| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Galton Grimm
   |
Posted - 2004.09.23 18:56:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Galton Grimm on 23/09/2004 19:04:31
The stats on dual turrets are wrong. The large sized Dual 250mm Turret compared to the medium sized 250mm turret does the same or less amount of damage over time, with less tracking. That makes no sense at all.
First off, the damage modifier is 1.5x for dual, 2.75x for single. Large ammo does twice the damage of medium ammo, so we have 3 vs 2.75, a little more damage per shot.
The rate of fire of dual 250 turret is less than medium single turret, so a little slower rate of fire for large. That in combination with the ammo/dmg mod numbers means it does the same amount of damage over time.
Tracking is slower on the large than the medium. So you'll hit less often. Meaning overall, you'll do less damage with the dual 250mm turret than with the single 250.
Tell me how that makes sense? It doesn't.
A "dual 250mm turret" should be just what it says, 2 250mm turrets in one mount.
It should use medium ammo.
It should carry twice the ammo as a single 250.
It should have the same damage modifier as the single 250. It should have the same tracking speed as the single 250.
It should have twice the rate of fire of a single 250.
It should use large hybrid skill, and be a large sized weapon because of the inherent nature of needing a larger mount point, and it's designed for battleships so large skill applies.
|
Galton Grimm
|
Posted - 2004.09.23 18:56:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Galton Grimm on 23/09/2004 19:04:31
The stats on dual turrets are wrong. The large sized Dual 250mm Turret compared to the medium sized 250mm turret does the same or less amount of damage over time, with less tracking. That makes no sense at all.
First off, the damage modifier is 1.5x for dual, 2.75x for single. Large ammo does twice the damage of medium ammo, so we have 3 vs 2.75, a little more damage per shot.
The rate of fire of dual 250 turret is less than medium single turret, so a little slower rate of fire for large. That in combination with the ammo/dmg mod numbers means it does the same amount of damage over time.
Tracking is slower on the large than the medium. So you'll hit less often. Meaning overall, you'll do less damage with the dual 250mm turret than with the single 250.
Tell me how that makes sense? It doesn't.
A "dual 250mm turret" should be just what it says, 2 250mm turrets in one mount.
It should use medium ammo.
It should carry twice the ammo as a single 250.
It should have the same damage modifier as the single 250. It should have the same tracking speed as the single 250.
It should have twice the rate of fire of a single 250.
It should use large hybrid skill, and be a large sized weapon because of the inherent nature of needing a larger mount point, and it's designed for battleships so large skill applies.
|
Cemetary
|
Posted - 2004.09.23 19:35:00 -
[3]
yep.
-------------------------------------------------
Ytiri kills |
Cemetary
|
Posted - 2004.09.23 19:35:00 -
[4]
yep.
-------------------------------------------------
Ytiri kills |
Selim
|
Posted - 2004.09.23 19:36:00 -
[5]
You do realize, that a cruiser gun does almost the same damage over time as a battleship one, right?
2 250mm railguns will always outdamage one battleship gun. One 250mm railgun will come close.
So no, your idea wont work.
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2004.09.23 19:36:00 -
[6]
You do realize, that a cruiser gun does almost the same damage over time as a battleship one, right?
2 250mm railguns will always outdamage one battleship gun. One 250mm railgun will come close.
So no, your idea wont work.
|
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2004.09.23 20:58:00 -
[7]
Yes they should be changed, renamed to 300mm rail or something. To stop people starting this kinda discussion every month or so. Or people should educate themselfs a little before starting threads. but that last bit is too much to ask for.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2004.09.23 20:58:00 -
[8]
Yes they should be changed, renamed to 300mm rail or something. To stop people starting this kinda discussion every month or so. Or people should educate themselfs a little before starting threads. but that last bit is too much to ask for.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
Nybbas
|
Posted - 2004.09.23 23:24:00 -
[9]
i have to agree with the poster of this topic, gimp its tracking speed too cuz its a larger gun, but tbh dual turrets are completely gimp right now... there is like no reason to use them, cuz a normal single is just as good if not better
|
Nybbas
|
Posted - 2004.09.23 23:24:00 -
[10]
i have to agree with the poster of this topic, gimp its tracking speed too cuz its a larger gun, but tbh dual turrets are completely gimp right now... there is like no reason to use them, cuz a normal single is just as good if not better
|
Mira Finoso
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 01:17:00 -
[11]
Galton, I completely agree with everything but the tracking speed. It should definately be slower to track than a single 250 rail. I agree the damage output should be equal to the single 250, but with nearly twice the fire rate.
Although I doubt they would ever change it to use medium ammo, for fear of mass confusion, it does make perfect sense as you've explained it. It is, after all, a "dual 250". Comparing the 250mm single with the dual should be like comparing a single barrel 12 guage shotgun with a side-by-side double barrel 12 guage shotgun. You don't put 10 guage ammo in a double barrel 12 guage, right? So why should you put larger ammo in a dual 250mm railgun?
I'd like to know what CCP's explanation is for this.
|
Mira Finoso
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 01:17:00 -
[12]
Galton, I completely agree with everything but the tracking speed. It should definately be slower to track than a single 250 rail. I agree the damage output should be equal to the single 250, but with nearly twice the fire rate.
Although I doubt they would ever change it to use medium ammo, for fear of mass confusion, it does make perfect sense as you've explained it. It is, after all, a "dual 250". Comparing the 250mm single with the dual should be like comparing a single barrel 12 guage shotgun with a side-by-side double barrel 12 guage shotgun. You don't put 10 guage ammo in a double barrel 12 guage, right? So why should you put larger ammo in a dual 250mm railgun?
