \| 752.9 \| 655.1 10100 \| 759.9 \| 727.7 \| 912.0 \| 811.4 \| 752.4 \| 653.2 15000 \| 475.9 \| 701.1 \| 932.0 \| 841.8 \| 696.0 \| 486.3 15300 \| 458.7 \| 694.8 \| 931.9 \| 842.0 \| 691.2 \| 473.9 20000 \| 235.7 \| 548.4 \| 732.0 \| 664.9 \| 603.4 \| 291.8 22400 \| 160.8 \| 455.7 \| 551.6 \| 501.8 \| 552.9 \| 218.0 25000 \| 105.4 \| 357.4 \| 367.3 \| 334.6 \| 496.8 \| 155.8 There are some things to note: - Hail is pretty much never a better choice than RF EMP (this has significance in Minnie circles). - The Abaddon has more EHP than the Mega, and does 98.5% of the Mega's max DPS at the Mega's optimal. The Geddon does 66.7%. - The Abaddon starts outdamaging the Thron 5700 meters, and the Geddon at 9600 meters (note, this is without a web, and inside web range) - The Abaddon never relinquishes the damage lead from 5700 meters until well past "medium range combat". The Apoc picks up where it leaves off, if that's your bag. - If you're using Null, you should be in an Abaddon. If you're above 5700m, you should be in an Abaddon. - But drones... ! The Geddon (without a web) outdamages the Mega inside web range - and has the same drone bay. Enjoy. (Cont) -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.20 07:12:00 - [33] But Liang, it does EM damage! Ok, this is fair. Battleclinic appears to be down right now, but I previously took the last ~20 kills off BC for the purposes of determining how EM damage was faring in a modern PVP environment. Behold (quote): Harpy, EM Resist=48.3% (Lowest) Hurricane (Shield), EM resist=30% (Lowest) Cerb, EM Resist=48.3% (Lowest) Tristan, EM Resist=50% (Highest) Merlin, EM Resist=25% (Lowest) Harbinger, EM Resist=78.6% (Highest) Discophoon, EM Resist=90% (lol, 8x EM smarties in the highs) (Highest... lol) Discomega, EM Resist=87.7% (lol... 8x EM smarties in the highs) (Highest... lol) Incursus, EM Resist=50% (Highest) Domi, EM Resist=70.6% (Highest) Stabber, EM Resist=0% (Lowest) Stabber, EM Resist=0% (Lowest) Rifter, EM Resist=60% (Highest) Drake, EM Resist=65.7% (Lowest) Ferox, EM Resist=64.1% (Second lowest) Impairor, EM Resist=50% (Highest) Merlin, EM Resist=43.8% (Lowest) Ferox, EM Resist=58.8% (Second lowest) Kestrel, EM Resist=0% (Lowest) Totals Lowest resist: 9 Second lowest: 2 Second highest: 0 Highest resist: 8 Avg resist: 48.4% Note: 2 of the ships were ultra hardened to EM for group smartie purposes. We'll go ahead and keep those in the mix just for fun. But Liang, your Abaddon fit sucks! It's way better with 3 Trimarks and ...! Sure, this is true - but it just goes to show how much better lasers are than blasters. Even a sub-optimal Abaddon fit literally wipes the floor with a standard Mega in typical small gang environments. Essentially, what I'm saying here is that the Abaddon can fit to do the Mega's job better than the Mega can. Conclusion: I'd say there's a fairly airtight case that lasers are currently dominating both close and long range combat. IMO there's only two options: - Nerf lasers (pulse lasers specifically) in such a way that they stop impinging upon blaster and autocannon niches. - Boost blasters and autocannons so that they are more useful in their own niche. This is my preferred method, and I have discussed it at length. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.20 10:36:00 - [34] Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 20/05/2009 10:36:45 Pulse Lasers got a tracking buff some time ago so that they were better able to deal with nano ships. ACs and Blasters did not. At the very least, CCP should consider applying this buff to Blasters and ACs or removing it from Pulse Lasers. There would still be other issues to sort out about damage and engagement envelope, but this first step would be a great start. EDIT: Yes, I know nano got nerfed. The reason for the buff isn't important, the fact that pulses got it and the others didn't is. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 11:35:00 - [35] The mega needs more CPU. The hyperion needs more PG and maybe CPU. BS blasters need to do more DMG in the 10-20km range.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.20 12:02:00 - [36] T2 ammo was the most requested ( I counted up to the day the ECM drones thread was opened) followed by projectiles. Blasters were 5th on the list.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.20 12:08:00 - [37] Originally by: Liang Nuren But Liang, it does EM damage! Ok, this is fair. Battleclinic appears to be down right now, but I previously took the last ~20 kills off BC for the purposes of determining how EM damage was faring in a modern PVP environment. Behold (quote): Harpy, EM Resist=48.3% (Lowest) Hurricane (Shield), EM resist=30% (Lowest) Cerb, EM Resist=48.3% (Lowest) Tristan, EM Resist=50% (Highest) Merlin, EM Resist=25% (Lowest) Harbinger, EM Resist=78.6% (Highest) Discophoon, EM Resist=90% (lol, 8x EM smarties in the highs) (Highest... lol) Discomega, EM Resist=87.7% (lol... 8x EM smarties in the highs) (Highest... lol) Incursus, EM Resist=50% (Highest) Domi, EM Resist=70.6% (Highest) Stabber, EM Resist=0% (Lowest) Stabber, EM Resist=0% (Lowest) Rifter, EM Resist=60% (Highest) Drake, EM Resist=65.7% (Lowest) Ferox, EM Resist=64.1% (Second lowest) Impairor, EM Resist=50% (Highest) Merlin, EM Resist=43.8% (Lowest) Ferox, EM Resist=58.8% (Second lowest) Kestrel, EM Resist=0% (Lowest) Totals Lowest resist: 9 Second lowest: 2 Second highest: 0 Highest resist: 8 Avg resist: 48.4% Note: 2 of the ships were ultra hardened to EM for group smartie purposes. We'll go ahead and keep those in the mix just for fun. But Liang, your Abaddon fit sucks! It's way better with 3 Trimarks and ...! Sure, this is true - but it just goes to show how much better lasers are than blasters. Even a sub-optimal Abaddon fit literally wipes the floor with a standard Mega in typical small gang environments. Essentially, what I'm saying here is that the Abaddon can fit to do the Mega's job better than the Mega can. Conclusion: I'd say there's a fairly airtight case that lasers are currently dominating both close and long range combat. IMO there's only two options: - Nerf lasers (pulse lasers specifically) in such a way that they stop impinging upon blaster and autocannon niches. - Boost blasters and autocannons so that they are more useful in their own niche. This is my preferred method, and I have discussed it at length. -Liang Peopel msut STOP taking examples from killboards to show stuff liek thais. They are completely worthless.. why>? Because those are the setusp of ships taht died.. in other words ships that FAILED. They do not show how GOod ships are fitted necessarily.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.05.20 12:21:00 - [38] Liang, out of those 20 ships there's only one that means anything at the BS scale. Dual EANM and DC is the bog-standard hardening on an armour-tanked BS, so the two highest resists are almost always EM and thermal, and that should be the basis of any comparison. (I'm not attempting to argue that blasters are fine btw.)
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 13:17:00 - [39] Edited by: Murina on 20/05/2009 13:34:20 Originally by: Seishi Maru Peopel msut STOP taking examples from killboards to show stuff liek thais. They are completely worthless.. why>? Because those are the setusp of ships taht died.. in other words ships that FAILED. They do not show how GOod ships are fitted necessarily. This is the most stupid statment ever. Ships get popped for many reasons and while one of them maybe because of it being poorly fitted 99% of the time a ship gets popped cos of pilot error, it was against a ship that had the ability to kill it, or simply because it was called primary. Making comments about loss mail not being a valid way to show ships resistances and tanking setups because you think the setups "failed" is utterly retded. Pick any fit you like and even if its perfect i bet if you check loss mails on most killboards in eve you will find loss mails with that fit on it......does that mean every fit in eve is "fail". Stop posting. Originally by:** Gypsio III Liang, out of those 20 ships there's only one that means anything at the BS scale. Dual EANM and DC is the bog-standard hardening on an armour-tanked BS, so the two highest resists are almost always EM and thermal, and that should be the basis of any comparison. Actually thats rather incorrect. Out of the typical armour tanking gang BS (RR or not). The phoon and domi can fit better tanking setups. The abaddon gets natural resists so gets better. The mega and armageddon cannot fit it cos of cpu issues. The hyperion and tempest MAYBE can fit it but with 6 low slots they must sacrifice either DPS or EHP to do so.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.20 16:29:00 - [40] Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 20/05/2009 13:34:20 Originally by: Seishi Maru Peopel msut STOP taking examples from killboards to show stuff liek thais. They are completely worthless.. why>? Because those are the setusp of ships taht died.. in other words ships that FAILED. They do not show how GOod ships are fitted necessarily. This is the most stupid statment ever. Ships get popped for many reasons and while one of them maybe because of it being poorly fitted 99% of the time a ship gets popped cos of pilot error, it was against a ship that had the ability to kill it, or simply because it was called primary. M You are the one with stupid statement here. Its simple statistical truth. On average bad fits will dire more easily therefore they appear most on killmails. People tried to use the killmail evidences to proove that nanoships were not used that much. But wasa completely fail statement. BEcause nanoships concept is exaclty about not beign killed. So the successful nanoships would appear very little on killboard. Killboards DO NOT REPRESENT ANYTHING about how ships are flown.. but how ships are lost. Those two sets have intersectiosn but are NOT the same sets. Anyoen with minimal understanding of statistics knows that such differences mkae a Good or awful statistical annalysis. So YOU stop posting.

5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.05.20 16:41:00 - [41] That argument only works for nanoships because by their nature nanoships were impossible to catch by anything and that's why they were nerfed. Any good sniper ship, any good tanker, any good ewar ship, any good ganker etc etc... Will be appearing on killboards 24/7 round the clock for what could have been some misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time or getting primaried.
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.20 16:48:00 - [42] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 20/05/2009 16:56:43 Originally by: Seishi Maru You are the one with stupid statement here. Its simple statistical truth. On average bad fits will dire more easily therefore they appear most on killmails. People tried to use the killmail evidences to proove that nanoships were not used that much. But wasa completely fail statement. BEcause nanoships concept is exaclty about not beign killed. So the successful nanoships would appear very little on killboard. Killboards DO NOT REPRESENT ANYTHING about how ships are flown.. but how ships are lost. Those two sets have intersectiosn but are NOT the same sets. Anyoen with minimal understanding of statistics knows that such differences mkae a Good or awful statistical annalysis. So YOU stop posting. Killboards do represent something: they represent the set of ships that died in PVP. This is a strict subset of the ships used (willingly and unwillingly, but judging from the overwhelming number of disruptors and scrams in those fits, I'd say willingly) in PVP, and is not disjoint from the set of ships killing in PVP (but neither is it a subset). Since we know something about the ships lost in PVP, and the set of ships lost in PVP is a subset of the ships used in PVP, we know something about the set of ships used in PVP. I will additionally posit that the set of ships lost in PVP is a very large subset of the set of ships used in PVP, because of the two Eve maxims (which I have found to be largely true, though admittedly I have a 3 year old Arazu with quite a lot of kills on it. It will eventually die): - Don't fly what you cannot afford to lose - Every PVP ship dies, it's just a matter of time. What this doesn't tell us is effectiveness in PVP, but I'm not sure that's really material to this argument. This argument is about dealing damage, and in virtually every PVP encounter, someone dies. Thus, according to the killboard research above, we know that EM damage is not a bad damage type to do in PVP. Sorry, but that set theory you brought up really fubars your argument. -Liang Ed: Grammar -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 18:11:00 - [43] Edited by: Murina on 20/05/2009 18:14:17 Originally by: Seishi Maru blah blah blah.....more ret**ded crap Go away fool you have no idea wtf you are talking about. In virtually every pvp fight and especially in gang vs gang combat ships will die no matter if they are fitted well or badly, checking KB's show what ships and fits are being used. You are so clueless lol..
Rivqua Caldari Omega Wing R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2009.05.20 18:35:00 - [44] Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 20/05/2009 18:14:17 Originally by: Seishi Maru blah blah blah.....more ret**ded crap Go away fool you have no idea wtf you are talking about. In virtually every pvp fight and especially in gang vs gang combat ships will die no matter if they are fitted well or badly, checking KB's show what ships and fits are being used. You are so clueless lol.. True, but his point still stands, you can't balance against "fit of the month" because, the fit of the month will change if you change the balance, are you then going to do a new patch and rebalance ships ? You balance vs natural resists, nothing else. _________________ - Rivqua - --- R.E.P.O. ---
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.20 18:41:00 - [45] Originally by: Rivqua True, but his point still stands, you can't balance against "fit of the month" because, the fit of the month will change if you change the balance, are you then going to do a new patch and rebalance ships ? You balance vs natural resists, nothing else. No, his point doesn't stand, and on top of that, balancing vs natural resists would give EM damage something approaching 27.5% average resist (0% x2 / 50% / 60%). -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2009.05.20 19:06:00 - [46] Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 20/05/2009 19:13:48 Balancing off of base non-racial resists you get... EM: 75% damage (100% to shields 50% to armor) EX: 70% damage ( 50% to shields 90% to armor) KN: 67.5% damage ( 60% to shields 75% to armor) TH: 72.5% damage ( 80% to shields 65% to armor) Also, when shooting at T2 ships, EM is prob the best all-around damage type to throw since only minmatar ships get a boost to em resists, and all minmatar T2 ships other than the wolf are shield tanks. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 19:15:00 - [47] Originally by: Rivqua True, but his point still stands, you can't balance against "fit of the month" because, the fit of the month will change if you change the balance, are you then going to do a new patch and rebalance ships ? You balance vs natural resists, nothing else. Considering ships slot layout ect are differant and they are going to bet always fitted in one way or another thats a bad idea. Whitch natural resists would you use?, shield natural resists?, armour natural resists?, hull natural resists?, T2 ship hull, armour or shield natural resists?, T1 ship hull, armour or shield natural resists?, which races T1 or T2 armour, hull or shield natural resists?.....and on and on... You should balance against a flat line of raw unresisted dmg that way as the game, the tactics and styles of fitting and flying change every dmg type gets its day.....apart from missile users who always have a full choice of each.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 19:23:00 - [48] Originally by: Mag's Originally by: NightmareX Yes, it's about taking risks. But then, no risks = no fun. I and many others, may take you more seriously, if you didn't tell us about risk free fights on sisi. Yeah, killing 5 motherships and with a hostile Titan in the same system as those 5 motherships we killed with a ** ton of capital ships as backup probably (you never know) in a RAZOR owned system some days ago is no risks on TQ. Originally by:** Murina Edited by: Murina on 20/05/2009 18:14:17 Originally by: Seishi Maru blah blah blah.....more ret**ded crap Go away fool you have no idea wtf you are talking about. In virtually every pvp fight and especially in gang vs gang combat ships will die no matter if they are fitted well or badly, checking KB's show what ships and fits are being used. You are so clueless lol.. And if i say that you don't have a single clue on what your talking about, then what?. Will you then still say your right?. If that's the case, then the others here that are talking to you can be as much right as you then, only because we say it. Since if you say your right, then we can be right to. Right?. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 19:28:00 - [49] Originally by: NightmareX And if i say that you don't have a single clue on what your talking about, then what?. Will you then still say your right?. If that's the case, then the others here that are talking to you can be as much right as you then, only because we say it. Since if you say your right, then we can be right to. Right?.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 19:44:00 - [50] Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 19:46:50 Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 20/05/2009 19:33:23 Originally by: NightmareX And if i say that you don't have a single clue on what your talking about, then what?. Will you then still say your right?. If that's the case, then the others here that are talking to you can be as much right as you then, only because we say it. Since if you say your right, then we can be right to. Right?. And yet more irrelavant ranting... The king of irrelavant and clueless trolling is back.... PS: post with a alt. LOL, posting with alts is for noobs with no balls. Or for those who are afraid of their forum honor. But if you want, i can post with Fatality Killer if that makes you a happy bunny. Anyways. Your posting is stupid. In almost every of the replies you do to someone here you have to say 'Awww boohoo, your a clueless troll and an idiot etc etc when someone is not agreeing with you. Like now, when i didn't agree with you, you still had to say that i'm a clueless troll. Want me to call you a clueless noobcake everytime i don't agree with you?. Who is the stupid poster here actually?. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise

Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 19:51:00 - [51] Edited by: Murina on 20/05/2009 19:52:14 Originally by: NightmareX LOL, posting with alts is for noobs with no balls. Or for those who are afraid of their forum honor. You posted with electric and then later pretended to be a noob in the same thread and then lied about it even though everybody knows it was you..... Your pathetic. Originally by: NightmareX Who is the stupid poster here actually?. You are and the truly sad thing is that you are so epicly stupid that you do not understand how transparantly obvious you are. PS: Stay on topic or leave the thread.
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.20 19:55:00 - [52] TBQFH, there has got to be a conspiracy between you two to flood any constructive blaster thread into the ground. Can you both please shut up and post constructively? -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 19:56:00 - [53] Originally by: NightmareX EDIT 2: Anyways, just to be on topic again. What's wrong with Large Blasters again?. I can't seem to find ANY issues with Large Blasters at all. Maybe it's because..... I NEVER USE THEM?. FIXED. http://triumvirate-alliance.com/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=3530&view=ships_weapons
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:01:00 - [54] Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 20:06:00 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX LOL, posting with alts is for noobs with no balls. Or for those who are afraid of their forum honor. You posted with electric and then later pretended to be a noob in the same thread and then lied about it even though everybody knows it was you..... Your pathetic. Originally by: NightmareX Who is the stupid poster here actually?. You are and the truly sad thing is that you are so epicly stupid that you do not understand how transparantly obvious you are. Look what we have here. We now have a player here who want to start a flame war again. But sorry, i don't go on your stupid comments here. Electric was originally made by me. But i gave the account to my brother after a while when i realized i didn't need him. I don't want to pay extra for a 2nd account for nothing. I rather pay for his account so he can play instead. But yeah, as i guess, you don't remember what i have said earlier about this. And the noob your talking about is not my alt. Want to see a screenshot of my Character Selection for a proof?. Or a screenshot from 'My Character' on the left side here, under the CSM button?. Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 20/05/2009 20:00:57 Originally by: NightmareX EDIT 2: Anyways, just to be on topic again. What's wrong with Large Blasters again?. I can't seem to find ANY issues with Large Blasters at all. Maybe it's because..... I NEVER USE THEM?. FIXED. http://triumvirate-alliance.com/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=3530&view=ships_weapons Does anybody see any blaster ships let alone blaster BS in your stats?....nope?....nor me.. Wow, do i really need to use them on TQ to just know that they are fine?. Ask Darknesss if you have the balls if Blasters are crap. LOL just try. OMG i'm gonna LOL really really hard at you if you do that. Originally by: Murina PS: Stay on topic or leave the thread. Are you gonna stay on topic then?. Anyways, any more stupid comments from you here, then i will do it easy by reporting you for starting a flame war. Maybe be on topic your self first of all. BE WARNED. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:08:00 - [55] Originally by: NightmareX The usual lies, denials and trolls... Do you have anything on topic and from YOUR experiances flying blaster battleships on TQ to add?......
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:12:00 - [56] Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 20:13:52 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX The usual lies, denials and trolls... Do you have anything on topic and from YOUR experiances flying blaster battleships on TQ to add?...... When it's about Blasters, Darknesss & Leilani Solaris is the man to talk to. They know 110% for sure what they are talking about when it's about Blasters & Blaster BS'es. So they will just say the same as me. Easy as that. Nothing more to add tbh. If you don't believe me, then feel free to convo them and ask. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:20:00 - [57] Originally by: NightmareX Do you have anything on topic and from YOUR experiances flying blaster battleships on TQ to add?...... When it's about Blasters, Darknesss & Leilani Solaris is the man to talk to. They know 110% for sure what they are talking about when it's about Blasters & Blaster BS'es. So they will just say the same as me. Easy as that. Nothing more to add tbh. If you don't believe me, then feel free to convo them and ask. How about you convo them, point them at this thread, and ask them to tell us that themselves. Since you have nothing more to add, I'll thank you for not getting involved in another flame war with Murina. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:26:00 - [58] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: NightmareX Do you have anything on topic and from YOUR experiances flying blaster battleships on TQ to add?...... When it's about Blasters, Darknesss & Leilani Solaris is the man to talk to. They know 110% for sure what they are talking about when it's about Blasters & Blaster BS'es. So they will just say the same as me. Easy as that. Nothing more to add tbh. If you don't believe me, then feel free to convo them and ask. How about you convo them, point them at this thread, and ask them to tell us that themselves. Since you have nothing more to add, I'll thank you for not getting involved in another flame war with Murina. -Liang I'm not starting a flame war. It's Murina who are doing that atm. I was replying to Murina and was saying that i didn't agree with him. Was no trolls no smack and no flames from me. Was just a normal reply with a question to him. And no. Why should i do that job for you guys with the convoing?. Is it because your fking lazy and don't have the balls to do it your self?. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:29:00 - [59] Edited by: Murina on 20/05/2009 20:34:50 Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX The usual lies, denials and trolls... Do you have anything on topic and from YOUR experiances flying blaster battleships on TQ to add?...... When it's about Blasters, Darknesss & Leilani Solaris is the man to talk to. So they will just say the same as me. Easy as that. Leilani Solaris has many many more kills using lasers and rails than blasters. http://triumvirate-alliance.com/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=1271&view=ships_weapons How many times do you need to be told to check your material before you post?. ABP link showing them using pulse... http://www.killboard.atomicbattlepenguins.com/?a=corp_detail&crp_id=1234&view=ships_weapons The solo mega fraps dude totally closing you down in the other thread.... Instead of posting i suggest you just take a picture of yourself being bent over and link it into blaster threads in future it will be quicker and have the same effect...
Maren Jensen	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:34:00 - [60] Originally by: NightmareX I don't listen to whiners who are lazy pvpers who ONLY want the insta pwn machine back because someone is bitter since they can't instakill frigs and cruisers in a Blaster BS anymore. 1. You are horrible at this game. 2. Please, really, stop posting.

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:36:00 - [61] Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 20:46:40 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX The usual lies, denials and trolls... Do you have anything on topic and from YOUR experiances flying blaster battleships on TQ to add?...... When it's about Blasters, Darknesss & Leilani Solaris is the man to talk to. So they will just say the same as me. Easy as that. Leilani Solaris has many many more kills using lasers and rails than blasters. http://triumvirate-alliance.com/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=1271&view=ships_weapons How many times do you need to be told to check your material before you post? It's not the point on how many kills they have with each weapons. It's how good they are with the ships and weapons, like Leilani Solaris have showed in his latest movie that is called Crimewave. There he use a Blaster Mega and a Blaster Kronos. In that movie like in the movie to Darknesss, he shows that Large Blasters are really good as long your doing it right. It's been proved alot of times when someone release a movie with Blaster BS'es in that they are doing very good in the Blaster BS'es. And then, why should i listen to some whiners when the movies shows that Blasters works really good?. If the Blasters works good for the players who are making the movies, then for sure, the Blasters will work as good for me then as they are doing for the movie maker when i'm using the right tactics / setups etc etc. There is NO EXCUSES that Blasters are crap when peoples shows ALOT of times that Blasters can work really really good. Do i need to say more?. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Rivqua Caldari Omega Wing R.E.P.O.	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:36:00 - [62] Originally by: Murina Whitch natural resists would you use?, shield natural resists?, armour natural resists?, hull natural resists?, T2 ship hull, armour or shield natural resists?, T1 ship hull, armour or shield natural resists?, which races T1 or T2 armour, hull or shield natural resists?.....and on and on... I would start by balancing against natrual armour resists (ie, without the +10% racial resist bonus). That's the baseline in this discussion atleast, because we are (were) discussing amarr and gaylente. Everything else is up to the player, and how he fits his ship / chooses to fly his ship. Another question, are we discussing "blaster tracking" or general "I want blasters to always be the correct choice for any fight that involves pvp" ? If we are talking increasing blaster tracking, what is the max point? Where is enough enough? Currently blasters do alot of things better then lasers. They don't do stationary gatecamping better. They do brawling alot better though. They do warp on top of enemy and shoot alot of better. They clear small ships alot faster. But that's ofcourse my opinion, I ask, tell us all, where is your "this is where we are, and this is where we want to be". Maybe if there was such a statement, backed up by technical data, those against the idea, could maybe come up with other ideas to buff/nerf about blasters, and you would get your tracking boost. About someone mentioning earlier pulses got a tracking boost: Don't forget, they are still the worst tracking close range battleship gun in the game. _________________ - Rivqua - --- R.E.P.O. ---
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:54:00 - [63] Originally by: Rivqua Another question, are we discussing "blaster tracking" or general "I want blasters to always be the correct choice for any fight that involves pvp" ? At the moment lasers are the correct choice for any fight that involves pvp so a improvement for blasters could only lessen the gap. Originally by: Rivqua Currently blasters do alot of things better then lasers. They don't do stationary gatecamping better. They do brawling alot better though. They do warp on top of enemy and shoot alot of better. They clear small ships alot faster. 1. Pls enlighted us to what "brawling" is?, or did you just make it up to fill out your "lots of things better". 2. Anybody can "warp on top of enemy and shoot", and if its a gang blasters lose any DPS advantage they may have before the first ship goes pop if they burn away, so unless its a gank opn a solo ship blasters are at a disadvantage. Blaster ships also have weaker tanks than the laser ships. 3. The tracking of laser ships at their available ranges allows them to hit small ships a lot more easily than blasters do. Originally by: Rivqua About someone mentioning earlier pulses got a tracking boost: Don't forget, they are still the worst tracking close range battleship gun in the game. Maybe you need to learn about how range effects transversal and tracking, lasers may have lower base tracking than blasters but the range of pulse and the way range effects transversal means that they hit small ships very easily. PS: I also do not see the point of boosting the tracking on blasters as no turret system has a problem hitting a simular sized ship even at close range. They do need to do more dmg at 10-20km though.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 21:04:00 - [64] Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 21:04:37 I'm only gonna reply to one of your points over here Murina. And it's this one under: Originally by: Murina At the moment lasers are the correct choice for any fight that involves pvp so a improvement for blasters could only lessen the gap. LOL, talk about FOTM dream world. That's the most stupid FOTM bear reply EVER. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.20 22:01:00 - [65] The back and forth replies in this thread up till now are either funny or pathetic, depending on how you look at it. So far there has been almost zero discussion about anything of any actual value. Just a bunch of insults and 'you're wrong' being tossed about, or arguing whether or not blasters even deserve a review in the first place. Here are the key issues: Blasters don't do enough peak DPS when compared to other weapons systems given their current limitations of short range, poor tracking inside that range, and high cap use compared to capless weapons. The argument 'skill something else' isn't valid. I have max skills in all four weapon types. That simply isn't an issue. I want each weapon system to be good at their niche role, and right now blasters don't accomplish this. One interesting side issue is how weapons scale between ship sizes. Small blasters are pretty good in my opinion, being balanced and working well when used properly. They have enough track, sig res and damage etc. to work against their proper targets with a good fit. Blasters don't scale so well when applied to larger ships such as BCs and BS. Smaller ships have enough speed and agility to easily fly into blaster range and maintain enough tracking at close ranges to hit their targets. Larger ships using blasters (BS specifically) aren't as flexible speed/agility wise and as a result lose a large degree of effectiveness when compared to smaller ships with blasters. Another issue is tanks and how they are radically different between ship classes. This is another major reason why blasters are more effective for smaller ship classes than with larger ships. Large ships have massive tanks with massive amounts of EHP and this results in minimizing the small DPS advantage large blasters have over lasers (and no DPS advantage over torps) when compared to smaller ships with fewer/no rigs and very lightweight tanks. Since smaller ships have lighter weight tanks, it's possible to use a high DPS setup and get in and make a kill and get out before your own (non existant) tank runs out. This isn't the case with larger (BS, BC) sized ships. It isn't possible to set up a gank ship that is focused solely on DPS and overcome a tanked setup before you're dead yourself. At the moment blaster ships are facing opposing ships with more EHP and 95-110% of their damage output, with fewer range limitations than they have. It's simply not competitive. Just use lasers you say? I have large pulse/beam spec to 4. I have torp spec 4. I have large AC spec 4. I'd like blasters to actually do what they're supposed to: overwhelming DPS at short range. Right now they do almost the same DPS as everything else, at 1/5 the range. Do I want more range? No. More tracking? Maybe a little. Large blasters (not medium or small) need more DPS. I'd say 25-30% more would be a good start. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 22:11:00 - [66] Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 22:14:36 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Large blasters (not medium or small) need more DPS. I'd say 25-30% more would be a good start. Holy crap. Do you even know what your talking about here?. Jesus christ man. Do you even know how ridicoulusly overpowered Large Blasters is going to be if that happens?. You wont get your uber insta pwn machine back again, JUST FORGET IT. The HP buffs we got on the ships some years ago is meant to let ships last longer in EVE. Is the HP buffs really needed if you want a 25-30% DPS increase on Blasters?. If there is something that will be boosted if that's ever needed, it will be the Bonuses on ther Mega that will be changed / boosted then. And not the Blasters. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.20 22:30:00 - [67] Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Bellum Eternus Large blasters (not medium or small) need more DPS. I'd say 25-30% more would be a good start. Holy crap. Do you even know what your talking about here?. It's so stupid that it hurts. 30% more raw damage might push the Mega's status as top damage dealer out to 8km, tbqfh. As it stands now, as shown in my post at the top of page 2, the Abaddon is a superior damage dealer from less than 6km until it runs out of range at 55km. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org

CCP Mitnal C C P	Posted - 2009.05.20 22:54:00 - [68] Cleaned. Please stay on topic. Having personal conflicts within threads ensures that tbere is never a consensus on how to fix an issue. Mitnal Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 22:56:00 - [69] Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 22:56:22 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Bellum Eternus Large blasters (not medium or small) need more DPS. I'd say 25-30% more would be a good start. Holy crap. Do you even know what your talking about here?. It's so stupid that it hurts. 30% more raw damage might push the Mega's status as top damage dealer out to 8km, tbqfh. As it stands now, as shown in my post at the top of page 2, the Abaddon is a superior damage dealer from less than 6km until it runs out of range at 55km. -Liang Your forgetting to take the omni tank resists into the picture here again or?. Because if you do, the Blaster Mega for example will pretty much be on top already. Here is an example: http://triumvirate-alliance.com/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=3342412 And here: http://triumvirate-alliance.com/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=3329335 And here to: http://triumvirate-alliance.com/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=3315623 I can link many more though, but i don't see the point in that tbh. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.20 23:04:00 - [70] Originally by: NightmareX Your forgetting to take the omni tank resists into the picture here again or?. Because if you do, the Blaster Mega for example will pretty much be on top already. Here is some examples: Here, here and here. I can link many more though, but i don't see the point in that tbh. Actually, I'm not at all forgetting to take resistances into account here. As has been shown repeatedly, EM damage is either the best damage type to deal or second best, especially with the recent resurgence in shield buffer tanking. I have already shown that in today's PVP environment, it's a very fantastic damage type to deal. It's shown here: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1076161&page=2#33 -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 23:15:00 - [71] Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 23:18:45 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: NightmareX Your forgetting to take the omni tank resists into the picture here again or?. Because if you do, the Blaster Mega for example will pretty much be on top already. Here is some examples: Here, here and here. I can link many more though, but i don't see the point in that tbh. Actually, I'm not at all forgetting to take resistances into account here. As has been shown repeatedly, EM damage is either the best damage type to deal or second best, especially with the recent resurgence in shield buffer tanking. I have already shown that in today's PVP environment, it's a very fantastic damage type to deal. It's shown here: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1076161&page=2#33 -Liang Yes, Lasers is a little better when your shooting shield tanked ships. I have said this earlier to. But if your shooting omni armor tanked ships, then Blasters have an advantage over Lasers. Anyways, 15 days and 21 hours left until i have Large Blaster Spec skill on level 5. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.20 23:17:00 - [72] Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 22:25:25 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Large blasters (not medium or small) need more DPS. I'd say 25-30% more would be a good start. Holy crap. Do you even know what your talking about here?. It's so stupid that it hurts. Jesus christ man. Do you even know how ridicoulusly overpowered Large Blasters is going to be if that happens?. You wont get your uber insta pwn machine back again, JUST FORGET IT. The HP buffs we got on the ships some years ago is meant to let ships last longer in EVE. And not to let a Tempest for example to blow up in 2 secs against 2 Blaster Megas. Is the HP buffs really needed if you want a 25-30% DPS increase on Blasters?. If there is something that will be boosted if that's ever needed, it will be the Bonuses on ther Mega that will be changed / boosted then. And not the Blasters. I was exaggerating the point (25-30% more DPS) to A) make a point, and B) to watch all the people truely not interested in fixing blasters (you) get trolled. I don't think that 25% is really reasonable. I think maybe 10-15% will work. If you buff the Mega's ship bonus then you affect other things like sniper performance in fleet etc., so that won't work. It's (very) funny that you bring up HP buffs. It's changes precisely like HP buffs and T2 ammo damage reduction and the addition of tanking rigs that have really diminished the performance of blasters. It's not that the HP buffs need to be rolled back, or rigs nerfed to reduce tanking across the board. All that needs to be done is add some more DPS to blasters and leave everything else static. Right now I think that everything is fairly well balanced between Projectiles/Lasers/Missiles with respect to short range large BS weapons. ACs need a bit more tracking, same as blasters, but that's just due to the web nerf. I'd actually be happy with a web increase to 70% and be done with it. 60% was too much of a nerf. Lasers suffer from crippling cap use, ACs and missiles are lowish on the DPS scale but use zero cap, and blasters use quite a bit of cap, particularly when you're running 7-8 guns on a BS it can be an issue when you get more than one large neut on you. But alas, you're pretty much set in your opinion. I'm not trying to change that. Just trying to bring attention to a shortcoming with blasters so that the devs will address it. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.20 23:23:00 - [73] Originally by: NightmareX Yes, Lasers is a little better when your shooting shield tanked ships. I have said this earlier to. But if your shooting omni armor tanked ships, then Blasters have an advantage over Lasers. Completely wrong. Lasers have the advantage shooting either type. My EM resists are usually the lowest of all my resists on just about every T2 armor tanked ship I fly, and if it's not the lowest, then it's within a few percentage points of my other middle resists. Further more, it doesn't matter what the highest/lowest resist is when you're losing 50-90% of your DPS due to range issues when using blasters, while you're still dealing 100% of your DPS using lasers. I can produce graph after graph of lasers doing more actual damage to a target with EM resists being the highest than blasters. Lasers do a LOT of dps, they have GREAT range, and EM resists simply aren't what they used to be. My omni tanked triple armor hardener Dominix tank has EM as it's lowest resist. Your arguments are weak and don't hold up to any scrutiny. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.20 23:24:00 - [74] Edited by: NightmareX on 20/05/2009 23:26:59 Bellum Eternus. I have one thing that i agree with you on. Instead of messing with the tracking on the Blasters and Autocannons, then i rather see the webs boosted up to 70% max. Because increasing the DPS any more or tracking is not a good idea to do today. But we are talking about something that might happen in 1-2 years with the speed CCP have to fix things. So maybe in that time, things might have changed alot in PVP to that time, and maybe a boost to tracking or DPS will be needed that then. You never know. But as things are today. Increasing the DPS or tracking on Blasters or Autocannons will rather mess up more things than it will fix tbqh. Anyways, fix Artilleries before you even think about messing with Blasters. Autocannons need to be looked at to before Blasters. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.05.21 00:25:00 - [75] Edited by: 5pinDizzy on 21/05/2009 00:28:25 Can anyone think of a change that's come about within the last couple of years that hurt lasers? My memory is struggling. My memory is sketchy without going through it all. List of Laser Buffs Revelations - All base em resists lowered by 10% - Amarr buff Quantum Rise - Missiles heavily nerfed. - Caldari nerf Quantum Rise - Medium drones nerfed. - Gallente take the worst nerf Quantum Rise - All ships slowed down. - Minmatar and Gallente take the worst nerf, Minmatar for their speed tanking and Gallente for the time taken to get within their very short range. Quantum Rise - Webs take heavy nerf - Gallente nerf mainly as that 10km range is where even their biggest ships like to operate in when fitting blasters. Negating what tracking advantage they have considerably. Minmatar Artillery and Autocannons were always crap as long as I can remember. Take that and the fact that all types of ewar has gradually been made more and more useless over time and Amarr combat focused laser boats keep climbing the tree.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.21 00:31:00 - [76] Originally by: NightmareX You know that my close range RR Tempest is ROFL'ing at your Abaddon or Geddon everytime i fight one of those ships?. You want to know why?. Yes it's because i can tank a gank fitted Abaddon / Armageddon with only one LAR II on my Tempest because the EM and Thermal resists is so high. My current setup on my RR Tempest have 80% EM and 67.6% Thermal resists, while it have 62.6% Kinetic and 55.1% Explosive resists. If you have EM as the lowest resist on your passive tanked omni RR BS, your doing something really really wrong. Re-read what I posted: active tri-hardened tank. Not passive. And yes, special case (Minmatar) tanks will have an advantage vs. lasers. Frankly, I end up killing Abaddons in Tempests more so because I can use 2x heavy neuts on them and don't need any cap for my ACs, allowing me to devote the rest of my cap to my tank. It takes a while to burn through all that EHP, but I get there eventually. And this is a blaster thread. We're getting off track here. I agree 100% that Artillery needs to be changed/buffed big time, but again, that's another thread/issue. Just because I'm pro-blaster doesn't mean that I'm anti-projectile. Allow me to re-iterate: I want every weapon system in the game to perform well in it's niche, and that includes artillery etc. TBH I'd like to see arty alpha increased by 100%, ROF decreased by the 50% or w/e to keep DPS the same, and the clipe sized increased by 300% or so. Sounds perfectly fair to me. All arty should have OMGWTF alpha, and it doesn't. I think that a 70% web would help just enough to 'fix' large AC/blaster tracking issues, particularly with the agility changes just added to TQ. It'll still never be like it was, but 60% is just too little of a speed reduction for a single web. I see this as a better more 'smooth' solution than jacking with specific tracking. Another thing with projectiles and ACs in particular: I'd like to see the ability to switch damage types and still see the same total DPS, rather than having the range/DPS vary wildly with damage type, similar to how missiles are. Right now the 'you can choose damage type' is a bit of a farce when it comes to projectiles. I think it would be acceptable to simply have 2x damage choices per range/damage catagory of ammo: have an EMP style ammo: em/kin/exp damage, and then a thermal style with heavy therm/exp. and then provide each ammo style with the 4-5 range variants required. This is in addition to fixing T2 ammo, which right now is just horrid. If you want projectiles fixed so bad then start a thread for that and I'll lend my support. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Deva Blackfire D00M.	Posted - 2009.05.21 00:33:00 - [77] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/05/2009 00:34:34 Dont forget exploration - its also laser buff (no ammo use!). Also invention: more scorch for laser users and cheaper guns! Im sure that "coalition of coalitions" is also laser buff - as we know they are mainly gang weapons and gangs of 1500 people are best place for lasers. Ofc nano nerf is also laser buff - everything is easier to hit. Blackops boost is also laser boost - THE REDEEMER! is laser boat!. To sum up: are you stupid or just playing one? EDIT: bellum: what is the "tracking issue" you are talking about? BS unable to wtfpwn frig? Or maybe having problems instapwning cruisers? Coz BS vs BS they hit quite well and isnt BS role killing other BSs?
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.21 00:49:00 - [78] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/05/2009 00:34:34 Dont forget exploration - its also laser buff (no ammo use!). Also invention: more scorch for laser users and cheaper guns! Im sure that "coalition of coalitions" is also laser buff - as we know they are mainly gang weapons and gangs of 1500 people are best place for lasers. Ofc nano nerf is also laser buff - everything is easier to hit. Blackops boost is also laser boost - THE REDEEMER! is laser boat!. To sum up: are you stupid or just playing one? EDIT: bellum: what is the "tracking issue" you are talking about? BS unable to wtfpwn frig? Or maybe having problems instapwning cruisers? Coz BS vs BS they hit quite well and isnt BS role killing other BSs? Anyone who has flown blaster BS a LOT knows that the only way to really do effective damage is to be just under optimal range (say, 4km for Neutron IIs and max skills with faction antimatter) and have both the shooter and the target sit dead still. Any transversal at all will wreck your DPS, and this is BS vs. BS. It only gets worse when you're shooting at a smaller target. It's not like an Abaddon or Geddon where a BS can be going 3-400m/sec transverse at 15km and you're still hitting it for 100% effective DPS, or zapping cruisers at 2km/sec at 35km away. Ask yourself this: is it reasonable to expect an Abaddon to be able to hit a Cruiser flying at 1500-2km/sec at 30-40km for 80-90% effective DPS using T2 ammo? If the answer is yes, then shouldn't it also be reasonable for a Mega (which has a tracking bonus, no less) to hit a Cruiser flying at the same speed at 12-18km and do the same relative DPS with similar ammo? Everything in Eve is a tradeoff. Lasers have big benefits and great capability, so to ACs. Blasters right now are sucky because lasers can do their job at their range at 90-100% efficiency plus continue to perform at what are for blasters extreme ranges. Heck, a while back I instapopped a Harpy or Hawk (can't remember exactly which) with my Abaddon at 45km+. When it happened I thought the guy warped off when I lost lock. I couldn't believe it. lasers are awesome. I want blasters to be awesome in their own area of operation as well: extreme close range. Right now they're not. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.05.21 00:50:00 - [79] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/05/2009 00:34:34 Dont forget exploration - its also laser buff (no ammo use!). Also invention: more scorch for laser users and cheaper guns! Im sure that "coalition of coalitions" is also laser buff - as we know they are mainly gang weapons and gangs of 1500 people are best place for lasers. Ofc nano nerf is also laser buff - everything is easier to hit. Blackops boost is also laser boost - THE REDEEMER! is laser boat!. To sum up: are you stupid or just playing one? Sorry what do you want me to reply to? You didn't make a point. You spouted a load of nonsense and said. "That's you that is, that's what you sound like."
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.21 01:00:00 - [80] Edited by: NightmareX on 21/05/2009 01:03:02 Originally by: Bellum Eternus lasers are awesome. I want blasters to be awesome in their own area of operation as well: extreme close range. Right now they're not. Lasers atm are a bit to much awesome tbh. The only logical solution atm is just to nerf the tracking a bit for Scorch / Lasers, so they can be more balanced to the other 3 weapon systems. If CCP takes away the tracking boost to Lasers as they gave the Lasers some years ago, then i think everything will be pretty nice tbh. When you can hit a Cruiser flying at 1500-2km/sec at 30-40km for 80-90% effective DPS using T2 ammo on Large Lasers, then i will say nerf the tracking on the Large Lasers now. Or just revert the tracking boost to Large Lasers that they got some years ago. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise

Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2009.05.21 01:30:00 - [81] Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 21/05/2009 01:36:11 Blasters don't need a 30% damage increase, that is just insane. Forget the Megathron, I would LOVE a 1400 DPS Rokh or a 2k DPS shield-Hype, but it would just be stupid overpowered. Blasters DO need a massive tracking boost, something like 50%. ACs need a tracking boost as well, say, 30%. And all the T2 short-range ammo should be changed. Lasers don't need a nerf. They got the nerf with the web changes, same as every other turret got nerfed. What we need is for the short-ranged guns to be more effective at point blank than lasers are, and right now they aren't. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.21 01:34:00 - [82] Edited by: NightmareX on 21/05/2009 01:35:43 Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Blasters DO need a massive tracking boost, something like 50%. ACs need a tracking boost as well, say, 30%. And all the T2 short-range ammo should be changed. Was the web nerf needed if you want a 50% tracking boost on Blasters and 30% on Autocannons?. Can i ask you why CCP nerfed the webbers?. Yes i know the answer, but do you know it?. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2009.05.21 01:39:00 - [83] Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 21/05/2009 01:45:51 Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 21/05/2009 01:35:43 Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Blasters DO need a massive tracking boost, something like 50%. ACs need a tracking boost as well, say, 30%. And all the T2 short-range ammo should be changed. Was the web nerf needed if you want a 50% tracking boost on Blasters and 30% on Autocannons?. Can i ask you why CCP nerfed the webbers?. Yes i know the answer, but do you know it?. Yes it is. The web nerf was too heavy handed, and now even same-class ships can evade fire too easily. After such a tracking boost, cruisers and frigates will still be able to evade effectively for the most part but it will make it harder to evade BS guns in a BS. For everything else, there is tracking disruptors. It would take a 400% tracking boost to blasters to make them track a webbed target as well as they did before QR. And the webs got nerfed because speed got nerfed, but battleships don't go 1/4 the speed they used to. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.21 02:25:00 - [84] Edited by: NightmareX on 21/05/2009 02:26:21 Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 21/05/2009 01:45:51 Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 21/05/2009 01:35:43 Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Blasters DO need a massive tracking boost, something like 50%. ACs need a tracking boost as well, say, 30%. And all the T2 short-range ammo should be changed. Was the web nerf needed if you want a 50% tracking boost on Blasters and 30% on Autocannons?. Can i ask you why CCP nerfed the webbers?. Yes i know the answer, but do you know it?. Yes it is. The web nerf was too heavy handed, and now even same-class ships can evade fire too easily. After such a tracking boost, cruisers and frigates will still be able to evade effectively for the most part but it will make it harder to evade BS guns in a BS. For everything else, there is tracking disruptors. It would take a 400% tracking boost to blasters to make them track a webbed target as well as they did before QR. And the webs got nerfed because speed got nerfed, but battleships don't go 1/4 the speed they used to. I like the webs as they are now, but it wouldn't hurt to take them to 70%. I'm all in for that. But saying 50% tracking boost to Blasters and 30% to Autocannons is asking to get the frigs and cruisers unpopular against BS'es again. Or it will make the frigs and cruisers useless against BS'es then. Like they was earlier. There is 2 reasons why the webs got nerfed. 1. To let the Frigs and Cruisers or Battlecruisers have a chance against Battleships, instead of getting instapwned by BS'es because they can't out track the BS'es at all. 2. The webs got nerfed because the speed was also nerfed. And yes, the speed nerf was needed tbh. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.21 06:24:00 - [85] Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 21/05/2009 01:36:11 Blasters don't need a 30% damage increase, that is just insane. Forget the Megathron, I would LOVE a 1400 DPS Rokh or a 2k DPS shield-Hype, but it would just be stupid overpowered. Blasters DO need a massive tracking boost, something like 50%. ACs need a tracking boost as well, say, 30%. And all the T2 short-range ammo should be changed. Lasers don't need a nerf. They got the nerf with the web changes, same as every other turret got nerfed. What we need is for the short-ranged guns to be more effective at point blank than lasers are, and right now they aren't. Hehe. BTW, I'm throwing a vid together of some scrap fraps footage I've had sitting around. My side of our little fight will be in it. Fast forwarded of course. ^-^ And yeah, I was being dramatic with the 30%, but I still think that blasters could do with a bit more peak DPS, particularly the large and medium sized guns. I don't want lasers nerfed relative to the other weapons, and lasers do just a little bit too much DPS compared to blasters, particularly given their range. Blasters should reign supreme at their optimal range, and they don't. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Gabriel Karade Gallente Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil	Posted - 2009.05.21 08:47:00 - [86] Five words: Tracking formula, point blank range... -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.21 09:00:00 - [87] Boost Artillery, Boost autocannons, Boost Blasters, but leave lasers the f'ck alone. They were without a doubt the worst weapon type for a long time, in 9/10 situations you were better off with Artties/Auto's on an Apoc than actual lasers, and now they are actually useful with [i]useful T2 ammo[/u] (well, Scorch and Conflag anyway) which is what alot of people moan about with other weapons (Crap T2 ammo). Why would you rather nerf everything to be crap than buff whats already crap to be good?. 20% tracking bonus to Blasters, 25% more damage modifier, 10% slower rate of fire. 15% more tracking to Autocannons, 10% more damage modifier, 10% faster rof. Make autocannons the "Rounds per minute" king and make blasters the "damage per hit" king of the two. Tweak some numbers here and there, oh and somewhere in amongst it all make artillery not suck too. Disclaimer, numbers are random as *** off the top of my head crap. Just contibuting my 0.02isk ___________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008 ^Third Times a Charm^
Tuncan Minmatar Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2009.05.21 09:36:00 - [88] Edited by: Tuncan on 21/05/2009 09:37:17 CCP should sharpen the borders, strenghten the abilities of weapons. Large blasters can have a better tracking at their optimal, i can dodge a mega in a phoon when webbed with 1 ab running (3x trimarks 2x 1600's) at 500m. Say that increase in %20 tracking HOWEVER, their optimals and range should be lower than normal. T2 null ammo can reach 13km optimal i guess, it should be under 8km. Thats it, if a large blaster user catches your BS( not bc or cruiser ) you are dead. Large lasers on the other hand, should have a significant tracking nerf. If you are shooting long range, you should suffer from tracking. Thats it. If i am closer to your BS you are dead, if i am away i am dead. But the TRUE fix to this game is to nerf CAP boosters. They are significantly overpowered and they are removing the penalty of lasers.
Daan Sai Polytrope	Posted - 2009.05.21 09:39:00 - [89] My suggestions: 1) buff blaster tracking. Yes. they are close range only weapons, exactly why they need more tracking. Many, me incl, think that after the speed/web changes they are still not right. Dramatic increase to tracking is needed, plus agility for blaster boats or they are just useless at their role. 2) buff projectile Alpha Strike. Ever since the big hp buff projectiles have been devalued, esp arties. Don't increase ROF, or you just make them into flexible rails. But double the damage modifiers and you get serious alpha again. --------------------------------- Internet Submarines is Serious Business ---------------------------------
Bonny Lee Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation	Posted - 2009.05.21 09:48:00 - [90] Edited by: Bonny Lee on 21/05/2009 09:48:44 I have looked into the weapon-systems to compare a little bit better. So i understand why for example blaster need a tracking boost. Tracking of the short range Large weapons is (eft): Hybrid: 0.05 0.046 0.0433 Projectil: 0.054 0.048 0.0432 The first thing i find a bit strange is that every projectil is better in trackin then the comparable blastersize-weapon, but the biggest. Why is 800er tracking worse then Neutron Blasters? (Funny thing Med-sized it is 425: 0.1056 vs heavy neutron: 0.1 small-sized it is 200: 0.315 vs light neutron: 0.3165) So you can¦t say that blaster tracking is worse cause sometimes AC (wtf?) have worse tracking. There is no line someone could see in that. The badest tracking ingame (Short range) is Laserstuff but on the other side they can shoot easily 2x the range so the tracking doesnt matter that much. => I can¦t understand why people do want to buff Blastertracking above AC-Tracking. Thats not right and that shouldnt be done. AC have to fight in Falloff they would need by far the best tracking. Today even this isnt the case cause the Largest-AC is not in line. I dont know what it was like before (with 90% webbers) but nobody is complaining about 800er tracking but all the people complain about blaster? So Why? They have better tracking atm.

Humphrey Goff	Posted - 2009.05.21 09:56:00 - [91] Originally by: NightmareX Lasers isn't more important than 3 other weapon systems. Just make the Lasers to be more balanced to the 3 other weapon systems instead. Problem solved then. There is some truth in this. The problem is also the world geometry, most close range fights simply happen in the 20-30km range where lasers is just much better than everything else. I also dont understand why a small disadvantage at extreme close range justifies an extreme advantage at other ranges. Maybe gal/min/cal ships is meant to have tracking disrupters in their extra utility slots, but that is just damn hard to manage compared to raw firepower
Deva Blackfire D00M.	Posted - 2009.05.21 10:47:00 - [92] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Originally by: Deva Blackfire Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 21/05/2009 00:34:34 Dont forget exploration - its also laser buff (no ammo use!). Also invention: more scorch for laser users and cheaper guns! Im sure that "coalition of coalitions" is also laser buff - as we know they are mainly gang weapons and gangs of 1500 people are best place for lasers. Ofc nano nerf is also laser buff - everything is easier to hit. Blackops boost is also laser boost - THE REDEEMER! is laser boat!. To sum up: are you stupid or just playing one? Sorry what do you want me to reply to? You didn't make a point. You spouted a load of nonsense and said. "That's you that is, that's what you sound like." EVERY of my line has a point (at least on exactly same level as yours does). If medium drone nerf was lasers buff (thats what you posted, wasnt it?) so is exploration change, BOps change and almost all other changes. And while we are at drones: Medium drone users in gallente line: - Vexor - Ishtar (rarely, heavies were better 90% of the time) - Domi (same as ishtar) Medium drone users in amarr line: - Arbi - Pilgrim - Curse - Apoc - Abaddon Hmmm geee i wonder who got hit harder here. Blaster buff then it is.
honey bunchetta	Posted - 2009.05.21 12:40:00 - [93] Direct buffs to BS lasers/lasers. 1. Tracking buff, just before the nano nerf. A. Allowing pulse to hit cruiser sized NANO ships at range BEFORE they were speed nerfed. B. Reducing the number of med sized cruiser hull gang vs gang pvp. 2. EM resistance changes. A. Increased laser DPS. Indirect buffs to BS lasers and nerfs to BS blasters. 1. Nano nerf: A. Made range the new "tertiary tank". B. Increased the use of BS gang fighting especially RR. 2. Web nerf: A. Making solo BS pvp virtually non-existant due to small ships easily kiteing BS turrets. B. Also making med-large gang BS pvp the only viable option. 3. Population density: A. More ppl same space = a increase in gang styles of pvp. B. A reduction in available solo targets for all sizes of solo ships. 4. Reduced mwd cap penalty/speed reduction. A. Givinging laser ships more overall cap to fire guns with. B. Also reducing the speed MWD gave makes blaster ships take longer to get into optimal. C. Reducing MWD speed also increased the cap usage blaster BS need to get into range by needing more cycles. More recent/upcoming changes that give buffs to BS lasers and nerfs to BS blasters. 1. ECM range reduction: A. ECM optimal is now within BS pulse range. B. Also increasing the effectivness of RR BS gangs. 2. Agility reduction: A. All classes of ships taking a agility reduction, meaning those that need to manouver into optimal are slower to do so and use more CAP mwding. B. Amarr having a MASSIVE optimal need to manouver the least so spend more time outside of others optimal. C. Ships other than lasers spend more time manouvering into optimal so doing less dps.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.21 13:40:00 - [94] Originally by: honey bunchetta Direct buffs to BS lasers/lasers. 1. Tracking buff, just before the nano nerf. A. Allowing pulse to hit cruiser sized NANO ships at range BEFORE they were speed nerfed. Yeah and now that tracking buff isn't needed, so yeah, take that tracking boost away. By doing this, you will fix pretty much everything. The tracking boost to Lasers was meant to be able to hit smaller ships better, because the cruiser sized ships was so fast. And now, the speed is nerfed, so what's the point with the tracking boost Lasers got then?. Lasers are just overpowered atm because of that. And to the other nerfs to Blasters as you told. Murina, can you please tell me why alot of players are still doing an excelent job in a Blaster BS today even after those nerfs?. Is that because Blasters are crap, or is it because Blasters are very good?. The answer is easy. Blasters are totally fine and players who are smart just find new ways to use their Blaster BS'es in. If Blasters had been as crap as you 'think' they are, then i also think Darknesss and many other Blaster BS pilots in the alliance i'm in would say Blasters are crap to if they had been crap. But the fact is that Blasters is fine. I see no complains in alliance chat or corp chat that Blasters are crap or poor. I have never seen it either. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2009.05.21 14:00:00 - [95] Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 21/05/2009 14:02:43 Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 21/05/2009 14:00:24 Originally by: NightmareX I like the webs as they are now, but it wouldn't hurt to take them to 70%. I'm all in for that. But saying 50% tracking boost to Blasters and 30% to Autocannons is asking to get the frigs and cruisers unpopular against BS'es again. Or it will make the frigs and cruisers useless against BS'es then. Like they was earlier. 70% webs would be even better than a 50% tracking bonus, especially against a smaller ship that fits a scram and no web of its own. The problem is it would be a tracking boost to ALL large weapons, which would do nothing to help the balance of lasers against blasters and ACs. A 50% tracking boost to blasters would make it a lot harder to speed tank a mega in web range, but it would still be very easy for a frigate to do and HACs that do not fit an afterburner would still have the option to kite the blaster ship due to its extremely limited range. IMO the ability to track well inside web range should be the blaster advantage. A smaller tracking boost to ACs would make them slightly more difficult to speed tank as well, and their "very slight" range advantage over blasters makes them harder to kite too. This would make them able to hit reasonably well at close and medium range, but not as well as the other two turret types in their optimal ranges. Even with a 100% boost to blaster tracking all it takes is one arbitrator with a couple of TDs to knock it back down to worse than it was before such a boost. TDs are devastatingly powerful against a turret battleship. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.21 14:13:00 - [96] Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 21/05/2009 14:02:43 Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 21/05/2009 14:00:24 Originally by: NightmareX I like the webs as they are now, but it wouldn't hurt to take them to 70%. I'm all in for that. But saying 50% tracking boost to Blasters and 30% to Autocannons is asking to get the frigs and cruisers unpopular against BS'es again. Or it will make the frigs and cruisers useless against BS'es then. Like they was earlier. 70% webs would be even better than a 50% tracking bonus, especially against a smaller ship that fits a scram and no web of its own. The problem is it would be a tracking boost to ALL large weapons, which would do nothing to help the balance of lasers against blasters and ACs. A 50% tracking boost to blasters would make it a lot harder to speed tank a mega in web range, but it would still be very easy for a frigate to do and HACs that do not fit an afterburner would still have the option to kite the blaster ship due to its extremely limited range. IMO the ability to track well inside web range should be the blaster advantage. A smaller tracking boost to ACs would make them slightly more difficult to speed tank as well, and their "very slight" range advantage over blasters makes them harder to kite too. This would make them able to hit reasonably well at close and medium range, but not as well as the other two turret types in their optimal ranges. Even with a 100% boost to blaster tracking all it takes is one arbitrator with a couple of TDs to knock it back down to worse than it was before such a boost. TDs are devastatingly powerful against a turret battleship. I see where you want to go. But i was still hitting a Pilgrim that had dual tracking disrupted me. He was orbiting me at 2-3 km at a speed of 250 m/s. The Pilgrim was ofc webbed. But even then when i was dual tracking disrupted, i was still hitting him. But not good enough to break his tank. Yes this was right after the web nerf on sisi. I think the tracking on Large Blasters is good enough tbh. I just think there is some crap in the whole tracking formula that makes Blasters / Autocannons in some situations to be crap. So i rather see the tracking formula fixed before anything. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Ignition SemperFi The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.21 14:41:00 - [97] Edited by: Ignition SemperFi on 21/05/2009 14:42:13 posting in a thread where torps were boned and no one cares. back to the subject at hand BS sized autocannons need looked at, scorch needs a sligh reduction in tracking, Pulse need their optimal increased. I believe this would allow for more ships to get under the tracking of large pulses (which i <3 btw thou). The other problem is you have to choose as a blaster pilot to either a) fit a warpscram and web or b) warp disruptor and web. (hell caldari blaster pilots usually dont even have a slot for a web so be happy) Yes, could increase their tracking but now your ability to BBQ smaller ships increases greatly and this is why i cant support this issue. This is where i believe its not as much the tracking of a mega or let alone a hype that needs looked at but the tracking formula itself. Also take into account the dmg you can apply with a mega, while still being able to utilize a utility highslot, whether RR or a neutralizer (which btw destroy's Amarr cap intensive boats) where as the geddon has even worse fitting issues than the mega, and has only 3 midslots. or we look at the abaddon, which is a cap monster with a giant passive tank but much smaller drone bay and is teir 3 all in all do i believe the blaster mega should be able to bring amazing amounts of DPS to bear in its range, yes. Should it be able to deal with cruisers, hardly at all. Yet a warpscrammed and webbed cruiser will generally melt under your your antimatter or null. Now could you be warpscrammed as well, yes and just like everything else in eve... there is a counter to your rock and a counter to my paper or scissors. TLDR: Boost Bs sized autocannons, SLIGHTLY tweak scorch tracking, fit a warp scram + web, and give large blasters a 5% dmg boost... so if and when you can hit it, you are outperforming everything in your range. You wont get back your OP blaster mega of the past, we all adapt. and FFS fix the tracking formula ---- People Say Im paranoid because I have a gun, I say I dont have to be paranoid because I have a gun. Space Vikings
1072 Fliegerkorps	Posted - 2009.05.21 15:15:00 - [98] well agreed.. having a gun only effective between 2km - 4.5km without decent advantages really suck. -boombastica !-
Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND	Posted - 2009.05.21 15:56:00 - [99] Originally by: NightmareX But i was still hitting a Pilgrim that had dual tracking disrupted me. He was orbiting me at 2-3 km at a speed of 250 m/s. The Pilgrim was ofc webbed. But even then when i was dual tracking disrupted, i was still hitting him. But not good enough to break his tank. Yes this was right after the web nerf on sisi. I think the tracking on Large Blasters is good enough tbh. I just think there is some crap in the whole tracking formula that makes Blasters / Autocannons in some situations to be crap. So i rather see the tracking formula fixed before anything. That Pilgrim must have been range disrupting you then since a cruiser sized target at 2km-250m/s is a hard target to track with blasters without any disruption. With double tracking disruption you wouldn't have touched him unless his EWar skills were trash. Also he could have just as easily stayed at 8-9km with double range disruption and never taken a single hit. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
london Gallente Dark-Rising	Posted - 2009.05.21 17:07:00 - [100] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Anyone who has flown blaster BS a LOT knows that the only way to really do effective damage is to be just under optimal range (say, 4km for Neutron IIs and max skills with faction antimatter) and have both the shooter and the target sit dead still. Any transversal at all will wreck your DPS, and this is BS vs. BS. It only gets worse when you're shooting at a smaller target. It's not like an Abaddon or Geddon where a BS can be going 3-400m/sec transverse at 15km and you're still hitting it for 100% effective DPS, or zapping cruisers at 2km/sec at 35km away. Ask yourself this: is it reasonable to expect an Abaddon to be able to hit a Cruiser flying at 1500-2km/sec at 30-40km for 80-90% effective DPS using T2 ammo? If the answer is yes, then shouldn't it also be reasonable for a Mega (which has a tracking bonus, no less) to hit a Cruiser flying at the same speed at 12-18km and do the same relative DPS with similar ammo? Everything in Eve is a tradeoff. Lasers have big benefits and great capability, so to ACs. Blasters right now are sucky because lasers can do their job at their range at 90-100% efficiency plus continue to perform at what are for blasters extreme ranges. Heck, a while back I instapopped a Harpy or Hawk (can't remember exactly which) with my Abaddon at 45km+. When it happened I thought the guy warped off when I lost lock. I couldn't believe it. lasers are awesome. I want blasters to be awesome in their own area of operation as well: extreme close range. Right now they're not. Amen, brotha.

Xorth Adimus Caldari The Perfect Storm Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2009.05.21 19:41:00 - [101] Simple: 1. Fix falloff so that it is effective for guns that need to use it (A/cs / blasters). 2. Give some longer range hybrid and projectile ammo real bonus's (ie positive falloff effects). That way everyone won't just use antimatter / EMP 90% of the time!
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.22 21:36:00 - [102] Right now, Blasters largely need help because their role has been taken over by lasers. Having a damage advantage from 0-6km and being totally outclassed past 6km speaks pretty poorly for battleship sized blasters. IMO, there are three possible fixes: - Increase blaster base damage by some non-trivial amount. This gives more DPS in range but accepts the current percentage of damage lost due to having "poor" tracking for range, and the damage lost for range. - Increase blaster base tracking. This gives more DPS close in and is an indirect nerf to smaller ships that hope to get under blasters. - Significantly nerf laser tracking so that their damage envelope starts a bit further out. I'm a fan of a bit of all three (slightly more tracking, a medium damage boost, and a medium laser tracking nerf). No, lasers are not supposed to be WTFPWN at 10km. If you wanted to engage at 10km, you should have brought a blaster ship. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm	Posted - 2009.05.22 21:55:00 - [103] Originally by: Liang Nuren Right now, Blasters largely need help because their role has been taken over by lasers. Having a damage advantage from 0-6km and being totally outclassed past 6km speaks pretty poorly for battleship sized blasters. IMO, there are three possible fixes: - Increase blaster base damage by some non-trivial amount. This gives more DPS in range but accepts the current percentage of damage lost due to having "poor" tracking for range, and the damage lost for range. - Increase blaster base tracking. This gives more DPS close in and is an indirect nerf to smaller ships that hope to get under blasters. - Significantly nerf laser tracking so that their damage envelope starts a bit further out. I'm a fan of a bit of all three (slightly more tracking, a medium damage boost, and a medium laser tracking nerf). No, lasers are not supposed to be WTFPWN at 10km. If you wanted to engage at 10km, you should have brought a blaster ship. -Liang 1st one shouldnt be considerd, since 1300Dps from a Megathron is more then enough already. You should still take into account that people still fly solo or very small gangs were you have a good chance of landing directly on top of your opponent. A Mega dealing more then 1300Dps would be pretty ridicoules in this case. I agree, a little range boost would help, bot no damage boost.
ZENZATION MeMento.	Posted - 2009.05.22 22:32:00 - [104] Originally by: fuxinos 1st one shouldnt be considerd, since 1300Dps from a Megathron is more then enough already. Why? Is there some magic line at 1300 dps that shouldnt be crossed? You do understand that laser battleships do 94% of the damage at three times the range right?
Inari Valar	Posted - 2009.05.22 23:43:00 - [105] Large blasters could use a bit more dps, but would really benefit from a change to the tracking formula. Ship size should have a HUGE impact on close-range tracking. If the ship is 1500m long, and only 500m away from my BS, it shouldn't matter how fast the thing is going. I should be able to hit it. A re-working of the tracking formula to account for ship size vs range at closer ranges would help mitigate a lot of the tracking problems ships have up close (and the horrible 0 range issue)
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.23 00:10:00 - [106] Originally by: fuxinos Originally by: Liang Nuren Right now, Blasters largely need help because their role has been taken over by lasers. Having a damage advantage from 0-6km and being totally outclassed past 6km speaks pretty poorly for battleship sized blasters. IMO, there are three possible fixes: - Increase blaster base damage by some non-trivial amount. This gives more DPS in range but accepts the current percentage of damage lost due to having "poor" tracking for range, and the damage lost for range. - Increase blaster base tracking. This gives more DPS close in and is an indirect nerf to smaller ships that hope to get under blasters. - Significantly nerf laser tracking so that their damage envelope starts a bit further out. I'm a fan of a bit of all three (slightly more tracking, a medium damage boost, and a medium laser tracking nerf). No, lasers are not supposed to be WTFPWN at 10km. If you wanted to engage at 10km, you should have brought a blaster ship. -Liang 1st one shouldnt be considerd, since 1300Dps from a Megathron is more then enough already. You should still take into account that people still fly solo or very small gangs were you have a good chance of landing directly on top of your opponent. A Mega dealing more then 1300Dps would be pretty ridicoules in this case. I agree, a little range boost would help, bot no damage boost. Yeahhhh... no. The theoretical maximum 1300 DPS Megathron is fiction. As an example I was out in 0.0 a few weeks back with a maxed out gank Neutron Blasterthron with 3x magstab IIs and 5x Berserker IIs (yeah, I know, not Ogre IIs, but the targets were ratting Sanshas and more thermal damage wasn't going to help). The point being is that even with an all gank setup, I still wasn't seeing 1300 DPS due to the fact that I'm not going to fit the better part of 3/4 billion ISK in implants for 2x 5% damage implants when I know as soon as I get bubbled I'm podded. I even sacrificed all of my anti-tackle capability (light drones) for a 5th heavy drone, just to maximize my DPS for the quick gank. It still wasn't enough. I still got tackled, I still died, and it's all due to the Blasterthron not doing enough DPS to get in, make a kill and get out before I'm tackled by 5-6 HICs, dictors and inties. Max gank ships are super specialized and few and far between. The Blasterthron I was running had ZERO tank on it, because as soon as I'm tackled, I'm dead, tank or no tank. Real 'combat' setups with a worthwhile tank won't be doing anywhere NEAR 1300 DPS. These days if you can break 900 DPS you're doing really well, particularly givin the increased tanks due to rigs etc. My Abaddon will do more on-target real world DPS at all ranges, drones or no drones, than my Blasterthron will. The main differences between the Abaddon and Blasterthron at this point are flexibility of movement as far as getting back to a gate etc. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2009.05.23 05:52:00 - [107] Originally by: fuxinos 1st one shouldnt be considerd, since 1300Dps from a Megathron is more then enough already. You should still take into account that people still fly solo or very small gangs were you have a good chance of landing directly on top of your opponent. A Mega dealing more then 1300Dps would be pretty ridicoules in this case. I agree, a little range boost would help, bot no damage boost. fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm I'm guessing you're role playing with that post, what with your corp name and all. Regards Mag
Kyguard Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.23 06:44:00 - [108] I think everyone was hoping you'd go away. Internet anonymity ftl -
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.23 11:11:00 - [109] Edited by: NightmareX on 23/05/2009 11:12:16 Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Originally by: NightmareX But i was still hitting a Pilgrim that had dual tracking disrupted me. He was orbiting me at 2-3 km at a speed of 250 m/s. The Pilgrim was ofc webbed. But even then when i was dual tracking disrupted, i was still hitting him. But not good enough to break his tank. Yes this was right after the web nerf on sisi. I think the tracking on Large Blasters is good enough tbh. I just think there is some crap in the whole tracking formula that makes Blasters / Autocannons in some situations to be crap. So i rather see the tracking formula fixed before anything. That Pilgrim must have been range disrupting you then since a cruiser sized target at 2km-250m/s is a hard target to track with blasters without any disruption. With double tracking disruption you wouldn't have touched him unless his EWar skills were trash. Also he could have just as easily stayed at 8-9km with double range disruption and never taken a single hit. No he was using 2x Tracking Disruption Scripts on me. He told it to me after the fight. Before he started to use the Tracking Disruptor on me, i almost killed him. I took him right down to like 20% armor in 2-3 volleys when he was orbiting me at that distance and speed. But after he took on the TD's, i couldn't him enough to break his tank. But was still hitting him lightly. But then i was using a +5% to tracking implant though. But still, i was still hitting him. And like i have said earlier to, i have never had any issues with the tracking on Blasters. They have been working perfectly for me everytime i have tested / used Blasters. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.23 11:43:00 - [110] Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 23/05/2009 11:12:16 Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Originally by: NightmareX But i was still hitting a Pilgrim that had dual tracking disrupted me. He was orbiting me at 2-3 km at a speed of 250 m/s. The Pilgrim was ofc webbed. But even then when i was dual tracking disrupted, i was still hitting him. But not good enough to break his tank. Yes this was right after the web nerf on sisi. I think the tracking on Large Blasters is good enough tbh. I just think there is some crap in the whole tracking formula that makes Blasters / Autocannons in some situations to be crap. So i rather see the tracking formula fixed before anything. That Pilgrim must have been range disrupting you then since a cruiser sized target at 2km-250m/s is a hard target to track with blasters without any disruption. With double tracking disruption you wouldn't have touched him unless his EWar skills were trash. Also he could have just as easily stayed at 8-9km with double range disruption and never taken a single hit. No he was using 2x Tracking Disruption Scripts on me. He told it to me after the fight. Before he started to use the Tracking Disruptor on me, i almost killed him. I took him right down to like 20% armor in 2-3 volleys when he was orbiting me at that distance and speed. But after he took on the TD's, i couldn't him enough to break his tank. But was still hitting him lightly. But then i was using a +5% to tracking implant though. But still, i was still hitting him. And like i have said earlier to, i have never had any issues with the tracking on Blasters. They have been working perfectly for me everytime i have tested / used Blasters. Considering you are a notorious liar i doubt this ever happened at all. But even if it did: 1. He was a idiot for not being at range and using range scripts in his TD'd. 2. He did not set his orbit or his transversal properly at the close range he orbited you. But as i said you have been proved a liar on so many occasions on this and other topics i doubt it happened at all.

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.23 13:22:00 - [111] Edited by: NightmareX on 23/05/2009 13:26:09 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 23/05/2009 11:12:16 Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Originally by: NightmareX But i was still hitting a Pilgrim that had dual tracking disrupted me. He was orbiting me at 2-3 km at a speed of 250 m/s. The Pilgrim was ofc webbed. But even then when i was dual tracking disrupted, i was still hitting him. But not good enough to break his tank. Yes this was right after the web nerf on sisi. I think the tracking on Large Blasters is good enough tbh. I just think there is some crap in the whole tracking formula that makes Blasters / Autocannons in some situations to be crap. So i rather see the tracking formula fixed before anything. That Pilgrim must have been range disrupting you then since a cruiser sized target at 2km-250m/s is a hard target to track with blasters without any disruption. With double tracking disruption you wouldn't have touched him unless his EWar skills were trash. Also he could have just as easily stayed at 8-9km with double range disruption and never taken a single hit. No he was using 2x Tracking Disruption Scripts on me. He told it to me after the fight. Before he started to use the Tracking Disruptor on me, i almost killed him. I took him right down to like 20% armor in 2-3 volleys when he was orbiting me at that distance and speed. But after he took on the TD's, i couldn't him enough to break his tank. But was still hitting him lightly. But then i was using a +5% to tracking implant though. But still, i was still hitting him. And like i have said earlier to, i have never had any issues with the tracking on Blasters. They have been working perfectly for me everytime i have tested / used Blasters. Considering you are a notorious liar i doubt this ever happened at all. But even if it did: 1. He was a idiot for not being at range and using range scripts in his TD'd. 2. He did not set his orbit or his transversal properly at the close range he orbited you. But as i said you have been proved a liar on so many occasions on this and other topics i doubt it happened at all. Murina, is trolling / moaning / using your big ass mouth all you can do?. I have a tips to you, if you have nothing more than doing the 3 things over, i suggest you get the hell out of this topic. AND NEVER COME BACK. You add nothing to this topic anyways. Your only here to call peoples for names and tell others here that they are liars when someone doesn't agree with you. The thing i wrote over have happened and you just have to live with it. And because it have happened, it was good enough evidence to see that the tracking is good enough, FOR ME. You have one more warning before i send a report on you for calling peoples for things here. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Terra Mikael Private Nuisance	Posted - 2009.05.23 16:26:00 - [112] Edited by: Terra Mikael on 23/05/2009 16:28:05 seriously, I don't see what's wrong with them. On sisi I used a dual web hyperion to take down an assault frigate. Was lots of lulz. and no, I didn't use drones and I had a full rack of neutron blasters, no tracking computer, a single plate buffer, and a **load of damage mods. Edit: Idea - why not change the tracking bonus to a web bonus. I with dual webs, it could make things interesting... ________________________________ Originally by:** Lone Gunman Yes overpowered would be giving a ship with the Covert ops cloak the ability to fire say..Torpedos, now that would be overpowered. But CCP would
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.23 16:35:00 - [113] Edited by: NightmareX on 23/05/2009 16:35:28 Originally by: Terra Mikael Edit: Idea - why not change the tracking bonus to a web bonus. I with dual webs, it could make things interesting... Intresting idea yeah. But what about the Kronos then?, will the Kronos get back to 99% web strenght then?. The Kronos doesn't really need 2x Web bonuses though heh. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Terra Mikael Private Nuisance	Posted - 2009.05.23 16:58:00 - [114] No idea. It was just one of those ideas that came out of nowhere. Let bellum work out the details, i'm too **ing lazy. ________________________________ Originally by:** Lone Gunman Yes overpowered would be giving a ship with the Covert ops cloak the ability to fire say..Torpedos, now that would be overpowered. But CCP would
Chi Quan Perkone	Posted - 2009.05.23 18:13:00 - [115] Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 23/05/2009 11:12:16 Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Originally by: NightmareX But i was still hitting a Pilgrim that had dual tracking disrupted me. He was orbiting me at 2-3 km at a speed of 250 m/s. The Pilgrim was ofc webbed. But even then when i was dual tracking disrupted, i was still hitting him. But not good enough to break his tank. Yes this was right after the web nerf on sisi. I think the tracking on Large Blasters is good enough tbh. I just think there is some crap in the whole tracking formula that makes Blasters / Autocannons in some situations to be crap. So i rather see the tracking formula fixed before anything. That Pilgrim must have been range disrupting you then since a cruiser sized target at 2km-250m/s is a hard target to track with blasters without any disruption. With double tracking disruption you wouldn't have touched him unless his EWar skills were trash. Also he could have just as easily stayed at 8-9km with double range disruption and never taken a single hit. No he was using 2x Tracking Disruption Scripts on me. He told it to me after the fight. Before he started to use the Tracking Disruptor on me, i almost killed him. I took him right down to like 20% armor in 2-3 volleys when he was orbiting me at that distance and speed. But after he took on the TD's, i couldn't him enough to break his tank. But was still hitting him lightly. But then i was using a +5% to tracking implant though. But still, i was still hitting him. And like i have said earlier to, i have never had any issues with the tracking on Blasters. They have been working perfectly for me everytime i have tested / used Blasters. out of curiosity, what ship were you in and on what server? (i have the sneaking suspicion it was not a large blasters sporting one and not on tq, i which case: GO AWAY OR POST ON TOPIC) ---- Ceterum censeo blasters need some tracking love
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.23 20:16:00 - [116] Originally by: NightmareX Murina, is trolling / moaning / using your big ass mouth all you can do?. No but even if it was all i could do it would be preferable tpo reading your lies. Originally by: NightmareX 1. He was not an idiot. He was testing my tracking while he was orbiting me. 2: So orbiting at 2-3 km while using 2x TD's with tracking disruption scripts is not a good way to avoid getting hit?. And also, he was using a Warp Scrambler II and an Afterburner. So i couldn't MWD then. He needs to work on his TD skills cos i just tested the same scenario and even with my mains PERFECT gallente pvp skills and flying a mega the only things really hitting the pilgrim even when i had it webbed were my drones. Originally by: NightmareX Everytime someone tell you something like this, the players are either stupid or clueless. Nope, most other ppl i listen to if they talk sense, YOU i never believe cos you have lied way to many times and made up way to much crap about things you do not understand. It was only in the last thread on "ships and modules" that was about these problems that you were shown and learned how to fit a mega properly for TQ pvp but you think your some sort of authority on them.......
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.23 23:08:00 - [117] Edited by: NightmareX on 23/05/2009 23:15:03 Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 23/05/2009 20:28:25 Originally by: NightmareX Murina, is trolling / moaning / using your big ass mouth all you can do?. No its not, but even if it was all i could do it would be preferable to reading your lies. Originally by: NightmareX 1. He was not an idiot. He was testing my tracking while he was orbiting me. 2: So orbiting at 2-3 km while using 2x TD's with tracking disruption scripts is not a good way to avoid getting hit?. And also, he was using a Warp Scrambler II and an Afterburner. So i couldn't MWD then. He needs to work on his TD skills cos i just tested the same scenario and even with my mains PERFECT gallente pvp and turret skills and flying a mega the only things really hitting the afterburning pilgrim even when i had it T2 webbed were my drones. Originally by: NightmareX Everytime someone tell you something like this, the players are either stupid or clueless. Nope, most other ppl i listen to if they talk sense, YOU i never believe cos you have lied way to many times and made up way to much crap about things you do not understand. It was only in the last thread on "ships and modules" that was about these problems that you were shown and learned how to fit a mega properly for TQ pvp but you think your some sort of authority on them....... Ohhh, look, Murina strikes back with his awesome post with all of the truth. Anyways. Nr 1. If your not trolling moaning or using your big mouth, then please stop doing what your doing now. Nr 2. His TD skills was maxed. Not sure what you have been testing, but the pilot i was testing against was doing everything right. And yeah, when i said i was hitting him, i wasn't saying i was hitting him all the times. But i was still hitting him with my Ion Blaster Cannon II's with a +5% to tracking implant. Nr 3. About lying. Your not the best one to talk about lying. Because when it's about lying, then your the best one to lie about how Blasters is. You just want your ipwn machine back. And now after they nerfed the webbers, your just epicly bitter because you can't instapwn frigs and cruisers. And if you still dont know it. The tracking on the Larghe Blasters are still totally fine. Maybe you should cry about getting the tracking formula fixed instead where the problems are?. Originally by: Chi Quan out of curiosity, what ship were you in and on what server? (i have the sneaking suspicion it was not a large blasters sporting one and not on tq, i which case: GO AWAY OR POST ON TOPIC) Does it matter what server i was on?. The tracking is 100% the same on both servers. The ship i was using was both a Megathron and a Megathron Federate Issue on Sisi. If you can do nothing more than crying about sisi and that, or that i was using sisi to test out a valid game mechanig that is used over TQ everywhere, then i don't know, but maybe you should shut up instead and just accept that the tracking on TQ and Sisi is 100% the same. So why whine about it?. Maybe you should go lose a Blaster Megathron to a noob over it?. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Quixis	Posted - 2009.05.24 06:18:00 - [118] Originally by: NightmareX Does it matter what server i was on?. Actually it does, fights are not treated in the same manner as on TQ. Plus, I'm not sure what brownie points you expect to gain, just because you pilot a Fed issue Mega. It is risk free sisi after all.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.24 06:26:00 - [119] Nightmare- If all you're going to do is turn my thread into a flamewar then just stop posting in my thread. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.24 11:14:00 - [120] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Nightmare- If all you're going to do is turn my thread into a flamewar then just stop posting in my thread. Bellum, i'm just telling how Blasters works for me. And because i use them right, i have no issues with them at all. Is that so hard to understand?. And no. I'm not turning this into a flame war here. Maybe it might end up in a flame war with Murina here though. But it's still not me that are doing that. Just to let you know some things here. A tracking boost will not happen for Blasters, because that goes against the web nerf. A DPS boost will not happen either, because Blasters are already the king of DPS. A range boost on Blasters will not happen to, because that goes against to be the shortest range weapon system in EVE. The ONLY possible thing i see as possible to change is the webbers. Also to change them from 60% to 70%. Doing more than that is going way to far after how CCP want the PVP to be now. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise

Reborn Phoenix Pacific Dawn	Posted - 2009.05.24 12:31:00 - [121] Edited by: Reborn Phoenix on 24/05/2009 12:31:45 Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 24/05/2009 11:57:47 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Nightmare- If all you're going to do is turn my thread into a flamewar then just stop posting in my thread. Bellum, i'm just telling how Blasters works for me. And because i use them right, i have no issues with them at all. Doesn't matter if it's on TQ or Sisi, they are working as they should on both servers. Is that so hard to understand?. And no. I'm not turning this into a flame war here. Maybe it might end up in a flame war with Murina here though. But it's still not me that are doing that. Just to let you know some things here. A tracking boost will not happen for Blasters, because that goes against the web nerf. A DPS boost will not happen either, because Blasters are already the king of DPS. A range boost on Blasters will not happen to, because that goes against to be the shortest range weapon system in EVE. The ONLY possible thing i see as possible to change is the webbers. Also to change them from 60% to 70%. Doing more than that is going way to far after how CCP want the PVP to be now. Increasing webber effect from 60% to 70% would be more of a PVP imbalance than changing the tracking on large blasters since webbs would benefit every weapon in game.
JonnyKay Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.24 12:54:00 - [122] Fix projectiles first imho. If blasters get fixed Gallente will be op leaving minmatar way out behind again =(
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2009.05.24 13:36:00 - [123] Edited by: Mag''s on 24/05/2009 13:38:12 NightmareX, I would like you to answer me this please. If Blasters are so good, why don't you use them on TQ? That's not a flame, just a simple question Regarding your assertion, that a tracking boost would negate the web nerf, it wouldn't. They nerfed webs because it was thought 90% meant death no matter what. A boost to blasters tracking, wouldn't mean death no matter what, but it would make people think twice. I don't have the figures in front of me, but you'll find lasers track far better at their optimal, than blasters do at theirs. Can anyone here show the figures please and what kind of a boost it would require to bring them in line? Oh btw Bellum, I'll have tech 2 large pulse lasers in 1 day 13 hours, just need to get the levels up. Would have had them sooner, but other skills got in the way. Edit: spelling. Regards Mag
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.24 14:18:00 - [124] Edited by: NightmareX on 24/05/2009 14:19:10 Originally by: Mag's Edited by: Mag''s on 24/05/2009 13:38:12 NightmareX, I would like you to answer me this please. If Blasters are so good, why don't you use them on TQ? That's not a flame, just a simple question Regarding your assertion, that a tracking boost would negate the web nerf, it wouldn't. They nerfed webs because it was thought 90% meant death no matter what. A boost to blasters tracking, wouldn't mean death no matter what, but it would make people think twice. I don't have the figures in front of me, but you'll find lasers track far better at their optimal, than blasters do at theirs. Can anyone here show the figures please and what kind of a boost it would require to bring them in line? Oh btw Bellum, I'll have tech 2 large pulse lasers in 1 day 13 hours, just need to get the levels up. Would have had them sooner, but other skills got in the way. Edit: spelling. As i have told earlier, there is a very good reason why the tracking on Lasers need to be nerfed to where it was before the Lasers got the tracking boost so they could hit HAC's better. And then you say this: but you'll find lasers track far better at their optimal, than blasters do at theirs. Another damn good reason to nerf the tracking on Lasers. Because Lasers should have **** poor tracking at 5 km while having nice tracking at longer distances. Even if the tracking boost Lasers got some time ago will be taken away, then Lasers will still track very good at longer distances. And also, why start messing with 3 other weapon types when you can just fix Lasers so they are more balanced to the 3 other weapon types that ARE balanced to each others now. And why i don't use Blasters on TQ atm?, it's because i'm waiting for Large Blaster Spec skill to complete at level 5 in 12 days and 7 hours. When that's done, my next mission will be to take my security status up to -1.9 so i can get my Megathron Navy Issue out of empire. Atm i'm at -5.8. Will take some time with my free time to play EVE. When that's done, i will start to use Blaster BS'es. Anyways. Boosting the tracking on Blasters anymore now will then go more towards instapwning frigs and cruisers again. And believe me when i say it. That will never happen again. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.24 20:09:00 - [125] Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 24/05/2009 20:16:56 Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 24/05/2009 11:57:47 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Nightmare- If all you're going to do is turn my thread into a flamewar then just stop posting in my thread. Bellum, i'm just telling how Blasters works for me. And because i use them right, i have no issues with them at all. Doesn't matter if it's on TQ or Sisi, they are working as they should on both servers. Is that so hard to understand?. And no. I'm not turning this into a flame war here. Maybe it might end up in a flame war with Murina here though. But it's still not me that are doing that. Just to let you know some things here. A tracking boost will not happen for Blasters, because that goes against the web nerf. A DPS boost will not happen either, because Blasters are already the king of DPS. A range boost on Blasters will not happen to, because that goes against to be the shortest range weapon system in EVE. The ONLY possible thing i see as possible to change is the webbers. Also to change them from 60% to 70%. Doing more than that is going way to far after how CCP want the PVP to be now. That entire post is just an opinion piece. #1, you imply that everyone else is just 'doing it wrong' and that if they knew what they were doing that they wouldn't be complaining. So to that I'm sure everyone can say a collective 'F#ck You'. Second, blasters are not the 'king of DPS'. There are a few ares where blasters do a little more DPS than other weapons, but the majority of the time they are equaled or eclipsed by all other weapon systems. The small amount of time that they end up doing more damage, and the small difference in damage that they actually have when doing so doesn't make up for all of their shortcomings. I'm max skilled in all four races weapons. I know full well what each is capable of and what they're not. Lasers don't need to be nerfed. Neither do torps (which do a TON of DPS at outstanding range). Boosting blasters won't 'instapwn' frigs/cruisers. Only someone who don't know wtf they're talking about would make such a statement. I don't care about SISI or TQ. Both are valid if they have the same rules for a particular test. I just killed a super tanked Dominix with a Dual Heavy Pulse Megathron the other day in a 1v1, as well as a Typhoon and a bunch of other BS in a stand up 1v1 each, just to prove it could be done. The targets were all max skilled PVP pilots. No, I don't want lasers nerfed. I think the overall balance for everything is quite nice at the moment except for medium and large blasters needing to do a bit more DPS and have a bit more tracking. Not 300% more, or 200% more. Just a small amount more. DPS needs a 10-15% increase across the board, and tracking needs a 20-30% increase. Optimal range could be improved by 25% or so too without stepping on anyone's toes. I think AC falloff should be doubled across the board. For all sizes. They need to have longer range than blasters, and need to be able to compete with pulse lasers for range, with the reduced damage allowing for no cap use. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.24 23:24:00 - [126] Edited by: NightmareX on 24/05/2009 23:26:16 Originally by: Bellum Eternus That entire post is just an opinion piece. And it's how i use the Blasters. I must be doing something right when i don't have any issues with Blasters right?. Why do i don't have it while you have issues?. For me it looks like the problem is in the players, not in the weapon type, like it always have been looking for me. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 10:39:00 - [127] Originally by: NightmareX And it's how i use the Blasters. I must be doing something right when i don't have any issues with Blasters right?. You do not and have never used blasters on TQ. Originally by: NightmareX For me it looks like the problem is in the players, not in the weapon type, like it always have been looking for me. The problem is about a player but that player is you because you are not a TQ blaster BS pvper, if you were you would understand the problems. The only reason you have that pimped navy mega on TQ is so you can get the devs to move it to FD- after every sissi patch so you can play with it on sissi and the crap you post about not having time to get your sec status up is just that...total crap. How long have you had it now??....
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 10:53:00 - [128] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 10:55:04 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX And it's how i use the Blasters. I must be doing something right when i don't have any issues with Blasters right?. You do not and have never used blasters on TQ. Originally by: NightmareX For me it looks like the problem is in the players, not in the weapon type, like it always have been looking for me. The problem is about a player but that player is you because you are not a TQ blaster BS pvper, if you were you would understand the problems. The only reason you have that pimped navy mega on TQ is so you can get the devs to move it to FD- after every sissi patch so you can play with it on sissi and the crap you post about not having time to get your sec status up is just that...total crap. How long have you had it now??.... Excuse me, but we have something called Singularity where Blasters exist to. Blasters on Singularity and TQ are 100% the same. And when i'm testing out things with Blasters on Singularity, then i'm making sure that the test gets as hard as possible. Like with the Dual Tracking Disruptor Pilgrim with a Warp Scrambler II and Afterburner. The Megathron i was testing with had a hard time, but i still managed to hit the Pilgrim. And what does that show?, yes it shows that the tracking is really good for Blasters. And Murina. Can you do me a favour?. If yes, then please do this. Ask Darknesss or Leilani Solaris why Blasters are really good. And don't tell me you wont do it, because that means your a ***** with no balls to just get the facts right into your face that Blasters are fine. Remember, when it's about Blasters, i will listen to the experts with Blasters, not the crybabys with no skills in using Blasters right.
Terra Mikael Private Nuisance	Posted - 2009.05.25 12:41:00 - [129] Bellum, could we get a link to your original blaster thread suggestions?
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 12:55:00 - [130] Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 13:13:20 Originally by: NightmareX Excuse me, but we have something called Singularity where Blasters exist to. Blasters on Singularity and TQ are 100% the same. Blasters maybe the same but: 1. The available combat is not. 2. Very very few ppl if any at all use HG and 5% implants for the sort of pvp that is availble on TQ for blaster ships. You problem is you live and play on sissi where you type in local what sort of ship you want to fight and range you want you combat to be at, and where the areas and combat are controlled by ccp. Originally by: NightmareX Can you do me a favour?. If yes, then please do this. Ask Darknesss or Leilani Solaris why Blasters are really good. How about you do everybody a favor and go away until you have some blaster XP on TQ. I dunno who you think you are to name drop others like it means anything, especially when neither of the ppl you mention have posted anything in this thread. Also Leilani Solaris uses rails and lasers more than blasters, darkness also has more kills with rails than he does with blasters......you total tool. Originally by: NightmareX And don't tell me you wont do it, because that means your a ***** with no balls to just get the facts right into your face that Blasters are fine. You are the clown and pus*y with no balls to fly on TQ, you hide on SISSI using your T2 pimped T2 rigged and 100isk implanted fits and think you are a pvp expert....your not your a liar, coward and a fool.

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 14:57:00 - [131] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 15:01:32 Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 13:13:20 Originally by: NightmareX Excuse me, but we have something called Singularity where Blasters exist to. Blasters on Singularity and TQ are 100% the same. Blasters maybe the same but: 1. The available combat is not. 2. Very very few ppl if any at all use HG and 5% implants for the sort of pvp that is availble on TQ for blaster ships. You problem is you live and play on sissi where you type in local what sort of ship you want to fight and range you want you combat to be at, and where the areas and combat are controlled by ccp. Originally by: NightmareX Can you do me a favour?. If yes, then please do this. Ask Darknesss or Leilani Solaris why Blasters are really good. How about you do everybody a favor and go away until you have some blaster XP on TQ. I dunno who you think you are to name drop others like it means anything, especially when neither of the ppl you mention have posted anything in this thread. Also Leilani Solaris uses rails and lasers more than blasters, darkness also has more kills with rails than he does with blasters......you total tool. Originally by: NightmareX And don't tell me you wont do it, because that means your a ***** with no balls to just get the facts right into your face that Blasters are fine. You are the clown and pus*y with no balls to fly on TQ, you hide on SISSI using your T2 pimped T2 rigged and 100isk implanted fits and think you are a pvp expert....your not your a liar, coward and a fool. 1. As i have said like trillion of times now. In the 3 years i have been testing a Blaster Mega or other Blaster BS'es on sisi, i have been testing EVERY damn possible PVP situations you can think of there. It's no excuse that it's a test server. When i have tested the most common PVP styles / tactics on Sisi like a million times, then i think Sisi is a good enough reason to say how Blasters is working. I have been in all from 1 vs 1 fights up to like 200 vs 200 man fight on Sisi. Yes those times with 200 vs 200 have been when CCP have announced that they want to do a stress test etc etc. But it's still a massive fleet fight and a valid way to test out a fleet battle. And i know alot of players that use LG / HG Slave sets on TQ, you just have to look around and not be lazy. 2. So your saying FFA 1 or the other FFA's are controlled by CCP?. LOL your a joke. FFA's are the best way to test out your ship. You can get the whole FFA on you etc. And it have been those times where i have been alone against 3-5 others in BS'es and Battlecruisers etc etc in FFA 1 in my Megathron / Kronos / Rokh, and still pwned the hell out of them. Simply because i know what i'm doing in a Blaster BS. And ofc the 4-5 man gang that was on me did some few mistakes. There is endless with ways you can fight on Sisi. Your just dumb as a monkey if you cannot see why Sisi is a good way to test out the performance on your ships. And ask anyone who are on Sisi how much i have been on Sisi the last 3 months. I have probably been there for max 1 week in total. 3. How about you do everybody a favor and go away until you have some more IQ and skills to use Blasters right?. 4. Does it matter if Leilani use more Rails and Lasers than Blasters?, i'm not asking on what weapon that is most used. I'm telling that he can use the weapons he's using very good. And yes, Leilani can use his Blasters extremely good like he have shows many times now. That's what it's all about, if he can use the weapons good or not. 5. And to the last thing. OMG, look, must call NightmareX for things because that makes me look uber cool and it shows that i'm the king of talking and know what i'm talking about waaaaah waaaahhh and must call him for more things because that makes you more right than me. RIIIIIIIGGGHHHHT Murina, the PRO king of PVPer?.
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 15:39:00 - [132] Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 15:42:27 Originally by: NightmareX As i have said like trillion of times now. In the 3 years i have been testing a Blaster Mega or other Blaster BS'es on sisi, i have been testing EVERY damn possible PVP situations you can think of there. 3 years of testing without using what you tested on TQ ever???????. You PLAY on sissi you do not test anything. YOU ARE A PATHETIC CLUELESS LOSER.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 15:43:00 - [133] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 15:45:58 Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 15:42:27 Originally by: NightmareX As i have said like trillion of times now. In the 3 years i have been testing a Blaster Mega or other Blaster BS'es on sisi, i have been testing EVERY damn possible PVP situations you can think of there. 3 years of testing without using what you tested on TQ ever???????. You PLAY on sissi you do not test anything. YOU ARE A PATHETIC CLUELESS LOSER. Yeah, and in all of those 3 years i have never had issues with Blasters. Does that tells you something?. I don't have issues now and i doubt i will have any issues withthem either now. No i don't live on Sisi now smartypants. I live on TQ now when i have the time to play. There is more important stuffs to do in our alliance than being on Sisi right now. And lol @ you for not being able to write Sisi right. It's not Sissi it's Sisi or Singularity if you want that. LOL when you don't even know how to write the name Sisi right, then i doubt you even know how it is on Sisi. Oh look at the bear tears. Had to call me names again. I hope you feel proud of that. Oh btw. A protip to you. You wont be more right than me just for calling me names if you don't know that. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 15:58:00 - [134] Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX Yeah, and in all of those 3 years i have never had issues with Blasters on Sisi. And i can for sure say that when i haven't had a single issue with Blasters in those 3 years with testing then in EVERY possible situations that is possible to test out in on Sisi, then i believe i wont have any issues on TQ either. Simple as that. Does that tells you something?. I don't have issues now and i doubt i will have any issues withthem either now. IT TELLS ME AND EVERY OTHER PLAYER IN EVE WITH ANY XP THAT YOU ARE A LIAR AND A FOOL AND HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT BLASTER PVP ON TQ. IF BLASTERS WERE SO GOOD YOU WOULD HAVE USED THEM ON TQ AT LEAST ONCE BUT YOU NEVER HAVE, AND SAYING THAT YOU HAVE BEEN TESTING THEM FOR ALL THAT TIME IS JUST MORE OF YOUR USUAL BULL. Y O U A R E A L O S E R Oh the rabble rabble rabble here is just epicly fun to read. Anyways. You better shut up and be on topic before it's to late. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
oniplE Point of No Return	Posted - 2009.05.25 16:08:00 - [135] new thread pls. x
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 16:24:00 - [136] Originally by: NightmareX Oh the rabble rabble rabble here is just epicly fun to read. Anyways. You better shut up and be on topic before it's to late. The silly troll you post on here is amusing to read. Anyways. Maybe if you had even ONE kill (or even a loss) on TQ in a blaster BS you would be slightly less of a joke.
Fatality Killer Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2009.05.25 16:45:00 - [137] Edited by: Fatality Killer on 25/05/2009 16:45:30 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX Oh the rabble rabble rabble here is just epicly fun to read. Anyways. You better shut up and be on topic before it's to late. The silly troll you post on here is amusing to read. Anyways. Maybe if you had even ONE kill (or even a loss) on TQ in a blaster BS you would be slightly less of a joke. Can't you get your silly troll ass out of this topic if you have nothing meaningfull to add?. I'm telling my experience with Blasters and that's on topic though. EDIT: Posted with my wonderfull alt.
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.05.25 16:48:00 - [138] Seriously, why is Murina allowed to post in this forum?
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 16:51:00 - [139] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 16:57:41 Originally by: Allen Ramses Seriously, why is Murina allowed to post in this forum? Same question. I know i can be stupid to someone here, but i'm telling my experience on how Blasters is for me at least. Nothing wrong with that. I'm on-topic most of the times except for when Murina is doing his epicly trolls / crying / whining here. It's in fact him that are taking every of those topics off-topic. And just so you know it Murina, your already reported 3 times now. That's why i said shut up before it's to late longer up here on this page.

CCP Mitnal C C P	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:00:00 - [140] Cleaned again. Do not let this thread become a TQ v Singularity conflict. Any future off-topic remarks in posts will be met with forum bans. Mitnal Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us


Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:02:00 - [141] Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 17:03:01 Anyway i do not see how a increase in blaster tracking and a reduction in laser tracking is a problem, after all pulse can track cruisers ect at their longer optimal ranges due to how range effects tracking so i do not see why blasters should not be able to do the same in their optimal as well. That means the smaller ships get close to laser BS to avoid/reduce incoming dmg and stay at range from blaster ships to avoid/reduce dmg. Right now blasters are getting screwed at short and long ranges as the cannot track in close and do not have range either. Blasters and AC also need to do more DPS aty 10-20km, the mega needs more CPU and the hyperion needs more PG and maybe CPU as well.
Sgt Napalm SiN. Corp Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:07:00 - [142] Signing support for OP. CCP Nozh appears to have disappeared as of late. The simple aspect is that with the web nerf blasters have become in effective and are in need of a bonus swap to counter the tracking issue. Also posting that Nightmare X has no clue if they are working as intended. At least with that toon. http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=NightmareX&filter=losses#show
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:07:00 - [143] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 17:15:09 Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 17:03:01 Anyway i do not see how a increase in blaster tracking and a reduction in laser tracking is a problem, after all pulse can track cruisers ect at their longer optimal ranges due to how range effects tracking so i do not see why blasters should not be able to do the same in their optimal as well. That means the smaller ships get close to laser BS to avoid/reduce incoming dmg and stay at range from blaster ships to avoid/reduce dmg. Right now blasters are getting screwed at short and long ranges as the cannot track in close and do not have range either. Blasters and AC also need to do more DPS aty 10-20km, the mega needs more CPU and the hyperion needs more PG and maybe CPU as well. If you don't know it yet, the tracking on Lasers are way to high atm. The ONLY reason the lasers got a tracking boost some years ago was so they could hit the fast cruisers and HAC's better. And what happened not so long time ago?, yes the speed was nerfed pretty hard. And then the Lasers still have that boosted tracking now when that tracking boost isn't really needed. Lasers will still track pretty good at longer distanced without the tracking boost they got. And that's why boosting the tracking on Blasters just so they can be more inline with Lasers is stupid. I rather see the webs changed from 60 to 70% instead of messing with the tracking on all of the close / med range turrets. Originally by: Sgt Napalm Also posting that Nightmare X has no clue if they are working as intended. At least with that toon. http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=NightmareX&filter=losses#show So your saying that in all of those 3 years i have been testing out Blasters in every possible ways you can test Blasters in on Sisi and never have had ANY issues at all. Are you then saying that the Blasters must have issues while i have never come across a single issue at all in those 3 years?. In 3 years of using Blasters on Sisi, i should clearly have seen some issues with Blasters if there REALLY have been some issues. Right?. I also ONLY listen to the players in EVE i know 100% that are good with Blasters. And all of those i know and have been talking with that use Blaster BS'es all day long are saying that Blasters is fine. Just ask Darknesss and Leilani Solaris for example. They know their stuffs when it's about Blaster BS'es. I don't know how you guys use Blasters, but for me it looks like there is something fked up in your experience or skills tbh.
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:16:00 - [144] Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Murina Anyway i do not see how a increase in blaster tracking and a reduction in laser tracking is a problem, after all pulse can track cruisers ect at their longer optimal ranges due to how range effects tracking so i do not see why blasters should not be able to do the same in their optimal as well. That means the smaller ships get close to laser BS to avoid/reduce incoming dmg and stay at range from blaster ships to avoid/reduce dmg. Right now blasters are getting screwed at short and long ranges as the cannot track in close and do not have range either. Blasters and AC also need to do more DPS aty 10-20km, the mega needs more CPU and the hyperion needs more PG and maybe CPU as well. If you don't know it yet, the tracking on Lasers are way to high atm. The ONLY reason the lasers got a tracking boost some years ago was so they could hit the fast cruisers and HAC's better. And what happened not so long time ago?, yes the speed was nerfed pretty hard. And then the Lasers still have that boosted tracking now when that tracking boost isn't really needed. Lasers will still track pretty good at longer distanced without the tracking boost they got. So why state the obvious that everybody already knows?. Originally by: NightmareX And that's why boosting the tracking on Blasters just so they can be more inline with Lasers is stupid. So you think nerfing lasers will fix the problems with blasters?.... Originally by: NightmareX I rather see the webs changed from 60 to 70% instead of messing with the tracking on all of the close / med range turrets. Quick fixes like that are a sign of lazy ppl and programmers as well as the fact that a increase in web effectiveness is also essentially a buff to ALL turret systems including lasers. Well thgought out adjustments cause a lot less problems down the line than just whacking a general adjustment into the games programming.
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:25:00 - [145] Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 17:35:03 Originally by: NightmareX So your saying that in all of those 3 years i have been testing out Blasters in every possible ways you can test Blasters in on Sisi and never have had ANY issues at all. Are you then saying that the Blasters must have issues while i have never come across a single issue at all in those 3 years?. In 3 years of using Blasters on Sisi, i should clearly have seen some issues with Blasters if there REALLY have been some issues. Right?. The very fact you CLAIM (as i think you are lying about "testing everyting blaster BS can do") to have been testing for 3 years but have never flown one on TQ shows you have 0 practical TQ XP with them. Originally by: NightmareX I also ONLY listen to the players in EVE i know 100% that are good with Blasters. And all of those i know and have been talking with that use Blaster BS'es all day long are saying that Blasters is fine. Just ask Darknesss and Leilani Solaris for example. 1. You only listen to ppl who you think agree with you, but so far ABP who you mentioned used more pulse and rails than blasters, and the guy who made the vids (Farjung) also shot you down in flames when you tried to use his PAST experiances. 2. I do not see either of those ppl posting in this thread. 3. I do see a LOT of ppl with blaster XP telling you that you are totally wrong and that blasters need fixing....but like i said its only ppl who agree with you that you copnsider worth listening to.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:26:00 - [146] Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX And that's why boosting the tracking on Blasters just so they can be more inline with Lasers is stupid. So you think nerfing lasers will fix the problems with blasters?.... It will fix most of the things you guys are crying about. The only reason why you guys want a boost to the tracking on Blasters is because Lasers have so good tracking in the distance where Blasters should be the best. And because the Lasers ONLY got the boost to tracking to his fast cruisers and HAC's better, then the Lasers tracking is overpowered today. Because if the speed on our ships today had been like this before the Lasers got the tracking boost, then the Lasers simply wouldn't get the tracking boost at all. Just think about that. There is a clear reason why we should not increase the tracking on Blasters or Autocannons so they can be inline with Lasers. it's the Lasers who need the nerf. And because you have issues with Blasters because your doing something wrong doesn't mean Blasters have issues. If i have been one of the main Devs who are programming about this stuffs, the first thing i would fix now is the tracking formula, and then reduce the Lasers tracking to how it was before it got the tracking boost. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:33:00 - [147] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 17:37:26 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX So your saying that in all of those 3 years i have been testing out Blasters in every possible ways you can test Blasters in on Sisi and never have had ANY issues at all. Are you then saying that the Blasters must have issues while i have never come across a single issue at all in those 3 years?. In 3 years of using Blasters on Sisi, i should clearly have seen some issues with Blasters if there REALLY have been some issues. Right?. The very fact you CLAIM to have been testing for 3 years but have never flown one on TQ shows you are either lying or have 0 practicle XP. Originally by: NightmareX I also ONLY listen to the players in EVE i know 100% that are good with Blasters. And all of those i know and have been talking with that use Blaster BS'es all day long are saying that Blasters is fine. Just ask Darknesss and Leilani Solaris for example. 1. You only listen to ppl who you think agree with you, but so far ABP who you mentioned used more pulse and rails than blasters, and the guy who made the vids also shot you down in flames when you tried to use his PAST experiances. 2. I do not see either of those ppl posting in this thread. 3. I do see a LOT of ppl with blaster XP telling you that you are totally wrong and that blasters need fixing....but like i said its only ppl who agree with you that you copnsider worth listening to. To the first thing. So by this, i can say your lying to now. If you can say i'm lying, then for sure, i can say your lying to. 1. I listen to peoples that have shown many many times both from killboards and movies and by letting me see how good they are in real PVP ON TQ. I don't listen to crybabys who only want CCP to hold their hands because they can't handle the new things you have to do in PVP now after the speed and webbers was nerfed. 2. Do you know why they wont post here?. Because they wont make you to shut up and get it into your thin head that Blasters is fine no matter what. If you only could have listened to Blaster experts like Darknesss, Leilani Solaris and many others who don't have issues with Blasters because they have adapted to the new changes and have found new ways to use their Blaster BS'es. 3. Yeah those peoples are really really lazy peoples who are bitter because their ultimate pwn machine got nerfed a little. OMG they can't insta pwn frigs and cruiser anymore, they have to work for their kills waaaaah. They should grow up and adapt like many others have been doing already. A Gallente BS'es was easy mode before. Now it's medium mode. Amarr BS'es went from hard mode to easy mode. Minmatar are still extremely hard more though. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:42:00 - [148] Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 17:46:40 Originally by: NightmareX 1. I listen to peoples that have shown many many times both from killboards and movies and by letting me see how good they are in real PVP ON TQ. Really?... Originally by: Farjung Give up on blasters. The game has moved on and their only use is ganking empire bears on a station". Originally by: NightmareX Do you know why they wont post here?. Because they wont make you to shut up and get it into your thin head that Blasters is fine no matter what. You hope that is why considering the spanking your last alliance gave you... Originally by: ChalSto For gods shake.....look at your own alliance before you post such crap. The megathron is a common ship in RR-gang...yes....but with RAILGUNS! A RR-rep-bthron SUCKS in RR-gangs. In 6 years of EvE, I havent seen a SINGLE working RR-rep-Bthron-gang. Not a freaking single one. The ones that tryed it got owned so badly that it wasnt even funny. And now YOU come here, trying to tell ME, that a RR-bthron is awesome? Even the RR-rep-Railthron is outperformed to badly by a rr-rep-typhoon, that I fly one insteat of a mega in FoE gangs. And FoE are specialists in RR-gangs. Hundreds of people tell you, that you are wrong. And yet you claim, that you have enough experience to tell people like ME, that that I am wrong? God damit....even CCP Nozh admited, that there¦s something wrong with blasters! Its like you trying to tell Chribba how to mine veldspar. You dont read the alliance forums You dont participate on ops You are barly online on TQ Your experience with Bthrons are pretty limited Normaly I wouldnt dare to smack allaince-m8s, but its getting pathetic. You DO NOT listen to anybody pal.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:47:00 - [149] Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX 1. I listen to peoples that have shown many many times both from killboards and movies and by letting me see how good they are in real PVP ON TQ. Really?... Originally by: Farjung Give up on blasters. The game has moved on and their only use is ganking empire bears on a station". Originally by: NightmareX Do you know why they wont post here?. Because they wont make you to shut up and get it into your thin head that Blasters is fine no matter what. You hope thant why considering the spanking your last alliance gave you... Originally by: ChalSto For gods shake.....look at your own alliance before you post such crap. The megathron is a common ship in RR-gang...yes....but with RAILGUNS! A RR-rep-bthron SUCKS in RR-gangs. In 6 years of EvE, I havent seen a SINGLE working RR-rep-Bthron-gang. Not a freaking single one. The ones that tryed it got owned so badly that it wasnt even funny. And now YOU come here, trying to tell ME, that a RR-bthron is awesome? Even the RR-rep-Railthron is outperformed to badly by a rr-rep-typhoon, that I fly one insteat of a mega in FoE gangs. And FoE are specialists in RR-gangs. Hundreds of people tell you, that you are wrong. And yet you claim, that you have enough experience to tell people like ME, that that I am wrong? God damit....even CCP Nozh admited, that there¦s something wrong with blasters! Its like you trying to tell Chribba how to mine veldspar. You dont read the alliance forums You dont participate on ops You are barly online on TQ Your experience with Bthrons are pretty limited Normaly I wouldnt dare to smack allaince-m8s, but its getting pathetic. You DO NOT listen to anybody pal. 1. Yes really. But do you listen to the Blaster experts at all?. 2. I didn't get any spank from the last alliance i was in. ChalSto is a player like you and Bellum who only can cry and let CCP do the job for you by boosting things for you when things gets changed so things get more challenging. 3. We are still talking about ChalSto here. See over on Nr 2 what i have written there.
TheLibrarian Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:49:00 - [150] Blasters need fixed? What? I hurd they did good damage. Better than my large ACs. Why dont you just get over your blasters needing fixed. I have got over my ACs.

Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:51:00 - [151] You've turned another thread into a sisi smackfest once again NightmareX, thanks for that. I use blasters regularly on TQ, and they have alot of issues, infact I've stopped using them on the Astarte, I've found rails to be alot better, now that can't be right can it? Please leave, get some proper fight experience, then return and tell us what you found. Anyone using them knows their limitations, and they out weight the slight (on paper) damage output. I'm 6 hours away from large pulse spec, as and when I lose the mega I have atm (insurance), I'll be switching to the Abaddon.
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:55:00 - [152] Originally by: NightmareX 1. Yes really. But do you listen to the Blaster experts at all?. You mean like farjung (who you mentioned and got shot down by), or ABP that it turned out use more pulse than blasters?.... Originally by: NightmareX I didn't get any spank from the last alliance i was in. ChalSto is a player like you and Bellum who only can cry and let CCP do the job for you by boosting things for you when things gets changed so things get more challenging. Dude you got spanked...and no you do not listen to anybody, you spout off names and corps of ppl you say will support you until they finally come into the thread you are trolling and tell you to STFU and that you are wrong, then you claim afterwards that they are clueless and have not adapted....
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:58:00 - [153] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 17:58:42 Originally by: Mag's You've turned another thread into a sisi smackfest once again NightmareX, thanks for that. I use blasters regularly on TQ, and they have alot of issues, infact I've stopped using them on the Astarte, I've found rails to be alot better, now that can't be right can it? Please leave, get some proper fight experience, then return and tell us what you found. Anyone using them knows their limitations, and they out weight the slight (on paper) damage output. I'm 6 hours away from large pulse spec, as and when I lose the mega I have atm (insurance), I'll be switching to the Abaddon. You can thank Murina for the thing about Sisi dude, not me. But don't bring in the TQ vs Sisi discussion here like the forum mod told. Again, how many times do i have to say this. By using Blasters for 3+ years on Sisi where i have tested them in every possible way you can use them in PVP like a million times. Is that not good enough evidence to say that Blasters are fine as they are now?. When i haven't found a single issue with Blasters in 3+ years on Sisi, then i really doubt i will find any issues with Blasters on TQ either. Yeah Darknesss and Leilani Solaris knows that Blasters have a limitation in range, but that's not a big issue for them tbh. Well what do you expect from the shortest ranged waepon in EVE?. But don't tell me Lasers doesn't have limitation to. Oh btw, i'm 11 days from Large Blaster Spec skill at level 5. I'm sooooo looking forward to use my Navy Mega soonÖ. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Mag's the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:03:00 - [154] Edited by: Mag''s on 25/05/2009 18:04:51 Originally by: NightmareX You can thank Murina for the thing about Sisi dude, not me. But it is you, you keep spouting the same line and everyone knows it's a faulty one. "By using Blasters for 3+ years on Sisi." The fact you can not see the issues with that statement, speaks volumes. Edit: I'm not getting sucked into another one of you clueless rants. kthxbi Regards Mag
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:03:00 - [155] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 18:06:35 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX 1. Yes really. But do you listen to the Blaster experts at all?. You mean like farjung (who you mentioned and got shot down by), or ABP that it turned out use more pulse than blasters?.... Originally by: NightmareX I didn't get any spank from the last alliance i was in. ChalSto is a player like you and Bellum who only can cry and let CCP do the job for you by boosting things for you when things gets changed so things get more challenging. Dude you got spanked...and no you do not listen to anybody, you spout off names and corps of ppl you say will support you until they finally come into the thread you are trolling and tell you to STFU and that you are wrong, then you claim afterwards that they are clueless and have not adapted.... Farjung told that he haven't been playing for years when he wrote that thing about Blasters. I would rather believe Darknesss way way more because he have been an active user with Blaster BS'es all the time he have been playing. I got spanked only because one alliance member didn't agree with me?, LOLS. Your funny. Then i can say that ChalSto got spanked by me because i he didn't agree with me?. Right?. Those who are only crying for boosts because they are lazy pvpers who doesn't want to adapt to the new changes is players i ignore. So they can say whatever they like. They wont change my mind about Blasters. Originally by: Mag's Edited by: Mag''s on 25/05/2009 18:04:32 Originally by: NightmareX You can thank Murina for the thing about Sisi dude, not me. But it is you, you keep spouting the same line and everyone knows it's a faulty one. "By using Blasters for 3+ years on Sisi." The fact you can not see the issues with that statement, speaks volumes. Edit: I'm not getting sucked into anoth one of you clueless rants. kthxbi Ehhh, does Darknesss / Leilani Solaris see any issues with Blasters?. No they don't. And i think i trust them when they say that. So the thing that i don't see any issues after using Blasters for 3+ years on Sisi is not a lie. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:10:00 - [156] Originally by: NightmareX Oh btw, i'm 11 days from Large Blaster Spec skill at level 5. I'm sooooo looking forward to use my Navy Mega soonÖ. All lvl5 neutron navy mega with 3 x mag stabs and all lvl5 skills = 1252dps. Large blaster spec4 but all else lvl5 on the same fitted navy mega = 1235dps. I do not believe that you are holding out for 17dps that you will not get out of it anyway due to tracking as well as range issues and that 17dps is RAW dps and before even BASE resistances... Do you honestly think anybody believes anything you post?.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:14:00 - [157] Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX Oh btw, i'm 11 days from Large Blaster Spec skill at level 5. I'm sooooo looking forward to use my Navy Mega soonÖ. All lvl5 neutron navy mega with 3 x mag stabs and all lvl5 skills = 1252dps. Large blaster spec4 but all else lvl5 on the same fitted navy mega = 1235dps. I do not believe that you are holding out for 17dps that you will not get out of it anyway due to tracking as well as range issues and that 17dps is RAW dps and before even BASE resistances... Do you honestly think anybody believes anything you post?. What kind of idiots use 3x damage mods on a Navy Mega TODAY???. A normal Navy Mega setup today that are for RR gangs use 1x Damage Control II, 3-4x 1600mm RTP's, 1-2x EANM's and one ANP and one damage mod. And with 3x t1 trimarks. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:22:00 - [158] Originally by: NightmareX What kind of idiots use 3x damage mods on a Navy Mega TODAY???. You tell me it was your stupid 3 x mag stab navy megafit you posted in the last thread that i was refering to pal..... Originally by: NightmareX A normal Navy Mega setup today that are for RR gangs use 1x Damage Control II, 3-4x 1600mm RTP's, 1-2x EANM's and one ANP and one damage mod. And with 3x t1 trimarks. 1012dps with all lvl5 skills. 999dps with lvl4 large blaster spec and all other skills lvl5. So you are claiming to be holding out for 13RAW dps you would never notice in a real fight anyway due to tracking and transversal?. Do you honestly think anybody believes you?...
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:24:00 - [159] Originally by: NightmareX Ehhh, does Darknesss / Leilani Solaris see any issues with Blasters?. No they don't. And i think i trust them when they say that. Just as nano*s didn't see problems with excessive speed after they perfected their counters to a tee, Blaster pilots don't see any problems with tracking after they perfected their methods. It's not that they're lying or truthful, just that their POV is skewed by experience. Believe it or not, there are certain problems associated with blaster tracking, in that the practical window of orbit is much lower. AC pilots are **ed off, and rightfully so, about their poor damage output. However, this does not invalidate the fact that blasters have the worst tracking window for range. Perhaps changing ammo so that it affects falloff as well as optimal will address this, perhaps it won't. But right now, unless you are using a ship that has a bonus to tracking, you will have a very hard time hitting any moving target in range, especially when orbiting. ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:26:00 - [160] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 18:26:00 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX What kind of idiots use 3x damage mods on a Navy Mega TODAY???. You tell me it was your stupid 3 x mag stab navy megafit you posted in the last thread that i was refering to pal..... Originally by: NightmareX A normal Navy Mega setup today that are for RR gangs use 1x Damage Control II, 3-4x 1600mm RTP's, 1-2x EANM's and one ANP and one damage mod. And with 3x t1 trimarks. 1012dps with all lvl5 skills. 999dps with lvl4 large blaster spec and all other skills lvl5. So you are claiming to be holding out for 13RAW dps you would never notice in a real fight anyway due to tracking and transversal?. Do you honestly think anybody believes you?... Do you know why i posted a 3x damage mod Navy Mega setup?. Because you had to use the ******ed 3x damage mod Abaddon setup. Do you know why i take the Large Blaster Spec to level 5 at all?. It's to have it maxed so i can max some other skills. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:36:00 - [161] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 18:37:22 Originally by: Allen Ramses Originally by: NightmareX Ehhh, does Darknesss / Leilani Solaris see any issues with Blasters?. No they don't. And i think i trust them when they say that. Just as nano*s didn't see problems with excessive speed after they perfected their counters to a tee, Blaster pilots don't see any problems with tracking after they perfected their methods. It's not that they're lying or truthful, just that their POV is skewed by experience. Believe it or not, there are certain problems associated with blaster tracking, in that the practical window of orbit is much lower. AC pilots are **ed off, and rightfully so, about their poor damage output. However, this does not invalidate the fact that blasters have the worst tracking window for range. Perhaps changing ammo so that it affects falloff as well as optimal will address this, perhaps it won't. But right now, unless you are using a ship that has a bonus to tracking, you will have a very hard time hitting any moving target in range, especially when orbiting. 1. No it's because their playstyle is different from others that have problems with Blasters. I know many that are saying that Lasers have a butt load of problems to, but that's because of their play styles. 2. There might be some problems with the tracing for Blasters in some PVP situations i agree, but it doesn't mean that everybody will have it, since everybody have different play styles. And fixing the Blasters so it makes everybody happy isn't possible, there will always be someone here on the forum that says Blasters are crap / poor yadda yadda yadda no matter what. And just to have this said. As a topic did show, the Autocannons is in a need for a boost looooooong long way before Blasters eventually need a boost. Lets see how Autocannons will perform first of all if Autocannons gets boosted. Then lets see if the Blasters will need any boosts. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:36:00 - [162] Originally by: NightmareX Do you know why i posted a 3x damage mod Navy Mega setup?. Because you had to use the ****ed 3x damage mod Abaddon setup. The abaddon can handle 3 x dmg mods the mega cannot, you trying to copy the setup of the abaddon with the mega just showed what a clueless child you are. Originally by:** NightmareX Do you know why i take the Large Blaster Spec to level 5 at all?. It's to have it maxed so i can max some other skills. Blaster spec lvl5 does not unlock any skills so to claim you are maxing it out so you can max out some other skills is a pathetically weak excuse when it only gives 17dps even with 3 x mag stabs let alone 13 with only 1 mag stab... You need to think before you post your silly lies and excuses pal cos your so transparant its a joke.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:41:00 - [163] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 18:47:04 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX Do you know why i posted a 3x damage mod Navy Mega setup?. Because you had to use the ****ed 3x damage mod Abaddon setup. The abaddon can handle 3 x dmg mods the mega cannot, you trying to copy the setup of the abaddon with the mega just showed what a clueless child you are. Originally by:** NightmareX Do you know why i take the Large Blaster Spec to level 5 at all?. It's to have it maxed so i can max some other skills. Blaster spec lvl5 does not unlock any skills so to claim you are maxing it out so you can max out some other skills is a pathetically weak excuse when it only gives 17dps even with 3 x mag stabs let alone 13 with only 1 mag stab... You need to think before you post your silly lies and excuses pal cos your so transparant its a joke. And if you haven't forgotten it already, the Navy Mega setup i posted with 2x damage mods out DPS'ed the Abaddon with 3x damage mods and still had more EHP than the Abaddon. So boohooo. Cry some more. I max it to have it maxed. I train them to finish the skills, not to only train them to level 4. And Murina, your very good at making a topic into a flame war. And because of that, HERE, take another report of you. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:49:00 - [164] Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 18:55:44 Originally by: NightmareX And if you haven't forgotten it already, the Navy Mega setup i posted with 2x damage mods out DPS'ed the Abaddon and still had more EHP than the Abaddon. Yea 600mil for 3k more EHP less resists and crap range and poor DPS (RELATIVLY SPEAKING). As well as a bulls eye painted on you hull as a primary target. Originally by: NightmareX And Murina, your very good at making a topic into a flame war. And because of that, HERE, take another report of you. Your lies are causing the problems pal. This IS on topic because all of your claims have 0 facxts and figures and are all about what you consider to be your experiances or what you think other who do not even post here would think. PS: Reported several of your posts for language that activated the filter. Now post your PURE facts and provable experiances or go troll elsewhere.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:56:00 - [165] Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX And if you haven't forgotten it already, the Navy Mega setup i posted with 2x damage mods out DPS'ed the Abaddon and still had more EHP than the Abaddon. Yea 600mil for 3k more EHP less resists and crap range and poor DPS (RELATIVLY SPEAKING). As well as a bulls eye painted on you hull as a primary target. Originally by: NightmareX And Murina, your very good at making a topic into a flame war. And because of that, HERE, take another report of you. This IS on topic because all of your claims have 0 facxts and figures and are all about what you consider to be your experiances or what you think other who do not even post here would think. PS: Reported several of your posts for launguge that activated the filter. Yeah, but do i care about the price?, no, i care about what is the best RR BS with DPS to use. And as long it's doing more DPS than the Abaddon i don't care. It's still doing better DPS. Oh wow, so the 2x Navy Mega's and the Bhaalgorn we had in our fleet here yesterday is now dead and blasted into dust?. We was even fighting outnumbered. Learn to fight then speak. It's not on topic, because all your doing now is to call me for names when i don't agree with you. Oh noes, i'm reported to use words that the forum filter have taken away, awww boooo, now i'm gonna go and cry in a corner bwahahahahahahah.
Tuncan Minmatar Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2009.05.25 18:59:00 - [166] Nightmare; You are right about blasters. Actually AC's and Blasters are fine LAZER'S are waaaaaaay overpowered =). Here is a small example; ( i have said this before ) Typhoon, against a navy mega. typhoon 3x trimarked, low slots no damage mods, 3x ressist stuff 1x dcu2 others are 1600mm's. Afterburner is on, im orbiting at 500 mega web's me. And he can 'barely' hit my 'battleship'. WTF? Im sitting in an armor tanking BS and avoid the fire? Vagabond vs apocalypse. Vaga standart nano fit going 485m/sec at 20km. ( normally i orbit at 15 AND really avoid lazer fire but this is WAY interesting, listen ) Apoc has Long range fit. I don't know which but he was able to hit me when i was 140km away. I start to orbit with mwd off, apoc hits me. HE hits me at 20km WITH long range weapons. WTF? i don't care what he had on his ship, i don't care if he had fit 423424X tracking stuff If i was in my artillery ship i would not even dream hitting him at 20km. All weapons systems have flaw's. However, lazers' flaw is too small. Like blasters are useless beyond 10km, lazers should be useless at their half optimal ( say that 15km or 10 km ) if i am moving. The only real drawback of lazers in FLEETS is cap which is not a problem with the ubersuperduper cap booster module.
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:04:00 - [167] Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 19:05:20 Originally by: NightmareX Oh wow, so the 2x Navy Mega's and the Bhaalgorn we had in our fleet here yesterday is now dead and blasted into dust?. We was even fighting outnumbered. 7 tri ship losses........4 megas, 1 pest, 1 abaddon, 1 flycatcher.......oh yea megas are great....nearly 60% of the losses of the fleet were megas the rest were 2 mixed BS and a tackler... Learn to read stats before you post. Originally by: NightmareX Oh noes, i'm reported to use words that the forum filter have taken away, awww boooo, now i'm gonna go and cry in a corner bwahahahahahahah. .....welcome to nightmareX everybody....
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:06:00 - [168] Tuncan. Yes i agree to mostly everything there. BUT...... Autocannons needs some tweakings, so they are not 100% fine atm. Lets see how Blasters is to Autocannons when AC's have got their tweaks / boost. You never know, maybe Blasters will need a boost to after the AC's are boosted. But the thing about the Lasers tracking today after the speed was nerfed is true. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:06:00 - [169] Originally by: NightmareX Ehhh, does Darknesss / Leilani Solaris see any issues with Blasters?. No they don't. And i think i trust them when they say that. So the thing that i don't see any issues after using Blasters for 3+ years on Sisi is not a lie. You keep bringing up Leilani's name. You keep speaking for him. I know him, probably before you met him. I've flown with him. He's a good pilot and a great gang mate. And I think that if he was aware you were speaking for him, he'd be more than a little unhappy with it. I'd STFU if I were you. Maybe he's not aware that you're doing this, maybe I should make it my business to make him aware of it. The only person in this thread doing any lying Nightmare is you. You're making up stuff to support your viewpoint and you're not discussing the orginal point in the first place. I never once said 'blasters are broken for me because I don't know how to use them and for everyone else they're fine'. And this isn't about whether or not blasters are fucntionally broken- that is, are they or are they not actually useable as a weapon system. They are. The issue here is their BALANCE relative to all the other weapons in the game. Where they sit in COMPARISON to the other weapons. Right now they are not where they need to be. Blasters should be the KING OF CLOSE RANGE WEAPONS. A 5-10% advantage in DPS in a very narrow set of circumstances does not equate to 'KING' in my book. So do one of two things: discuss the topic at hand (relative balance of blasters vs. other weapons) or STFU and stop posting in my thread and wasting everyone's time. FFS, the mods have had to clean your posts out of this thread TWICE now. And no, I'm not the one reporting it. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:08:00 - [170] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 19:09:06 Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 19:05:20 Originally by: NightmareX Oh wow, so the 2x Navy Mega's and the Bhaalgorn we had in our fleet here yesterday is now dead and blasted into dust?. We was even fighting outnumbered. 7 tri ship losses........4 megas, 1 pest, 1 abaddon, 1 flycatcher.......oh yea megas are great....nearly 60% of the losses of the fleet were megas the rest were 2 mixed BS and a tackler... Learn to read stats before you post. Originally by: NightmareX Oh noes, i'm reported to use words that the forum filter have taken away, awww boooo, now i'm gonna go and cry in a corner bwahahahahahahah. .....welcome to nightmareX everybody.... It's not about what ships we lost, it's about what we killed and how much we pwned the enemies AND keeping the faction ships alive. We had all of the 3 guys in the faction BS'es in our watch list all the time. And not only that, we seriously owned them. Because we know what we are doing.

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:13:00 - [171] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 19:15:58 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: NightmareX Ehhh, does Darknesss / Leilani Solaris see any issues with Blasters?. No they don't. And i think i trust them when they say that. So the thing that i don't see any issues after using Blasters for 3+ years on Sisi is not a lie. You keep bringing up Leilani's name. You keep speaking for him. I know him, probably before you met him. I've flown with him. He's a good pilot and a great gang mate. And I think that if he was aware you were speaking for him, he'd be more than a little unhappy with it. I'd STFU if I were you. Maybe he's not aware that you're doing this, maybe I should make it my business to make him aware of it. The only person in this thread doing any lying Nightmare is you. You're making up stuff to support your viewpoint and you're not discussing the orginal point in the first place. I never once said 'blasters are broken for me because I don't know how to use them and for everyone else they're fine'. And this isn't about whether or not blasters are fucntionally broken- that is, are they or are they not actually useable as a weapon system. They are. The issue here is their BALANCE relative to all the other weapons in the game. Where they sit in COMPARISON to the other weapons. Right now they are not where they need to be. Blasters should be the KING OF CLOSE RANGE WEAPONS. A 5-10% advantage in DPS in a very narrow set of circumstances does not equate to 'KING' in my book. So do one of two things: discuss the topic at hand (relative balance of blasters vs. other weapons) or STFU and stop posting in my thread and wasting everyone's time. FFS, the mods have had to clean your posts out of this thread TWICE now. And no, I'm not the one reporting it. Not to make you more sad, but i'm just telling what he have said to me ingame in corp chat here. He have told me that Blasters is fine for him because of his play style now. Simple as that. But yeah you can just poke Leilani if you want about this topic. Doesn't do me anything. Because i'm sure he's gonna say that Blasters is fine here to. He might tell that he have some few very small issues with them though, but it's nothing that makes Blasters poor or anything like that for him. And also. Like i have said many times here already. There is a VERY CLEAR reason why Lasers need a nerf in tracking instead of boosting some other weapons. If you don't see why the Lasers need a nerf in the tracking, your not smart enough to realize that Blasters is fine either.
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:26:00 - [172] Originally by: NightmareX He have told me that Blasters is fine for him because of his play style now. Simple as that. Translation: Blasters are a poor choice for pvp and if you use them you will only be effective in VERY limited scenario's. Originally by: NightmareX He might tell that he have some few very small issues with them though, but it's nothing that makes Blasters poor or anything like that for him. HE HE.....just slip in a "provisional" clause into your comments...i feel yet another ownage from one of your "pro blaster pilot scources" incoming...
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:29:00 - [173] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 19:37:28 Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 19:34:22 Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX He have told me that Blasters is fine for him because of his play style now. Simple as that. Translation: Blasters are a poor choice for pvp and if you use them you will only be effective in VERY limited scenario's. Originally by: NightmareX He might tell that he have some few very small issues with them though, but it's nothing that makes Blasters poor or anything like that for him. HE HE.....just slip in a "provisional" clause into your comments...i feel yet another ownage from one of your "pro blaster pilot scources" incoming... Blasters is a poor choice for players that wants easy mode and those who want CCP to hold your hands when you PVP. Yeah, i'm waiting for Darknesss / Leilani to come here and tell us all that Blasters sucks more than Lasers. And again, do you know why Blasters are somewhat limited (when i say limited it doesn't mean they are poor) atm in PVP?, it's because Lasers have taken over the role where Blasters should be much more effective than Blasters after the speed got nerfed. it's because Lasers still have the tracking boost that was meant to be able to hit fast cruisers and HAC's. Those ships are not that fast anylonger and that tracking boost should be taken away. That's why Lasers need a nerf instead. I know you want your FOTM heaven to stay, but sadly for you, it's the truth. Edit: I posted in red now because it's cool.
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:40:00 - [174] Originally by: NightmareX And again, do you know why Blasters are limited atm in PVP?, it's because Lasers have taken over the role where Blasters should be much more effective than Blasters. That's why Lasers need a nerf instead. Blasters are poor due to the fact the game and aspects of it have been changed so BS pvp is all about gangs, and as such blasters are a poor choice due to thier range limitations and the poor tanks the ships that use them have. This also means that nerfing laser tracking will not make much differance as in gang combat the abundance of webs make tracking irrelavant. The problem is with the idea of BS blasters now that BS are reduced to gang ships makes them poor choices, maybe giving BS blasters uber tracking so they can be uber solo ships would give them a role, after all a small ship can avoid a blaster BS's dmg with range.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:47:00 - [175] Originally by: Murina Originally by: NightmareX And again, do you know why Blasters are limited atm in PVP?, it's because Lasers have taken over the role where Blasters should be much more effective than Blasters. That's why Lasers need a nerf instead. Blasters are poor due to the fact the game and aspects of it have been changed so BS pvp is all about gangs, and as such blasters are a poor choice due to thier range limitations and the poor tanks the ships that use them have. This also means that nerfing laser tracking will not make much differance as in gang combat the abundance of webs make tracking irrelavant. The problem is with the idea of BS blasters now that BS are reduced to gang ships makes them poor choices, maybe giving BS blasters uber tracking so they can be uber solo ships would give them a role, after all a small ship can avoid a blaster BS's dmg with range. This is just after how YOU play the game. After how i play the game right now in RR gangs, the Blaster Mega is a very very nice ship to use. But as i have told, i'm gonna max my Large Blaster Spec skill to level 5 before i'm gonna start using them on TQ. And like the fight we had yesterday, we was fighting in a distance where Blasters is really good, we was pretty close to each others. That's what i'm saying, it all depends on how YOU play the game. And after how we are playing the game and how our RR gangs with BS'es is used, then Blaster Megas are a good ship choice. NO ONE in our gang with Blaster Megas was complaining that they couldn't hit anyone in the fight. They was melting pretty much everything, even the smaller ships to. I'm gonna say this one more time, just because it's you. LEARN TO FIGHT THEN SPEAK. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Murina Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.05.25 19:53:00 - [176] Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 19:57:55 Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 19:57:07 Originally by: NightmareX This is just after how YOU play the game. After how i play the game right now in RR gangs, the Blaster Mega is a very very nice ship to use. But as i have told, i'm gonna max my Large Blaster Spec skill to level 5 before i'm gonna start using them on TQ. 13-17 raw dps before tracking and range ect is that important is it?..... Originally by: NightmareX NO ONE in our gang with Blaster Megas was complaining that they couldn't hit anyone in the fight. They was melting pretty much everything, even the smaller ships to. I saw the losses....null ammo loaded......so much for your uber face melt blaster BS dps..... Originally by: NightmareX I'm gonna say this one more time, just because it's you. I NEED TO LEARN TO FIGHT IN A BLASTER BS ON TQ THEN SPEAK. Fixed.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 20:05:00 - [177] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 20:05:11 Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 25/05/2009 19:57:07 Originally by: NightmareX This is just after how YOU play the game. After how i play the game right now in RR gangs, the Blaster Mega is a very very nice ship to use. But as i have told, i'm gonna max my Large Blaster Spec skill to level 5 before i'm gonna start using them on TQ. 13-17 raw dps before tracking and range ect is that important is it?..... Originally by: NightmareX NO ONE in our gang with Blaster Megas was complaining that they couldn't hit anyone in the fight. They was melting pretty much everything, even the smaller ships to. I saw the losses....null ammo loaded......so much for your uber face melt blaster BS dps..... Also some of your so called blaster BS were using RAILS... Originally by: NightmareX I'm gonna say this one more time, just because it's you. I NEED TO LEARN TO FIGHT IN A BLASTER BS ON TQ THEN SPEAK. Fixed. 1. So what?. I don't care if the skill would give 1 DPS more, i want to max it and forget the skill so i can think about other skills. End of story. 2. Yeah so what?. I got told to use Barrage L on my Close range RR Tempest with 800mm AC t2 guns. Do you have any problems with it?. The Blaster Mega pilots still had no issues to hit the enemies with Null L. 3. They where told to use Blasters, Autocannons, Pulses as weapons, not Rails or other long range weapon types. They might have had no other choices than using the current setups (with Rails) they had on their Mega. It's not always you can find the a whole close range setup on the market in 0.0 space. And it's not always they have both the close range and the long range setup available at the same time, since they might have lost one of the ships with one of the setups on it. 4. Try to be more funny. Then i might lol at you. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
oniplE Point of No Return	Posted - 2009.05.25 20:50:00 - [178] Edited by: oniplE on 25/05/2009 20:50:37 You know, maybe.. just maybe, if you've never ever flown a blaster ship in pvp on TQ, you shouldnt be posting in this thread. Im not saying im an expert on blasters, but atleast i can say i've used them in a real pvp environment. I'm not trying to insult you, but sisi is very different from TQ. The setups used are different, people use different tactics, the FFA's are nothing like real PVP and the 1v1's dont give a correct picture of real pvp'ing. Please do not come back with a comment on how you tested every possible situation because a) its not true and b) its not real pvp cuz its on sisi. Again, im not trying to insult you but you have 0 authority, 0 experience and 0 knowledge of blaster pvp if you havent used them on TQ. Log on TQ, buy a blaster ship and start shooting something, then come back. You probably wont change your opinion but atleast you'll have a shred of credibility.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 21:12:00 - [179] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 21:17:34 Originally by: oniplE Edited by: oniplE on 25/05/2009 20:58:02 Edited by: oniplE on 25/05/2009 20:50:37 You know, maybe.. just maybe, if you've never ever flown a blaster ship in pvp on TQ, you shouldnt be posting in this thread. Im not saying im an expert on blasters, but atleast i can say i've used them in a real pvp environment. I'm not trying to insult you, but sisi is very different from TQ. The setups used are different, people use different tactics, the FFA's are nothing like real PVP and the 1v1's dont give a correct picture of real pvp'ing. Please do not come back with a comment on how you tested every possible situation because a) its not true and b) its not real pvp cuz its on sisi. Again, im not trying to insult you but you have 0 authority, 0 experience and 0 knowledge of blaster pvp if you havent used them on TQ. Log on TQ, buy a blaster ship and start shooting something, then come back. You probably wont change your opinion but atleast you'll have a shred of credibility. AND that murina guy might stop replying on every post you make..which would be great aswell :PP I'm gonna ask you this. When i'm saying that i have tested every possible ways you can test Blasters in, then it means that there is nothing new for me to see on TQ other than it's TQ (Live Server). Then, do i still need to use them on TQ only because it's TQ?. To be clear here. I don't care what server it is on, all i care about is that i have tested every possible ways you can test Blasters in like millions of times. THAT DOES COUNT. Because i have tested Blasters in all from 1 vs 1's, 5 vs 5 , even 5 vs 10, 50 vs 50 and so on. And i'm sure i have a clue on how to use the Blasters after i have been doing like 5 vs 5 / 10 vs 10 fights etc on sisi like xxxx times now. In those gangs / fights, we are doing EXACTLY what we would do on TQ. We are doing those fights ONLY to simulate TQ. And we are doing it because it's fun and it's a good way to test our ships in. Or to find where / when there is issues with our ships. When we are doing those tests, it's all from close range RR BS'es to Sniper fitted BS'es. Ofc smaller ships are allowed to be used. But i use BS'es as main ships. And i'm sure the others that are in our gangs that are doing this are saying the same as me, that we are doing that only to simulate a fight on TQ and to find out how our ships performs etc etc. There is also LOTS of players on sisi that i know are extremely good with different Battleships and weapons. And i have asked them many many times if we are going to make a gang so we can take out the another gang that are in the FFA 1 for example. Last time i was on Sisi, there was a gang of 6 BS'es in FFA 1. They had 2x Kronos'es, 1x Paladin, 2x Megathron and one Typhoon. Then i decided to put up my own gang with 4 other players i know are very good in PVP. I was then in a Kronos, another one in a Kronos and one in a Paladin + we had 2x Oneiros'es. Then i warped in as a bait. Then all agrroed me, got the rest of my gang to warp in at their optimals. 10 seconds later i was in 50% armor and then i got the Kronos and Paladin with RR's on me + the 2x Oneiros'es on me, and they couldn't break my tank. The 6 others we was fighting also used RR on their ships, so some of them was a bit hard to kill, but we did it in the end. We killed one of their Kronoses and the Paladin before they decided to change target, but it was to late for them already. They couldn't break our tank no matter what. We won that fight with 6 kills and no losses. That's what i call a simulate of a fight on TQ.
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.05.25 21:26:00 - [180] Tell me... When you tested every possible scenario on Sisi, was there any difference between your normal playstyle? Or were you just doing the mandatory double-webbing, scramming, and keeping at range in a mega? This is where the blaster has its issues. If you did two of the following: ( Not a mega Not webbing/jamming Not staying stationary ) Please tell me how that went.

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 21:42:00 - [181] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 21:46:00 Originally by: Allen Ramses Tell me... When you tested every possible scenario on Sisi, was there any difference between your normal playstyle? Or were you just doing the mandatory double-webbing, scramming, and keeping at range in a mega? This is where the blaster has its issues. If you did two of the following: ( Not a mega Not webbing/jamming Not staying stationary ) Please tell me how that went. Well i can't say anything on the normal playstyle on how Blasters are on TQ atm, because i haven't used Blasters in years on TQ. I will tell how it is after i have started to use the Blasters on TQ soonÖ. But i doubt i will go in for some suprises on TQ when i have been testing Blasters for over 3 years on Sisi already. I have had my suprise days on Sisi some times, but those suprises doesn't have anything to do with being poor or crap at doing what they are supposed to do. The only suprise i might end up in is to get blobbed to death on TQ, but no Battleships will survive that anyways. Anyways. When i'm fighting others in a 1 vs 1 fight for example, then i approach them and orbits them at my optimal while i web and disrupt them ofc. If i'm fighting an Amarr BS' i'm just gonna orbit him at 500m and laught at him. To be short, i know how to fight every of the BS'es ingame in a Blaster Mega. Same with my Tempest. When it's about a fight like this one here. There i didn't move at all tbh. Because we was at a gate waiting on them to jump in on us. We was all staying close to each others so we could RR everybody. And yes, we did a very nice job with the RR'ing, because everybody was staying close to each others. If someone just starts to move around they might end by getting out of our RR range and they might get killed. And we don't want that to happen. But as you can see on the link i linked to over, we had only some few losses while we killed almost everyone of them. Yes i'm talking about what tactics etc you have to use in the different types of fights your doing. I'm not talking or thinking about that i was using a Tempest in that fight. It's not what's important here. The thing that is important is to be good with the ships you fly and to follow what the FC's we have are saying. I hope that cleared up some of your questions. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.25 22:56:00 - [182] Originally by: NightmareX Well i can't say anything on the normal playstyle on how Blasters are on TQ atm for me, because i haven't used Blasters in years on TQ. That right there just rendered everything you've ever said irrelevant. Just stop posting. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 23:07:00 - [183] Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 23:07:48 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: NightmareX Well i can't say anything on the normal playstyle on how Blasters are on TQ atm for me, because i haven't used Blasters in years on TQ. That right there just rendered everything you've ever said irrelevant. Just stop posting. You didn't read the thing i said about the Tempest on TQ and Sisi did you?. There is absolutely no difference on how i use a Tempest on TQ and Sisi, then i doubt it will be any different from how i use a Blaster Mega on Sisi to TQ. That's what you don't get. That's why i say i wont go in for any suprises or anything like that with Blaster BS'es on TQ, because i know every possible situations you can come over and i have tested Blasters in all of those situations. And i know how the Large Blasters performs in those situations. So, what's your next excuse?. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.25 23:21:00 - [184] Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 23:10:45 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: NightmareX Well i can't say anything on the normal playstyle on how Blasters are on TQ atm for me, because i haven't used Blasters in years on TQ. That right there just rendered everything you've ever said irrelevant. Just stop posting. You didn't read the thing i said about the Tempest on TQ and Sisi did you?. There is absolutely no difference on how i use a Tempest on TQ and Sisi, then i doubt it will be any different from how i use a Blaster Mega on Sisi to TQ. That's what you don't get. That's why i say i wont go in for any suprises or anything like that with Blaster BS'es on TQ, because i know every possible situations you can come over and i have tested Blasters in all of those situations. And i know how the Large Blasters performs in those situations. So, what's your next excuse?. If you only have excuses your self because your nothinh more than a lazy PVPer who doesn't want to adapt to the new changes in PVP, then you can stop posting your self. We don't want lazy pvpers that don't want to adapt to the new changes in PVP and then cry all day long to the devs to get their ultimate instapwn battleship back. I don't 'not get' anything. You don't use a blaster BS on TQ. You haven't (by self admission) for years. You don't know what you're talking about. So stop pretending that you do. Adapt? I have. I've simply stopped using blaster BS all together and have to use something else to win. Do I still win? Of course I do. But I don't use blasters to do it, even when I should be using them, because they aren't competitive, even in their designed role. Again, you're missing/ignoring the point. Blasters are not good enough at point blank range to compensate for their shortcomings when compared to other weapons. You say they're workable. Of course they're workable, anything is workable. I fit Dual Heavy Pulse lasers to my Mega and killed a bunch of people with it. It was workable. So much so that I don't see a need to fit blasters on a blaster ship when I can be fitting lasers. It's not that lasers have too much tracking. It's that blasters don't have enough DPS up close to differentiate them from lasers. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Chi Quan Perkone	Posted - 2009.05.25 23:47:00 - [185] Originally by: NightmareX Well i can't say anything on the normal playstyle on how Blasters are on TQ atm for me, because i haven't used Blasters in years on TQ. .... When it's about a fight like this one here. - you were in a TEMPEST so surely not using blasters. - the MH megas were 50% fited with rails, 50% with blasters, as a good mix. - the MH megas died mostly to your megas (the amarr ships also score high on those KMs), the ravens to your amarr ships. so good target choice resistance wise. you went for the megas overall LAST according to the date on the kills. - as you said this was a gatecamp so you knew at what range the MH fleet was going to spawn, so you fited and set up accordingly. you admit yourself that you did not move. this would have also caused the ships to possibly get out of the spawn bubble range (not just remote rep). (- the kill time on the mails tells that MH did possibly not spawn all at the same time, so you had time to pick them off) - according to the mails, most mega damage came from (no-travel-time)sentry drones - all amarr bs that died were pulse fited, bar one sniper apoc - woot bait - props to your fc, nice trap. ---- Ceterum censeo blasters need some tracking love
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 23:52:00 - [186] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 25/05/2009 23:10:45 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: NightmareX Well i can't say anything on the normal playstyle on how Blasters are on TQ atm for me, because i haven't used Blasters in years on TQ. That right there just rendered everything you've ever said irrelevant. Just stop posting. You didn't read the thing i said about the Tempest on TQ and Sisi did you?. There is absolutely no difference on how i use a Tempest on TQ and Sisi, then i doubt it will be any different from how i use a Blaster Mega on Sisi to TQ. That's what you don't get. That's why i say i wont go in for any suprises or anything like that with Blaster BS'es on TQ, because i know every possible situations you can come over and i have tested Blasters in all of those situations. And i know how the Large Blasters performs in those situations. So, what's your next excuse?. If you only have excuses your self because your nothinh more than a lazy PVPer who doesn't want to adapt to the new changes in PVP, then you can stop posting your self. We don't want lazy pvpers that don't want to adapt to the new changes in PVP and then cry all day long to the devs to get their ultimate instapwn battleship back. I don't 'not get' anything. You don't use a blaster BS on TQ. You haven't (by self admission) for years. You don't know what you're talking about. So stop pretending that you do. Adapt? I have. I've simply stopped using blaster BS all together and have to use something else to win. Do I still win? Of course I do. But I don't use blasters to do it, even when I should be using them, because they aren't competitive, even in their designed role. Again, you're missing/ignoring the point. Blasters are not good enough at point blank range to compensate for their shortcomings when compared to other weapons. You say they're workable. Of course they're workable, anything is workable. I fit Dual Heavy Pulse lasers to my Mega and killed a bunch of people with it. It was workable. So much so that I don't see a need to fit blasters on a blaster ship when I can be fitting lasers. It's not that lasers have too much tracking. It's that blasters don't have enough DPS up close to differentiate them from lasers. Yeah you gave up on using them because they was to hard more for you. Thank you for proving what i have been telling for a long time. You simply went to the next thing that was easy mode (Lasers) when your easy mode (Blasters) got nerfed to Medium mode. And again, i don't need to use Blasters on TQ to know how they work dude. Yes Blasters are good enough. The only thing that can be somewhat hard from times to times is the short range on Blasters. But use the right tactics and use your brain when your using a Blaster Mega. Do that and you can be as much successfull as Darknesss for example. And when Darknesss says Blasters is very good, then i believe that man no matter what you have to say. Yes Lasers have to much tracking. How many times do i have to tell you that the Lasers ONLY got the tracking boost some years ago so they could hit fast cruisers and HAC's better. That's not needed now since the speed is nerfed quite a bit. So because of that, the tracking on Lasers are way to high. And the reason why nerfing the tracking on Lasers would fix most things is because if you take the tracking boost away from Lasers, then they will be pretty poor at close range LIKE THEY SHOULD BE. And they would not hit so good inside web range because their tracking is so low in close range. By that, the Blasters would have a huge DPS advantage in web range / 5 km like they also should have. How hard is that to understand?. This is the easiest change to do. CCP would be stupid if they went the hard way. And i also know how CCP are and i really doubt that they will boost Blasters. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.25 23:54:00 - [187] And also to add because i ran out of characters left on the post over. And if CCP are going to boost Blasters, then they have to boost Autocannons. And if they boost those 2 weapons, then they have to boost torps aswell. See what i mean now?. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 00:04:00 - [188] Edited by: NightmareX on 26/05/2009 00:08:24 Originally by: Chi Quan Originally by: NightmareX Well i can't say anything on the normal playstyle on how Blasters are on TQ atm for me, because i haven't used Blasters in years on TQ. .... When it's about a fight like this one here. - you were in a TEMPEST so surely not using blasters. - the MH megas were 50% fited with rails, 50% with blasters, as a good mix. - the MH megas died mostly to your megas (the amarr ships also score high on those KMs), the ravens to your amarr ships. so good target choice resistance wise. you went for the megas overall LAST according to the date on the kills. - as you said this was a gatecamp so you knew at what range the MH fleet was going to spawn, so you fited and set up accordingly. you admit yourself that you did not move. this would have also caused the ships to possibly get out of the spawn bubble range (not just remote rep). (- the kill time on the mails tells that MH did possibly not spawn all at the same time, so you had time to pick them off) - according to the mails, most mega damage came from (no-travel-time)sentry drones - all amarr bs that died were pulse fited, bar one sniper apoc - woot bait - props to your fc, nice trap. 1. I told you in that post that i was using a Tempest there, but that was not the point of the post. Learn to read what i have written before you post. 2. Yes, those are not us, we are using close range setups when we are fighting like in that link did show. 3. Yes, it's our FC's that decide who's primary and secondary etc. Doing a job as a FC is not an easy job and it's totally different from what ships you use. Use the ships your very good at using + be good in PVP and know what your doing makes for a wonderfull gang if the others in the gang are the same. 4. We didn't exactly know what we was going to meet, but we was in close range fitted BS'es with RR's because we was going to take down a POS that was VERY important for us to take down. Then while we was about to take the POS to like 35% shield, there was an incoming fleet of like 60 ships to our 42 man gang. And we was prepeared to fight them. And yes, it ended up in a massacre for them heh. 5. They all pretty much jumped in on the same time. Was maybe 10 seconds from the first one had jumped in to the last one had jumped. Yes i know, we had cloaked scouts on the other side of the gate. 6. Yes Sentry drones are nice to use if your going to sit still and don't move. And a POS that was our main goal to kill is not a moving target, so yeah, you get the point. 7. Yeah, it's not often today that i see Amarr BS'es fitted with any guns bigger than Pulses when it's about close range fights. 8. Yeah DHB in his Bhaalgorn was also a nice bait of some sort. He was starting to take structure damage before he got out in the fight. Yes we had all RR's on him (i had 2x Large 'Solace' RR's on him), but you know, when over 20 BS'es are shooting him it's not easy to keep his armor up lol. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.05.26 00:09:00 - [189] Edited by: Allen Ramses on 26/05/2009 00:10:14 Originally by: NightmareX And if CCP are going to boost Blasters, then they have to boost Autocannons. And if they boost those 2 weapons, then they have to boost torps aswell. See what i mean now?. Blasters NEED a boost in tracking, just as ACs NEED a boost in DPS. Missiles NEED a boost to guidance. See what the rest of us mean now? ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 00:19:00 - [190] Edited by: NightmareX on 26/05/2009 00:33:58 Originally by: Allen Ramses Edited by: Allen Ramses on 26/05/2009 00:10:14 Originally by: NightmareX And if CCP are going to boost Blasters, then they have to boost Autocannons. And if they boost those 2 weapons, then they have to boost torps aswell. See what i mean now?. Blasters NEED a boost in tracking, just as ACs NEED a boost in DPS. Missiles NEED a boost to guidance. See what the rest of us mean now? You still don't grasp it that by boosting the tracking on Blasters is going to make the Blasters more back to the frigs and cruiser instakilling. One of the reasons for the web nerf was to prevent that. And now you want that back?. I don't think CCP want that back in EVE tbqh. Blaster BS'es are meant to only hit ships in the same size, or Battlecruisers as minimum. But still, i can hit cruisers okish now as long i'm not dual tracking disrupted with tracking disruption scrips lol. It just takes longer time to kill a cruiser now because of the web nerf. Even if the Autocannons would get a 15% DPS increase, it would still be much lower than the Blasters do. Blasters would still be way way better than Autocannons DPS wise even after that. But then, everything is not about who have the best DPS and tracking or range. It's all about how your play style is. And Autocannons still need a boost no matter what. It have needed a boost for many years now. Because when Pulses can get more DPS on a Tempest than it gets on with it's dual bonuses to Projectiles with Autocannons fitted for example, then something is VERY wrong. The same problem was with the Naglfar before they fixed it. Now when CCP have fixed the Naglfar. Now they can fix the Autocannons a little & nerf the Lasers tracking to where it was before they got the tracking boost some years ago. By doing this, they will fix all of the issues that really is the problem atm. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise

Gavin Darklighter Ministry of War	Posted - 2009.05.26 01:46:00 - [191] Originally by: NightmareX You still don't grasp it that by boosting the tracking on Blasters is going to make the Blasters more back to the frigs and cruiser instakilling. One of the reasons for the web nerf was to prevent that. And now you want that back?. A tracking boost will make it EASIER, not instaBBQ with no effort. This should be the advantage blasters have over lasers IMO. A skilled cruiser will still be able to evade. With TDs anything would still be able to either orbit and evade or kite and stay out of range but still inside 10km. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
Chi Quan Perkone	Posted - 2009.05.26 02:08:00 - [192] Originally by: NightmareX You still don't grasp it that by boosting the tracking on Blasters is going to make the Blasters more back to the frigs and cruiser instakilling. WRONG!!! this is an extreme example using 800m/s transversal and a sig radius of 100. the NEW denotes a 25% increase in tracking for the neutrons and a rollback of the tracking boost for pulses along with halving falloff. note how small the differences are even with those rather extreme modifications. ---- Ceterum censeo blasters need some tracking love
DigitalCommunist November Corporation	Posted - 2009.05.26 03:21:00 - [193] Despite being my favourite and most used weapon, I must regretfully report that there's really nothing wrong with blasters. Changing the guns themselves would amount to screwing with things which aren't broke. If I had to pick any grievances even slightly related to blaster warfare, I'd have to list the following: Hyperion - Stupid implementation, very easy to fix though. Tracking Formula - Inaccurate transverse and signature calculation; or maybe I should say 'poorly simulated'. Affects blasters, but it affects other guns even more unlike some proponents of this argument will claim. Null - Don't like the range bonus, gives blasters an "AC mode" and subsequently makes ACs less useful. Poor Tempests :(( Injectors - Damn useful, but nearly impossible to have an active tank BS without one that is also PVP fitted. Drones - Most BS are still carrying legacy stats from beta where BS were simply "bigger and better". I don't think BS should have as much drone space and drone options as they do, especially the non-Gallente ones and ESPECIALLY the Caldari ones. Missiles - Total newb weapon. Needs missile arming delays on their long range types (cruise, heavy, standard), or a splash damage that only affects their owner so getting up someone's arse has some benefit. All of these things affect blaster warfare to some extent, and even then, there's still nothing wrong with blasters. Blaster battleship warfare is the only area that isn't competitive, and mostly because of power creep in all other races' BS which isn't matched by the Hyperion. A seriously horrible ship if you ask me. And if any of the stuff I listed gets changed, it wouldn't be for the sake of blasters but other parts of the game. On a side note, all Bellum needs now to become the Jim Raynor of Gallente is more skillpoints and a chubby ex-gf, hrehhh.
Sgt Napalm SiN. Corp Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.05.26 04:32:00 - [194] How about the lack of being able to hold a target in place? The blasters are only somewhat* effective to their maximum falloff. Also, what is with the focus only on blaster BS? How about the other blaster ships?
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.26 06:37:00 - [195] Originally by: DigitalCommunist On a side note, all Bellum needs now to become the Jim Raynor of Gallente is more skillpoints and a chubby ex-gf, hrehhh. I loled.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.05.26 06:47:00 - [196] Originally by: NightmareX Yeah you gave up on using them because they was to hard more for you. Thank you for proving what i have been telling for a long time. You simply went to the next thing that was easy mode (Lasers) when your easy mode (Blasters) got nerfed to Medium mode. And again, i don't need to use Blasters on TQ to know how they work dude. Yes Blasters are good enough. The only thing that can be somewhat hard from times to times is the short range on Blasters. But use the right tactics and use your brain when your using a Blaster Mega. Do that and you can be as much successfull as Darknesss for example. And when Darknesss says Blasters is very good, then i believe that man no matter what you have to say. Yes Lasers have to much tracking. How many times do i have to tell you that the Lasers ONLY got the tracking boost some years ago so they could hit fast cruisers and HAC's better. That's not needed now since the speed is nerfed quite a bit. So because of that, the tracking on Lasers are way to high. And the reason why nerfing the tracking on Lasers would fix most things is because if you take the tracking boost away from Lasers, then they will be pretty poor at close range LIKE THEY SHOULD BE. And they would not hit so good inside web range because their tracking is so low in close range. By that, the Blasters would have a huge DPS advantage in web range / 5 km like they also should have. How hard is that to understand?. This is the easiest change to do. CCP would be stupid if they went the hard way. And i also know how CCP are and i really doubt that they will boost Blasters. There isn't a prize for using ships and fits that are less than optimal for PVP. Use the best tool for the job. It's not that I've 'given up' blasters in favor of 'easy mode'. I use the best tools for the job, and right now there is zero reason to use blasters when I can use lasers and do just as well at point blank range with them as I can with blasters, which is broken. You're so misinformed it's pathetic. You think that Blasters will be able to shoot frigs and cruisers out of the sky with ease if their tracking is improved a small amount. That's idiotic. I once tried to kill a Retribution with my Hyperion when 90% webs still existed and I still couldn't hit him simply because of the poor sig res of Neutron IIs and the overall lack of tracking at close range, 90% web or not. No way in hell are blasters going to be swatting frigs with a 60% web, or even two, with a small tracking increase. Blasters need to do the MOST DPS of all weapon systems up close (inside 4km) by a LARGE MARGIN. Right now they do slightly more DPS than other weapons, and that's if both targets are sitting dead still. "Slightly more" isn't good enough.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 09:42:00 - [197] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: NightmareX Yeah you gave up on using them because they was to hard more for you. Thank you for proving what i have been telling for a long time. You simply went to the next thing that was easy mode (Lasers) when your easy mode (Blasters) got nerfed to Medium mode. And again, i don't need to use Blasters on TQ to know how they work dude. Yes Blasters are good enough. The only thing that can be somewhat hard from times to times is the short range on Blasters. But use the right tactics and use your brain when your using a Blaster Mega. Do that and you can be as much successfull as Darknesss for example. And when Darknesss says Blasters is very good, then i believe that man no matter what you have to say. Yes Lasers have to much tracking. How many times do i have to tell you that the Lasers ONLY got the tracking boost some years ago so they could hit fast cruisers and HAC's better. That's not needed now since the speed is nerfed quite a bit. So because of that, the tracking on Lasers are way to high. And the reason why nerfing the tracking on Lasers would fix most things is because if you take the tracking boost away from Lasers, then they will be pretty poor at close range LIKE THEY SHOULD BE. And they would not hit so good inside web range because their tracking is so low in close range. By that, the Blasters would have a huge DPS advantage in web range / 5 km like they also should have. How hard is that to understand?. This is the easiest change to do. CCP would be stupid if they went the hard way. And i also know how CCP are and i really doubt that they will boost Blasters. There isn't a prize for using ships and fits that are less than optimal for PVP. Use the best tool for the job. It's not that I've 'given up' blasters in favor of 'easy mode'. I use the best tools for the job, and right now there is zero reason to use blasters when I can use lasers and do just as well at point blank range with them as I can with blasters, which is broken. You're so misinformed it's pathetic. You think that Blasters will be able to shoot frigs and cruisers out of the sky with ease if their tracking is improved a small amount. That's idiotic. I once tried to kill a Retribution with my Hyperion when 90% webs still existed and I still couldn't hit him simply because of the poor sig res of Neutron IIs and the overall lack of tracking at close range, 90% web or not. No way in hell are blasters going to be swatting frigs with a 60% web, or even two, with a small tracking increase. Blasters need to do the MOST DPS of all weapon systems up close (inside 4km) by a LARGE MARGIN. Right now they do slightly more DPS than other weapons, and that's if both targets are sitting dead still. "Slightly more" isn't good enough. 1. Blasters isn't broken, your skills or experience with using Blasters are now broken. 2. I think i know how good the tracking is on Blasters already. When i can hit a damn small Pilgrim in my Blaster Mega AFTER i'm being dual tracking disrupted with Tracking Disruption Script while he orbit me at 3 km at a speed of 250 m/s. Then i can say right now that the tracking is good enough to hit cruisers extremely easy with no problems if the tracking gets any boosted on Blasters. Atm on Sisi, i tear apart any normal cruisers in no time in a Blaster Mega. But that's because i know how to do it. And then you want a tracking boost that means it goes towards hitting frigs and cruisers way to easy. 3. If you want to have a DPS advantage for Blasters in the 5 km distance, then nerf the tracking on Lasers like i have told earlier. It's the easiest solution and it's the most logical one to. If you nerf the Lasers tracking to what it was before it got the tracking boost, then i can guarantee you that the Blasters will do enourmous more DPS in the 5 km distance than Lasers would do. I will say it short. DO NOT boost Blasters up to a weapon type that is overpowered. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 09:44:00 - [198] And because i ran out of characters left on my reply before this, then i will add this to. What DigitalCommunist said. This man also gets it. He also see that the tracking formula is not right and need fixing. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2009.05.26 10:02:00 - [199] Originally by: DigitalCommunist Drones - Most BS are still carrying legacy stats from beta where BS were simply "bigger and better". I don't think BS should have as much drone space and drone options as they do, especially the non-Gallente ones and ESPECIALLY the Caldari ones. Missiles - Total newb weapon. Needs missile arming delays on their long range types (cruise, heavy, standard), or a splash damage that only affects their owner so getting up someone's arse has some benefit. Confirming that Missiles are overpowered. Also confiming that Gallente blasterboats need full racks of hi-slots and godly dronebays, but Caldari blasterboats do of course not. Balance needs to be maintained.
stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 13:33:00 - [200] Originally by: Bellum Eternus There isn't a prize for using ships and fits that are less than optimal for PVP. Use the best tool for the job. It's not that I've 'given up' blasters in favor of 'easy mode'. I use the best tools for the job, and right now there is zero reason to use blasters when I can use lasers and do just as well at point blank range with them as I can with blasters, which is broken. This is quite true, blasters are not worth using over lasers. Originally by: Bellum Eternus You're so misinformed it's pathetic. You think that Blasters will be able to shoot frigs and cruisers out of the sky with ease if their tracking is improved a small amount. That's idiotic. I once tried to kill a Retribution with my Hyperion when 90% webs still existed and I still couldn't hit him simply because of the poor sig res of Neutron IIs and the overall lack of tracking at close range, 90% web or not. No way in hell are blasters going to be swatting frigs with a 60% web, or even two, with a small tracking increase. Lasers can kill frigs and cruisers at their extreem long ranges, so frigs and cruisers orbit in close to use transversal tank them. I see no reason why blasters should not be able to kill cruisers and frigs at their extreem close ranges, and if frigs and cruisers want to tank them they can orbit at range where blasters cannot reach them. Originally by: Bellum Eternus Blasters need to do the MOST DPS of all weapon systems up close (inside 4km) by a LARGE MARGIN. Right now they do slightly more DPS than other weapons, and that's if both targets are sitting dead still. "Slightly more" isn't good enough. I agree, the 300%-1000% more optimal lasers get totally overshadows the small % of extra dmg blasters get, especially when you consider the tanks available to each races ships.

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 13:48:00 - [201] Edited by: NightmareX on 26/05/2009 13:54:30 Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: Bellum Eternus There isn't a prize for using ships and fits that are less than optimal for PVP. Use the best tool for the job. It's not that I've 'given up' blasters in favor of 'easy mode'. I use the best tools for the job, and right now there is zero reason to use blasters when I can use lasers and do just as well at point blank range with them as I can with blasters, which is broken. This is quite true, blasters are not worth using over lasers. Originally by: Bellum Eternus You're so misinformed it's pathetic. You think that Blasters will be able to shoot frigs and cruisers out of the sky with ease if their tracking is improved a small amount. That's idiotic. I once tried to kill a Retribution with my Hyperion when 90% webs still existed and I still couldn't hit him simply because of the poor sig res of Neutron IIs and the overall lack of tracking at close range, 90% web or not. No way in hell are blasters going to be swatting frigs with a 60% web, or even two, with a small tracking increase. Lasers can kill frigs and cruisers at their extreem long ranges, so frigs and cruisers orbit in close to use transversal tank them. I see no reason why blasters should not be able to kill cruisers and frigs at their extreem close ranges, and if frigs and cruisers want to tank them they can orbit at range where blasters cannot reach them. Originally by: Bellum Eternus Blasters need to do the MOST DPS of all weapon systems up close (inside 4km) by a LARGE MARGIN. Right now they do slightly more DPS than other weapons, and that's if both targets are sitting dead still. "Slightly more" isn't good enough. I agree, the 300%-1000% more optimal lasers get totally overshadows the small % of extra dmg blasters get, especially when you consider the tanks available to each races ships. 1. So nerf Lasers so Blasters is worth using again then. 2. Large guns is not supposed to kill frigs and cruisers easily, it should be hard. It was one of the reasons why CCP nerfed the webs. This is the real problem with many of you here. You simply don't understand that the web nerf was so the Battleships isn't an instakill machine for frigs and cruisers. Or it was one of the reasons for the web nerf. Now you have to work hard to get frigs and cruisers killed in a close range Battleship. And yes, i love this, because it makes cruisers and frigs more fun to use against Battleships. 3. The reason Lasers have so much more range than Blasters (that is very close range weapons) is because Lasers are Med / long range weapons. And because Laser BS'es are not ships who are known for being agile or ships that are going to MWD alot around, you have to have something that makes up for those disadvantages Amarr BS'es have. So that's why Lasers have more range and good tracking on longer distances. But atm Lasers have to much tracking, so that should be nerfed. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Matrix Skye Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.05.26 14:02:00 - [202] Originally by: DigitalCommunist Missiles - Total newb weapon. Needs missile arming delays on their long range types (cruise, heavy, standard), or a splash damage that only affects their owner so getting up someone's arse has some benefit. Yes indeed. Missiles are the loln00b weapon system. And at the same time they need a nerf because, because, well, because... they're overpowered. Yeah. That's it. They're overpowered.
stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 14:10:00 - [203] Originally by: NightmareX 1. So nerf Lasers so Blasters is worth using again then. 2. Large guns is not supposed to kill frigs and cruisers easily, it should be hard. It was one of the reasons why CCP nerfed the webs. 3. The reason Lasers have so much more range than Blasters (that is very close range weapons) is because Lasers are Med / long range weapons. And because Laser BS'es are not ships who are known for being agile or ships that are going to MWD alot around, you have to have something that makes up for those disadvantages Amarr BS'es have. So that's why Lasers have more range and good tracking on longer distances. 1. Im not sure if you just trolling but i said nothing about nerfing lasers. 2. If large guns are not supposed to kill cruisers ect then their is a big problem because lasers have no problem hitting even unwebbed mwding cruisers at their longer optimal ranges. 3. If lasers are med range weapons and can hit cruisers at med range while cruisers can kite lasers at close range. Then blasters being close range weapons should be able to hit cruisers just as easily at close range but be kited by cruisers at med range. If a cruiser orbits a laser BS at med range and gets melted ppl would say its the cruiser pilots fault for being stupid and not getting close and kiting the dmg, the same thing can be applied to blaster BS but in reverse cos if its tracking gets fixed a cruiser pilot would be stupid to get in close when it can easily kite blasters by using range.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 14:24:00 - [204] Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX 1. So nerf Lasers so Blasters is worth using again then. 2. Large guns is not supposed to kill frigs and cruisers easily, it should be hard. It was one of the reasons why CCP nerfed the webs. 3. The reason Lasers have so much more range than Blasters (that is very close range weapons) is because Lasers are Med / long range weapons. And because Laser BS'es are not ships who are known for being agile or ships that are going to MWD alot around, you have to have something that makes up for those disadvantages Amarr BS'es have. So that's why Lasers have more range and good tracking on longer distances. 1. Im not sure if you just trolling but i said nothing about nerfing lasers. 2. If large guns are not supposed to kill cruisers ect then their is a big problem because lasers have no problem hitting even unwebbed mwding cruisers at their longer optimal ranges. 3. If lasers are med range weapons and can hit cruisers at med range while cruisers can kite lasers at close range. Then blasters being close range weapons should be able to hit cruisers just as easily at close range but be kited by cruisers at med range. If a cruiser orbits a laser BS at med range and gets melted ppl would say its the cruiser pilots fault for being stupid and not getting close and kiting the dmg, the same thing can be applied to blaster BS but in reverse cos if its tracking gets fixed a cruiser pilot would be stupid to get in close when it can easily kite blasters by using range. 1. If your not dumb i said nerf Lasers instead of messing with the Blasters that are fine now. 2. Large guns that are close range like Blasters and Autocannons is not supposed to kill frigs and cruisers easily. Lasers is another story because they are med / long range guns and the ships that use Large Lasers are ships that isn't agile and are not known to be using MWD's alot. So again, i'm saying this. You have to have something that makes up for those disadvantages Amarr BS'es have with speed and agility etc. So that's why Lasers have more range and better tracking at more ranges. You should know this to. If you don't know this, then your not a PVPer at all. 3. You can hit cruisers okish in a Blaster Mega for example if you know what your doing. But that doesn't mean that you should hit them no matter what. You just have to use your brain a little first of all. And again, the reason Lasers are hitting frigs and cruisers so easily today is because the tracking on Lasers are to high. I hope you understand now what i'm talking about. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 14:30:00 - [205] Originally by: NightmareX 1. If your not dumb i said nerf Lasers instead of messing with the Blasters that are fine now. 2. Large guns that are close range like Blasters and Autocannons is not supposed to kill frigs and cruisers easily. 1. I think your just a troll. 2. Lasers are short range weapons as well. Originally by: NightmareX Lasers is another story because they are med / long range guns and the ships that use Large Lasers are ships that isn't agile and are not known to be using MWD's alot. So again, i'm saying this. You have to have something that makes up for those disadvantages Amarr BS'es have with speed and agility etc. So that's why Lasers have more range and better tracking at more ranges. You should know this to. If you don't know this, then your not a PVPer at all. Look how stupid you are... As far as speed and agility is concerned a twin plated mega does 822ms with a align time of 14.7secs, while a twin plated armageddon does 792ms and has a align time of 15.3 seconds. The top speed and agility differance is insignificant 30ms and 0.6 of a second lol. I guess its you who needs a education about pvp, and way this is my last reply to you as you are a rude insulting troll.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 14:45:00 - [206] Edited by: NightmareX on 26/05/2009 14:56:27 Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX 1. If your not dumb i said nerf Lasers instead of messing with the Blasters that are fine now. 2. Large guns that are close range like Blasters and Autocannons is not supposed to kill frigs and cruisers easily. 1. I think your just a troll. 2. Lasers are short range weapons as well. Originally by: NightmareX Lasers is another story because they are med / long range guns and the ships that use Large Lasers are ships that isn't agile and are not known to be using MWD's alot. So again, i'm saying this. You have to have something that makes up for those disadvantages Amarr BS'es have with speed and agility etc. So that's why Lasers have more range and better tracking at more ranges. You should know this to. If you don't know this, then your not a PVPer at all. Look how stupid you are... As far as speed and agility is concerned a twin plated mega does 822ms with a align time of 14.7secs, while a twin plated armageddon does 792ms and has a align time of 15.3 seconds. The top speed and agility differance is insignificant 30ms and 0.6 of a second lol. I guess its you who needs a education about pvp, and way this is my last reply to you as you are a rude insulting troll. Ok, since you don't know how Blasters and Lasers are supposed to work. Then let me explain something to you. Lasers is not supposed to be good at close range where Blasters are good. But atm, the Lasers are almost as good as Blasters in the web range. It should NOT be like that because Lasers are med / long range weapons. The reason the Lasers tracking is to high now is simple. Some years ago, Lasers got a tracking boost so they could hit fast cruisers and HAC's better. That was fine that time, because the cruisers and HAC's was very fast that time. But then, what happened not so long time ago?, yes the speed got nerfed quite alot. And then my question stands, why does Lasers still have that tracking boost when those cruisers and HAC's is no where as fast as they was earlier?. Because of that the Lasers is overpowered now. So, if you then nerf the tracking on Lasers to what it was BEFORE the Lasers got the tracking boost, then the Lasers will be poor where the Blasters should be very good. But still, even when they nerf the tracking on Lasers, the Lasers will still track good at longer ranges. And if you nerf the tracking on Lasers, then we wont have the problem that Lasers is pretty much as good at Blasters at close range. Because Lasers SHOULD NOT be good in close range. Blasters and eventually Autocannons should be the best tracking / DPS weapons inside web range. Lasers should be the best at med / long ranges. That's what it's all about. And this is something you don't seem to understand. The only solution and the easy solution to is to nerf the Lasers tracking. By doing that your fixing many things instead of just boosting Blasters that just fix one thing. And also, if you going to boost Blasters, then you have to boost Autocannons again, and when those 2 weapons are boosted, then yikes, Torps need a boost to. See what i mean?. It will just be chaos if we goes that way. EVERY good PVPers in EVE knows this is the truth. Now who's the stupid one now and who's the one that need educations in PVP stinger7?. If you don't know this, then please do me this favour under. STOP POSTING AND LEAVE THIS TOPIC. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 15:04:00 - [207] Edited by: stinger7 on 26/05/2009 15:06:57 Originally by: NightmareX Ok, since you don't know how Blasters and Lasers are supposed to work. Let me explain something to you. Lasers is not supposed to be good at close range where Blasters are good. But atm, the Lasers are almost as good as Blasters in the web range. It should NOT be like that because Lasers are med / long range weapons. The reason the Lasers tracking is to high now is simple. Some years ago, Lasers got a tracking boost so they could hit fast cruisers and HAC's better. That was fine that time, because the cruisers and HAC's was very fast that time. But then, what happened not so long time ago?, yes the speed got nerfed quite alot. And then my question stands, why does Lasers still have that tracking boost when those cruisers and HAC's is no where as fast as they was earlier?. Because of that the Lasers is overpowered now. So, if you then nerf the tracking on Lasers to what it was BEFORE the Lasers got the tracking boost, then the Lasers will be poor where the Blasters should be very good. But still, even when they nerf the tracking on Lasers, the Lasers will still track good at longer ranges. You have no clue for several reasons but the main one is that a lot of close range RR fits now use large rails guns and they have god awful tracking and if rails can be used in such gangs then nerfing the tracking of lasers will do nothing, and it will certainly not help blasters any. Originally by: NightmareX Now who's the stupid one now and who's the one that need educations in PVP stinger7?. If you don't know this, then please do me this favour under. STOP POSTING AND LEAVE THIS TOPIC. This topic is obviously beyond your limited understanding of the problem as you short sighted and useless "nerf laser tracking" solution clearly shows, its you who should stop posting and leave this topic. You were wrong about the agility being a big issue as i showed you with the mega/geddon comparison. You were wrong about nerfing laser tracking making a differance as i showed you with the rail gun example. Now do you have any more silly and worthless history lessons or insults to throw out or are you going to go away get a clue?.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 15:12:00 - [208] Edited by: NightmareX on 26/05/2009 15:14:40 Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX Ok, since you don't know how Blasters and Lasers are supposed to work. Let me explain something to you. Lasers is not supposed to be good at close range where Blasters are good. But atm, the Lasers are almost as good as Blasters in the web range. It should NOT be like that because Lasers are med / long range weapons. The reason the Lasers tracking is to high now is simple. Some years ago, Lasers got a tracking boost so they could hit fast cruisers and HAC's better. That was fine that time, because the cruisers and HAC's was very fast that time. But then, what happened not so long time ago?, yes the speed got nerfed quite alot. And then my question stands, why does Lasers still have that tracking boost when those cruisers and HAC's is no where as fast as they was earlier?. Because of that the Lasers is overpowered now. So, if you then nerf the tracking on Lasers to what it was BEFORE the Lasers got the tracking boost, then the Lasers will be poor where the Blasters should be very good. But still, even when they nerf the tracking on Lasers, the Lasers will still track good at longer ranges. You have no clue for several reasons but the main one is that a lot of RR fits now use rails guns that have god awful tracking and if rails can be used in such gangs then nerfing the tracking of lasers will do nothing. Originally by: NightmareX Now who's the stupid one now and who's the one that need educations in PVP stinger7?. If you don't know this, then please do me this favour under. STOP POSTING AND LEAVE THIS TOPIC. This topic is obviously beyond your limited understanding of the problem as you short sighted and useless "nerf laser tracking" solution clearly shows, its you who should stop posting and leave this topic. You were wrong about the agility as i showed you with the mega/geddon comparison. You were wrong about nerfing laser tracking making a differance as i showed you with the rail gun example. Nopw do you have any more silly and worthless history lessons or insults to throw out or are you going to get a clue?. 1. It's how it's supposed to work dude. Lasers are NOT A CLOSE RANGE WEAPON (like Blasters isn't a med range weapon) even when you can hit at close range. Lasers are meant to be crap inside web range. But are they crap inside web range now?. NO THEY ARE NOT. 2. The reason why Nerf Lasers tracking is the only solution is because if you boost the tracking on Blasters and Autocannons just so they can be inline with how lasers are, then we are back to the old instakilling of frigs and cruisers in BS'es. WE DON'T WANT THAT TO COME BACK EVER. 3. And about the agility. Was you dumb or what?, because when i said agility i meant that Amarr BS'es are slower than other BS'es and that. Like you said, a twin plated Mega does 822ms with a align time of 14.7secs while a twin plated Armageddon does 792ms and has a align time of 15.3 seconds. Yes, my point proven dude. 4. And also with the Rails, you don't compare the Rails with Pulses, you compare then to Beams or Tachyons. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 15:28:00 - [209] Edited by: stinger7 on 26/05/2009 15:33:08 Originally by: NightmareX 1. It's how it's supposed to work dude. Lasers are NOT A CLOSE RANGE WEAPON (like Blasters isn't a med range weapon) even when you can hit at close range. Lasers are meant to be crap inside web range. But are they crap inside web range now?. NO THEY ARE NOT. You really do have a limited intellect dont you?. BS lasers will never be poor inside web range because BS are now gang ships and multiple webs will mean transversal will be close to 0 at any range. Originally by: NightmareX 2. The reason why Nerf Lasers tracking is the only solution is because if you boost the tracking on Blasters and Autocannons just so they can be inline with how lasers are, then we are back to the old instakilling of frigs and cruisers in BS'es. WE DON'T WANT THAT TO COME BACK EVER. It will only happen to pilots stupoid enough to get into blaster range, stay close to laser ships to avoid getting hit, stay at range from blaster ships to avoid getting hit....that is so simple even you could understand it. Originally by: NightmareX 3. And about the agility. Was you dumb or what?, because when i said agility i meant that Amarr BS'es are slower than other BS'es and that. Like you said, a twin plated Mega does 822ms with a align time of 14.7secs while a twin plated Armageddon does 792ms and has a align time of 15.3 seconds. Yes, my point proven dude. 30ms at mwd speed and 0.6 of a second you think is significant enpough to justify 300%-1000% more optimal range?.. Now i know your a troll. Originally by: NightmareX 4. And also with the Rails, you don't compare the Rails with Pulses, you compare then to Beams or Tachyons. Its a comparison of a BS weapon system with crap tracking that still used for close range engagements, stop trying to ignore and deflect the issue with useless scemantics and system type whines. ANSWER THIS IF YOU CAN: RAILS ARE USED IN CLOSE RANGE RR PVP, RAILS HAVE CRAP TRACKING...SO HOW WILL NERFING PULSE'S TRACKING MAKE THEM POOR AT CLOSE RANGE PVP?.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 15:39:00 - [210] Edited by: NightmareX on 26/05/2009 15:46:44 Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX 1. It's how it's supposed to work dude. Lasers are NOT A CLOSE RANGE WEAPON (like Blasters isn't a med range weapon) even when you can hit at close range. Lasers are meant to be crap inside web range. But are they crap inside web range now?. NO THEY ARE NOT. You really do have a limited intilect dont you?. BS lasers will never be poor inside web range because BS are now gang ships and multiple webs will mean transversal will be close to 0 at any range. Originally by: NightmareX 2. The reason why Nerf Lasers tracking is the only solution is because if you boost the tracking on Blasters and Autocannons just so they can be inline with how lasers are, then we are back to the old instakilling of frigs and cruisers in BS'es. WE DON'T WANT THAT TO COME BACK EVER. It will only happen to pilots stupoid enough to get into blaster range, stay close to laser ships to avoid getting hit, stay at range from blaster ships to avoid getting hit....that is so simple even you could understand it. Originally by: NightmareX 3. And about the agility. Was you dumb or what?, because when i said agility i meant that Amarr BS'es are slower than other BS'es and that. Like you said, a twin plated Mega does 822ms with a align time of 14.7secs while a twin plated Armageddon does 792ms and has a align time of 15.3 seconds. Yes, my point proven dude. 30ms at mwd speed and 0.6 of a second you think is significant enpough to justify 300%-1000% more optimal range?.. Now i know your a troll. Originally by: NightmareX 4. And also with the Rails, you don't compare the Rails with Pulses, you compare then to Beams or Tachyons. Its a comparison of a BS weapon system with crap tracking that still used for close range engagements, stop trying to ignore and deflect the issue with useless scemantics and system type whines. ANSWER THIS IF YOU CAN: RAILS ARE USED IN CLOSE RANGE RR PVP, RAILS HAVE CRAP TRACKING...SO HOW WILL NERFING PULSE'S TRACKING MAKE THEM POOR AT CLOSE RANGE PVP?. 1. It's something else if it's in a gang. But the tracking should be much much worser for Lasers in web range no matter what anyways. That's what i'm trying to tell you. But as things are atm, the Lasers track 99% as good as Blasters in web range. It should not be like that. 2. And how many of the EVE's playerbase are stupid players?, yes i can tell you right now that it's over 60%. There is a reason why CCP nerfed the webs, so Battleships isn't an instakill machine for the frigs and cruisers. 3. Tell me how many Armageddons that used MWD's?. It's few. And an Abaddon with MWD is also LULZ because it's slow as hell even with MWD. MWD is very important to use in 0.0 space, so you have a chance to get out of bubbles. No MWD in a bubble means your dead. 4. Using Rails in RR gangs is something someone is using in 0.0 space sometimes. But as you can see on our killboard, we don't use Rails in RR gangs, or we use that some very few times. It all depends on what we are going to shoot, but we use close range weapons in RR BS gangs mainly, because that's best to use. Take a look at this link HERE. Yes you see that our 42 man gang pwned the hell out of a 55 man gang. And if you look closer on what setups the Mostly Harmless guys did use on their Megas for example, then you can see that they used Rails on some of their ships. And what happens if your in a R(f)ail fitted BS and meet a gang with close range fitted BS'es?, yes they get massacred. We use Rails in Sniper BS gangs on our Megas. Alright, is there any more troll replies i can reply to?. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise

stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 15:48:00 - [211] Originally by: NightmareX I have no point only troll... Yup i thought so. /Waits for a player with a idea worth hearing to join thread.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 15:51:00 - [212] Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX I have no point only troll... Yup i thought so. /Waits for a player with a idea worth hearing to join thread. Are you an alt of Murina huh?. Yeah i guess so, and i think i know why. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 15:57:00 - [213] Originally by: NightmareX Troll. So are you going to answer the question or just keep trolling. As BS rails are used in close range BS pvp what makes you think reducing the tracking of pulse will help BS blasters at all, or make BS pulse poor at close range?.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 16:00:00 - [214] Edited by: NightmareX on 26/05/2009 16:00:21 Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX Troll. So are you going to answer the question or just keep trolling. As BS rails are used in close range BS pvp what makes you think reducing the tracking of pulse will help BS blasters at all, or make BS pulse poor at close range?. I have explained multiple times over why nerfing the Lasers (Pulses) tracking will help Blasters and other things to. I don't want to explain the same thing one more time because you can't read and because you don't understand how Blasters and Lasers are meant to work. It's pointless no matter what to explain it to you one more time when you don't want to get it into your head. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Grez Minmatar Core Contingency Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2009.05.26 16:06:00 - [215] Edited by: Grez on 26/05/2009 16:07:10 FYI lasers got a tracking boost because they couldn't hit anything orbiting them at 10km or under. Even inties with dual lights with tracking boosts couldn't hit other ships well whilst they were orbiting without the MWD on. Hell, no ship really hits anything orbiting them real close at decent speeds. Same goes for all races. What on earth makes Gal so special as to negate the effect all other races are forced to live with? Perhaps the answer is to lower the tracking penalty on T2 blaster ammo by a small amount. --- Grez: I shot the sheriff Kalazar: But I could not lock the Deputy BECAUSE OF FALCON
stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 16:09:00 - [216] Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX Troll. So are you going to answer the question or just keep trolling. As BS rails are used in close range BS pvp what makes you think reducing the tracking of pulse will help BS blasters at all, or make BS pulse poor at close range?. I have explained multiple times over why nerfing the Lasers will help Blasters and other things to. I don't want to explain the same thing one more time because you can't read and because you don't understand how Blasters and Lasers are meant to work. It's pointless no matter what to explain it to you one more time when you don't want to get it into your head. You explained nothing. You gave a pointless and worthless history lesson and then claimed that nerfing pulse tracking will be a big solution to all problems. Your understanding of the problem and your soloution is too limited because you ignore the fact that: BS are gang ships and as such in gang combat a target will be well and truly webbed making tracking and transversal irrelavant. So even if you gave lasers the same tracking as 425mm rails they would still be effective for the sort of close range combat available to BS. Its your lack of understanding and narrow blinkered veiw of the problem that is the problem.
stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 16:18:00 - [217] Originally by: Grez FYI lasers got a tracking boost because they couldn't hit anything orbiting them at 10km or under. Even inties with dual lights with tracking boosts couldn't hit other ships well whilst they were orbiting without the MWD on. Hell, no ship really hits anything orbiting them real close at decent speeds. Same goes for all races. What on earth makes Gal so special as to negate the effect all other races are forced to live with? Lasers do not live with it though. Lasers do low or 0 dps against smaller ships orbiting close, but hit smaller ships at med range because they are aparantly med range weapons. Blasters being close range weapons do low or 0 dps against small ships at med range, but in close range should hit as well as pulse do at med range. So sensable pilots if blasters are fixed should orbit laser ships close and blaster ships at range, for ppl who preach about weapons being "diffferant" this should not be a hard concept to understand.
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 16:19:00 - [218] Edited by: NightmareX on 26/05/2009 16:26:25 Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX Troll. So are you going to answer the question or just keep trolling. As BS rails are used in close range BS pvp what makes you think reducing the tracking of pulse will help BS blasters at all, or make BS pulse poor at close range?. I have explained multiple times over why nerfing the Lasers will help Blasters and other things to. I don't want to explain the same thing one more time because you can't read and because you don't understand how Blasters and Lasers are meant to work. It's pointless no matter what to explain it to you one more time when you don't want to get it into your head. You explained nothing. You gave a pointless and worthless history lesson and then claimed that nerfing pulse tracking will be a big solution to all problems. Your understanding of the problem and your soloution is too limited because you ignore the fact that: BS are gang ships and as such in gang combat a target will be well and truly webbed making tracking and transversal irrelavant. So even if you gave lasers the same tracking as 425mm rails they would still be effective for the sort of close range combat available to BS. Its your lack of understanding and narrow blinkered veiw of the problem that is the problem. Yeah i gave no explanation to a lazy PVPer that only want his ultimate close range instakillmachine back because you simply don't want to adapt to the new changes in PVP after the web and speed got nerfed. WOW, no suprise here. And if the explanations over was no explanation to you, then nothing is explanation to you anyways, so you can just leave this topic instead of trolling here. It's in fact you that have totally wrong understanding here on how Lasers (Pulses) and Blasters are SUPPOSED to work. They are not supposed to work after how you want them to work because your a damn lazy PVPer who don't want to adapt to the new changes. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 16:49:00 - [219] Edited by: NightmareX on 26/05/2009 17:00:34 Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX more insults and troll. Its a simple concept realy although i know your limitations may make it difficult for you to understand so il explain slowly. If you want to kite a laser BS in a cruiser you get in close. If you want to kite a blaster BS in a cruiser you stay at range. You can hardly say that blaster ships will be "instakill" machines just because a pilot is stupid enough to fight them at close range and gets melted, any more than laser ships are "instakill" machines if the same pilot chooses to fight them at med range and also gets melted. This way cruisers still have the ability to easily kite the dmg of both systems but at the systems weakest areas/ranges....IE: lasers at close range and blasters at med/long range. Murina, stop trolling here. Your not getting anything that have with PVP to do no matter what someone tell you. So you can just say whatever you like. We don't care about your crap understanding on how things works in EVE when it's about PVP and weapons and ships. I could have told this things with Blasters and lasers to a monkey and even he would understand what i'm saying. Anyways, a question to you. Would you agree with Darknesss if he got in this topic and told you how Blasters works and would you agree to DHB WildCat if he had got in this topic and told you how Lasers works?. I'm sure you wouldn't even agree then. But to let you know, there isn't ANY points to get them here, because they would say the same as me. They would waste their times here with a player that is you Murina that don't have a single clue about how some weapons works. Remember, i'm in the same corp as both of them. I know what they are saying about both Blasters and Lasers. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
stinger7 eve tutors inc	Posted - 2009.05.26 17:00:00 - [220] Originally by: NightmareX 0 content + insults. You give no answers and all you do is insult anybody who tells you the truth by calling them lazy pvpers and claiming that they have not adapted. Either add facts, figures and examples of how nerfing laser tracking will help blasters in the sort of combat available to BS on TQ or please go and troll somewhere else.

NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 17:02:00 - [221] Originally by: stinger7 Originally by: NightmareX 0 content + insults. You give no answers and all you do is insult anybody who tells you the truth by calling them lazy pvpers and claiming that they have not adapted. Either add facts, figures and examples of how nerfing laser tracking will help blasters in the sort of combat available to BS on TQ or please go and troll somewhere else. Wow awesome reply to what i have written. Nice job on the reply. You made a really hard work with that reply. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.26 17:04:00 - [222] Originally by: stinger7 You give no answers and all you do is insult anybody who tells you the truth by calling them lazy pvpers and claiming that they have not adapted. Either add facts, figures and examples of how nerfing laser tracking will help blasters in the sort of combat available to BS on TQ or please go and troll somewhere else. While I don't disagree with your analysis of NightmareX, I will point out that on the top of the second page of this thread, I showed how an Abaddon can pretty much completely eliminate the need of a blasterthron - ever. Nerfing laser tracking would greatly mitigate by lowering the amount of damage that they can realistically do at close range. Thus, lasers stop impinging upon blaster territory. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
NightmareX D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.26 17:07:00 - [223] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: stinger7 You give no answers and all you do is insult anybody who tells you the truth by calling them lazy pvpers and claiming that they have not adapted. Either add facts, figures and examples of how nerfing laser tracking will help blasters in the sort of combat available to BS on TQ or please go and troll somewhere else. While I don't disagree with your analysis of NightmareX, I will point out that on the top of the second page of this thread, I showed how an Abaddon can pretty much completely eliminate the need of a blasterthron - ever. Nerfing laser tracking would greatly mitigate by lowering the amount of damage that they can realistically do at close range. Thus, lasers stop impinging upon blaster territory. -Liang This is not a reply to you Liang, because you smart enough to see the whole picture here. So this reply are to stinger7 / Murina. See what i mean now stinger7?. If you don't see this, your not a PVPer. Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.26 17:14:00 - [224] Originally by: Grez Hell, no ship really hits anything orbiting them real close at decent speeds. Same goes for all races. What on earth makes Gal so special as to negate the effect all other races are forced to live with? Because they don't (and can't) live anywhere else. All the damage they do is at close range. Also, you might remember this little thing called a "Nano Nerf" and a more recent "Agility Nerf" that slowed things down again and again? Why should lasers have tracking geared towards killing things going 5km/s at 24km when nothing actually goes that fast anymore? Why should lasers be able to overtake blasters in raw DPS well inside web range? Simple answer: they shouldn't. It's a different game from when lasers got the tracking boost, and it's one where that boost is not necessary anymore. Quote: Perhaps the answer is to lower the tracking penalty on T2 blaster ammo by a small amount. So with regards to T2 blaster ammo: - Void is utterly trash and nobody really uses it. The problems at close range evince themselves with CN AM - which doesn't have a tracking penalty. - Null is interesting because if you find yourself using null with any regularity at all, you would be much, much, much better off in a laser ship. There's no good reason for lasers to so completely dominate all ranges of combat (and make no mistake - they do). -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
bubbly bird	Posted - 2009.05.26 17:49:00 - [225] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: stinger7 You give no answers and all you do is insult anybody who tells you the truth by calling them lazy pvpers and claiming that they have not adapted. Either add facts, figures and examples of how nerfing laser tracking will help blasters in the sort of combat available to BS on TQ or please go and troll somewhere else. While I don't disagree with your analysis of NightmareX, I will point out that on the top of the second page of this thread, I showed how an Abaddon can pretty much completely eliminate the need of a blasterthron - ever. Nerfing laser tracking would greatly mitigate by lowering the amount of damage that they can realistically do at close range. Thus, lasers stop impinging upon blaster territory. -Liang While this may seem like a reasonable idea on paper the fact is that it is rather pointless due to the available pvp for BS. Nerfing laser tracking would do nothing to lower the DPS from lasers anywhere apart from on a EFT graph because the only pvp available for BS is gang pvp and gang PVP = multiple webs and that makes making tracking irrelavant. After all if the tracking on rails is good enough for close range RR BS gang combat just how bad do you intend to nerf the tracking of lasers to make them bad at close range?. Do not get me wrong, if solo and 1 v 1 BS pvp was as prevalant on TQ as gang pvp is right now then your idea would work but the fact is that solo and 1 v 1 pvp does not exist on TQ because of tracking, lock speed, ship speed and agility ect ect of BS.
DigitalCommunist November Corporation	Posted - 2009.05.26 18:26:00 - [226] Originally by: Matrix Skye Yes indeed. Missiles are the loln00b weapon system. And at the same time they need a nerf because, because, well, because... they're overpowered. Yeah. That's it. They're overpowered. Quit moaning, I didn't say they were overpowered. I only said they were newb weapons. Quantum Rise might've brought balance back in line but it didn't change the underlying mechanics. Making changes to missiles should be for the sake of adding complexity and tactics to a weapon that has absolutely none.
Electric Universe The Choir	Posted - 2009.05.26 19:28:00 - [227] Edited by: Electric Universe on 26/05/2009 19:28:24 Originally by: bubbly bird Edited by: bubbly bird on 26/05/2009 18:18:48 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: stinger7 You give no answers and all you do is insult anybody who tells you the truth by calling them lazy pvpers and claiming that they have not adapted. Either add facts, figures and examples of how nerfing laser tracking will help blasters in the sort of combat available to BS on TQ or please go and troll somewhere else. While I don't disagree with your analysis of NightmareX, I will point out that on the top of the second page of this thread, I showed how an Abaddon can pretty much completely eliminate the need of a blasterthron - ever. Nerfing laser tracking would greatly mitigate by lowering the amount of damage that they can realistically do at close range. Thus, lasers stop impinging upon blaster territory. -Liang While this may seem like a reasonable idea on paper the fact is that it is rather pointless due to the available pvp for BS. Nerfing laser tracking would do nothing to lower the DPS from lasers anywhere apart from on a EFT graph because the only pvp available for BS is gang pvp and gang PVP = multiple webs and that makes tracking virtually irrelavant. After all if the tracking on rails is good enough for close range RR BS gang combat just how bad do you intend to nerf the tracking of lasers to make them bad at close range?. Do not get me wrong, if solo and 1 v 1 BS pvp was as prevalant on TQ as gang pvp is right now then your idea would work but the fact is that solo and 1 v 1 pvp does not exist on TQ because of the tracking, lock speed, ship speed and agility ect ect ect of BS. Wrong wrong wrong and more wrong. This is so wrong that it's shouldn't be allowed to be so wrong as you are now. Anyone knows what Liang said there is the truth.
bubbly bird	Posted - 2009.05.26 20:34:00 - [228] Edited by: bubbly bird on 26/05/2009 20:37:16 To liang.. I just did a little test with a ABADDON with 6 x pilgrim boosted tracking disruptors with tracking scripts in them hitting it giving it a tracking of 0.00258. with scorch.......a ion siege blaster cannon on a moros IN SIEGE gets 0.00203 tracking btw, just to give you a perspective. Even with such a massive butchering of the abaddons tracking (to virtually in siege blaster dread levels) the abaddon still hits the gang webbed mega for 500-700 dps at 2km-5km out of the available 730 turret dps it gets with scorch fitted. Now LIANG i know that you are a reasonably minded and fair person so i must ask how you reconcile the FACTS that i have shown here and in my post above with your thoughts and ideas that nerfing laser tracking is some how going to make laser BS worse at the kinds of close range pvp that is available to BS on TQ.
Poisson Distribution	Posted - 2009.05.27 02:53:00 - [229] The game is getting closer and closer to real balance, as each correcting swing of the pendulum brings everyone closer and closer to the mean. I think it's reasonable that Amarr have a clear gunnery advantage over other gunboats. Where I have an issue is that Amarr ships are both the most effective gunnery AND the most durability. Reintroducing Amarr's cap vulnerability would go a long way towards redressing this balance. If Amarr boats had active tanks, rather than the current 'racial' passive resist bonus, we'd have ships that dealt high dps over a broad engagement envelope, but did so over a shorter period of time. The ubiquitous cap booster would lengthen an Amarr ship's fighting time, but its pilot would quickly have to start making decisions about when and how to divert energy to reps. In an ideal world, Amarr ships would be glass cannons whose high and effective damage would have its greatest effect early on in an engagement, while Gallente ships would be durable little beetles who could endure a slugfest and gain an advantage over time. Minmatar ships would have either high alpha or good damage over time, while missile and drone boats would offer a consistent dps closer to their theoretical max but with low top-end damage or countermeasure vulnerability as drawbacks. The goal of relative balance is within reach, but conceptual changes to ship types need to be made rather than just tweaks to one or two weapon classes.
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.27 04:45:00 - [230] Originally by: bubbly bird To liang.. I just did a little test with a ABADDON with 6 x pilgrim boosted tracking disruptors with tracking scripts in them hitting it as well as reducing my skill level in "motion prediction" to 0. This gave its pulse a tracking of 0.00207 with scorch.......a ion siege blaster cannon on a moros IN SIEGE gets 0.00203 tracking btw, just to give you a perspective. Even with such a massive butchering of the abaddons tracking (to in siege blaster dread levels) the abaddon still hits the gang webbed mega for 500-700+ dps from around 2km-10km out of the available 730 turret dps it gets with scorch fitted. Now LIANG i know that you are a reasonably minded and fair person so i must ask how you reconcile the FACTS that i have shown here and in my post above with your thoughts and ideas that nerfing laser tracking is some how going to make laser BS worse at the kinds of close range pvp that is available to BS on TQ. Honestly, what you're saying is undoubtedly true - I don't doubt it in the least. However, as I've said, my beef with lasers is not that they perform too well in gang settings where range, damage, and EHP reign supreme. My beef with lasers is that they perform too well in close range combat. Now, I know, you're saying that you just showed the Abaddon is still putting out really quite spectacular damage against a mega while being six-times bonus tracking disrupted. This obviously means that a tracking nerf wouldn't make any difference, right? Well, not really. You (generally) shouldn't engage in close range combat in larger gang settings, and the only time blasters make any sense at all is when you don't have the advantage of a large gang. Thus, my beef with lasers performing too well in that setting makes perfect sense (heh, to me). That said, you have a perfectly legitimate observation: lasers put out alot of raw (and frequently unresisted given the "recent" influx of shield tanking) damage. Maybe the right answer is simply to lower tracking (a bit) to help with smaller craft, and to outright lower laser damage. However, I don't think there's any really easy answers that won't make the Amarrians (old and new) stand up and proclaim how being underpowered for years should mean they have the right to be overpowered for years. I don't think this is something that can really be addressed by CCP without making lasers suck in small gangs. I'm training lasers. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org

Chi Quan Perkone	Posted - 2009.05.27 10:59:00 - [231] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: bubbly bird ... ... and this brings us back to the thought that, while tracking adjustments might patch the problem, ultimately only a thorough rework of the sig-resolution/tracking/falloff mechanics will really fix the problem. DrEyoG i believe this mathematic curve-fitting-problem falls into your jurisdiction? (and besides, what happened to the quarterly reports?) ---- Ceterum censeo blasters need some tracking love
bubbly bird	Posted - 2009.05.27 11:49:00 - [232] Edited by: bubbly bird on 27/05/2009 11:53:53 Originally by: Chi Quan Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: bubbly bird ... ... and this brings us back to the thought that, while tracking adjustments might patch the problem, ultimately only a thorough rework of the sig-resolution/tracking/falloff mechanics will really fix the problem. I agree that the entire tracking mechanic/code needs to be reworked, and im still sceptical about nerfing tracking making a differance as in the example i used the mega in question i used as a target ship had only between 2-4 of webs on it and in my experiance on TQ i have never been in a BS gang that had so few ships that it had less than 3 or so webs (since the nano domi/phoon ect age anyway) and normally a BS gang is way into double figures of ships and webs nowadays. Also as you know EFT gives the target ship perfect and totally steady transversal speed and thats a thing unachieveable in reality on TQ. I feel this issue is way to complicated to be fixed by a simple tracking nerf because of the availability of pvp that BS have been limited to over the last few years. This is not a slight against liang or her idea as at least she and some others recognise the problem and clearly admit its more complicated than it seems, but i also feel that adding an attempted "tracking nerf patch" in the vague hopes it will make a slight differance may (and probably will knowing CCP) considerably delay a true fix from being implemented within a reasonable time frame.
Beverly Sparks	Posted - 2009.05.30 14:03:00 - [233] Originally by: Liang Nuren However, I don't think there's any really easy answers that won't make the Amarrians (old and new) stand up and proclaim how being underpowered for years should mean they have the right to be overpowered for years. I don't think this is something that can really be addressed by CCP without making lasers suck in small gangs. I'm training lasers. -Liang Me too, and ultimately, this is what will bring balance.
species2143	Posted - 2009.07.27 19:56:00 - [234] For the love of god everybody aggree with NightmareX or else you'll soon discover how a thread can get trolled to death with dillusional ranting and alt posting....
species2143	Posted - 2009.07.27 20:01:00 - [235] Originally by: Electric Universe Wrong wrong wrong and more wrong. This is so wrong that it's shouldn't be allowed to be so wrong as you are now. Anyone knows what Liang said there is the truth. Oh hi electric, still posting with your alts to back-up your arguments? BTW what ever happened to Tyrkisk Peber? Did you send her back to WOW? and no I'm not going to bother reading your posts again, been there done it b4.
Blonda Mea Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.07.28 17:17:00 - [236] For the love of god!!!! give it up. ALL of eve knows the list of broke goes like this 1 Missiles 2 Projectiles and Minmatar ships 3 Regions and Sov warfare 4 Ewar 5 Bounty system 6 Amarr tracking nerf 7 Your damn high damage Blasters.
Beardponderer You're Doing It Wrong	Posted - 2009.07.29 09:37:00 - [237] To be honest, they should just bring back Blaze and Desolate making the resistance arguement useless. Then again that would **** the advantage minmatar and caldari get of choosing damage types. Also, hai nmx! You should really stop trying to get them to see your point of view. Mindless arguements ftl
Bob Mc Shade. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.07.29 14:03:00 - [238] Give amarr bs more mids and you can have your blaster dmg buff. Just sayin'.
Chi Quan Bibkor Enterprises	Posted - 2009.08.01 04:01:00 - [239] fire in the hole! sorry, couldn't resist. ---- Ceterum censeo blasters need some tracking love
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.08.01 06:18:00 - [240] Originally by: Bob Mc Give amarr bs more mids and you can have your blaster dmg buff. Just sayin'. If the Geddon had 4x mids and the Abaddon 5, I'd never get out of them. I'd never fly an Astarte again if the Abso had 4x mids. I'd fly a Zealot religiously (lol, pun) if it had 4 mids. I'd fly a Legion all the time if it had enough mids... oh wait, it does! And I do! How about that? Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting

Bob Mc Shade. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2009.08.01 18:20:00 - [241] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Bob Mc Give amarr bs more mids and you can have your blaster dmg buff. Just sayin'. If the Geddon had 4x mids and the Abaddon 5, I'd never get out of them. I'd never fly an Astarte again if the Abso had 4x mids. I'd fly a Zealot religiously (lol, pun) if it had 4 mids. I'd fly a Legion all the time if it had enough mids... oh wait, it does! And I do! How about that? You're right, it would be stupid if amarr ships were simply given more mids. But the geddon, for example (really, t3 isnt your run of the mill ship in pvp atm) only has 3, which means you need to choose. point booster web or point mwd booster or well, i dunno. Lasers may be great (and they are - i pretty much exclusively fly geddon/zealot (and curse but w/e)) but the golden ships are more limited in their options. The abaddon is fine but most amarr ships still only have 3 mids. Guns arent everything that makes a ship great.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one 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.