I'd like to know what CCP's explanation is for this.
|
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 01:42:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Imhotep Khem on 24/09/2004 17:05:16
Thats the problem with the dual gun. It should not be shooting large ammo in the first place. CCP has backed themselves in a corner on this one and I don't see a sensible way out.
Currently when they say 'dual' gun, they mean the duct tape version.
____
If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 01:42:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Imhotep Khem on 24/09/2004 17:05:16
Thats the problem with the dual gun. It should not be shooting large ammo in the first place. CCP has backed themselves in a corner on this one and I don't see a sensible way out.
Currently when they say 'dual' gun, they mean the duct tape version.
____
If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Travel Girl
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 02:01:00 -
[15]
yeap I agree on that as well...
dual 250mm = 2 x single 250mm.
That would be the case in any army in the world anyway. |
Travel Girl
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 02:01:00 -
[16]
yeap I agree on that as well...
dual 250mm = 2 x single 250mm.
That would be the case in any army in the world anyway. |
Isonkon Serikain
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 02:08:00 -
[17]
You are dead on... I think with all the lobbying seen in the forums over missiles railguns have not gotten the proper care and tuning. Having a 300mm rail kind of complicates the situation for the devs... Since a tweak to one gun changes the balance in the spectrum of large rails.
I also never understoo why dual 150's and 250's did not use the kind of ammo their single counterpart uses...makes logical sense.
The problem is the damage done by a such a dual 250 would probably be more, over time than a 425mm gun. The whole thing is pretty borked and I hope CCP does not opt out for the easy "balancing", which would involve nerfing the 250mm cruiser gun...
|
Isonkon Serikain
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 02:08:00 -
[18]
You are dead on... I think with all the lobbying seen in the forums over missiles railguns have not gotten the proper care and tuning. Having a 300mm rail kind of complicates the situation for the devs... Since a tweak to one gun changes the balance in the spectrum of large rails.
I also never understoo why dual 150's and 250's did not use the kind of ammo their single counterpart uses...makes logical sense.
The problem is the damage done by a such a dual 250 would probably be more, over time than a 425mm gun. The whole thing is pretty borked and I hope CCP does not opt out for the easy "balancing", which would involve nerfing the 250mm cruiser gun...
|
Galton Grimm
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 03:12:00 -
[19]
Tracking speed should be the same as the smaller single version, because although there would be at least twice the mass of gun and mount, you have to assume that all the extra grid power is going somewhere, partly dedicated to firing the rounds and partly dedicated to more powerful tracking motors to spin the mount around for aiming. And realistically, grid should only be twice that of a single.
If an accurately modelled dual 250 would be too powerful game balance wise, maybe it should be dual 200mm, the midpower gun from the next smaller sized ship. So battleships could get a dual 200mm with all the correct halving and doubling math, using medium ammo. Cruisers could get a double 125mm (instead of the current double 150mm) using small ammo. By extension, battleships could get a quad 125mm using small ammo.
|
Galton Grimm
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 03:12:00 -
[20]
Tracking speed should be the same as the smaller single version, because although there would be at least twice the mass of gun and mount, you have to assume that all the extra grid power is going somewhere, partly dedicated to firing the rounds and partly dedicated to more powerful tracking motors to spin the mount around for aiming. And realistically, grid should only be twice that of a single.
If an accurately modelled dual 250 would be too powerful game balance wise, maybe it should be dual 200mm, the midpower gun from the next smaller sized ship. So battleships could get a dual 200mm with all the correct halving and doubling math, using medium ammo. Cruisers could get a double 125mm (instead of the current double 150mm) using small ammo. By extension, battleships could get a quad 125mm using small ammo.
|
Fikia
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 06:15:00 -
[21]
I agree that the dual guns should be changed the way that was suggested.. The down side to using such guns would be their range.. but that's fine since one should use said guns for the purpose of shooting at the smaller ships the original guns were aimed for..
This would help out bships to be able to lose 1 or 2 turret slots to effectively be able to use their gunnery skills for the smaller weapons to use.
|
Fikia
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 06:15:00 -
[22]
I agree that the dual guns should be changed the way that was suggested.. The down side to using such guns would be their range.. but that's fine since one should use said guns for the purpose of shooting at the smaller ships the original guns were aimed for..
This would help out bships to be able to lose 1 or 2 turret slots to effectively be able to use their gunnery skills for the smaller weapons to use.
|
Aaron Meyers
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 06:26:00 -
[23]
You don't get bonus for medium turrets on BS, you do for the dual ones.
|
Aaron Meyers
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 06:26:00 -
[24]
You don't get bonus for medium turrets on BS, you do for the dual ones.
|
Fikia
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 07:24:00 -
[25]
I wouldn't care about if it had bonuses or not :)
|
Fikia
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 07:24:00 -
[26]
I wouldn't care about if it had bonuses or not :)
|
Loka
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 07:58:00 -
[27]
lower the sig radius of the weapons to make it a better anti frig/cruiser weapon
_____________________________________
Dead or Alive
|
Loka
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 07:58:00 -
[28]
lower the sig radius of the weapons to make it a better anti frig/cruiser weapon
_____________________________________
Dead or Alive
|
stinky fecker
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 08:24:00 -
[29]
dual 250mms are absolutely sh1te |
stinky fecker
|
Posted - 2004.09.24 08:24:00 -
[30]
dual 250mms are absolutely sh1te |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |