EVE Search - Blasters are fine, I fly gallente AND amarr

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Blasters are fine, I fly gallente AND amarr

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Allahs Warrior Gallente Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests	Posted - 2009.08.02 14:27:00 - [1] I dont think you guys understand what it means to have HIGHEST DPS. Highest DPS in the game means that if you're hitting them 1v1 (since we've been comparing 1v1 setups), and you've got similar tanks, you win. Doesn't matter what race, what kind of guns, whether they have drones or not, whether they have active or passive tank, or whatever. You win. In small gangs, where you can web them effectively and therefore actually hit them, you win, every time. Lasers have to bank on the fact that your tracking is junk for your optimal otherwise they lose EVERY TIME you get in range (which gallente will outrun amarr with higher battleship base speed). The only problem is that this raw mathematical approach never happens when solo in "real EVE". Your warpin is 20km away and his scorch hits you and by the time your 50m/s advantage gets you there he's done 50k damage. But there are more cases than just blasters where "solo pvp" is broken. You're fighting a rock against paper. If you don't like that, then fly amarr. Otherwise, get a covops warpin, and a friend to web him, and in small gang fights with a good warp-in, gallente ALWAYS will win. Your surplus of mids with comparable lows means you can individually point EACH ship of theirs, and be confident in the fact you'll be naturally doing more DPS, and oh yeah, you'll have drones. And remember, 24km is max fighting range (unless you've got a missile on your ares or you are extremely lucky when overheating), so there's a gallente shortrange buff right there. You only ever have to close 24km, otherwise you can warp out. tl;dr Comparing pulses to Neutrons in a solo fight with a bad warpin for the blasterboat and no friends to web him is putting pulses where they like to be, rather than where they will always lose.
AstroPhobic Divine Retribution	Posted - 2009.08.02 14:40:00 - [2] There are no 1v1s. 10-15% loss in damage for 300% range. It's not even a question.
Allahs Warrior Gallente Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests	Posted - 2009.08.02 14:42:00 - [3] Originally by: AstroPhobic I didn't read your post past the first paragraph. I didn't even read the tl;dr at the bottom. Oh that's good input.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2009.08.02 15:02:00 - [4] Edited by: Grimpak on 02/08/2009 15:02:58 Originally by: Allahs Warrior Originally by: AstroPhobic I didn't read your post past the first paragraph. I didn't even read the tl;dr at the bottom. Oh that's good input. very well, let's put it this way: in how many situations can you think of a megathron landing right on top of your ass? and in how many situations you will find a HPL fitted ship (geddon, apoc or 'baddon) landed on their optimals? and what is the chance of anyone of these scenarios happen in "real-life" conditions, in 1vs1's? and finally pitting an apoc and a megathron against each other, considering that there's a 5% chance of the 'thron landing at point blank on the apoc, who would win? there you have it. 10 to 15% damage sacrificed for an increase on over 300% in range. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
AstroPhobic Divine Retribution	Posted - 2009.08.02 15:03:00 - [5] Originally by: Allahs Warrior I didn't read the part where you said there was no 1v1s Comparing pulses and blasters in a 1 on 1 scenario is nothing short of laughable. Carry on.
Atreus Tac Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.08.02 15:56:00 - [6] Hmmmm...no Quote: Lasers have to bank on the fact that your tracking is junk for your optimal There tracking is (as you would put it) VERY good in ratio to their optimal. Quote: The only problem is that this raw mathematical approach never happens when solo in "real EVE" good for their range. So your are saying that in eve lasers are better because eve isnt played on paper? Quote: If you don't like that, then fly amarr Ahh so now you are saying that to have more success in 1v1 train amarr. Okay this arguement seems flawed. Quote: Otherwise, get a covops warpin, and a friend to web him, and in small gang fights with a good warp-in, gallente ALWAYS will win. or you can get 2 other people in two other battle ships because 3vs1 is better. Let me get this straight. What you are trying to say is blasters are fine if you have 2 other people to help you fight 1 ship. But in true 1v1 in eve amarr are way better and to be good train amarr. you sir are STUPID. This arguement is flawed in every way. Lasers are a much more complete weapon because their tracking is too good for their range (scorch im looking at). Their damage/optimal ratio is way better that blasters. They dish out better damage types and web nerf/speed nerf has hurt balster more than any other ship. __________________________________________________________ [16:54:07] Kopier Tante > if you got an mwd then your completly ****ed [16:54:34] Kopier Tante > you got no defence, no speed, nothing.
Allahs Warrior Gallente Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests	Posted - 2009.08.02 16:16:00 - [7] Edited by: Allahs Warrior on 02/08/2009 16:16:50 Train amarr for success against blasters with pulses 1v1 when you start at 24km, yes. Train minmatar to turn off amarr lasers with neuts and make them absolutely useless while you orbit and shoot cap-free. edit: you sir are stupid
AstroPhobic Divine Retribution	Posted - 2009.08.02 16:22:00 - [8] Originally by: Allahs Warrior Edited by: Allahs Warrior on 02/08/2009 16:16:50 Train amarr for success against blasters with pulses 1v1 when you start at 24km, yes. Train minmatar to turn off amarr lasers with neuts and make them absolutely useless while you orbit and shoot cap-free. edit: you sir are stupid Obvious troll is obvious. Please don't feed him anymore, that is all.
Jared D'Uroth Universal Peace Operation	Posted - 2009.08.02 16:23:00 - [9] Confirming Allah's Warrior is the stupidest person to ever post on S&M. Also, boost Minmatar. === Originally by: Sidus Isaacs Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega My instinct says troll, but there's this little nagging voice saying some people really are that dumb.
Atreus Tac Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.08.02 16:34:00 - [10] Originally by: Allahs Warrior Edited by: Allahs Warrior on 02/08/2009 16:16:50 Train amarr for success against blasters with pulses 1v1 when you start at 24km, yes. Train minmatar to turn off amarr lasers with neuts and make them absolutely useless while you orbit and shoot cap-free. edit: you sir are stupid Oh yeah, the other point I was going to make is that you believe that blasters are fine just becuase they can beat lasers when they start in their very short optimal. This, imo, is very narrow mined as this is such a small proportion of fights that it is foolish to base such a broad statement on it. __________________________________________________________ [16:54:07] Kopier Tante > if you got an mwd then your completly ****ed [16:54:34] Kopier Tante > you got no defence, no speed, nothing.

Allahs Warrior Gallente Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests	Posted - 2009.08.02 16:50:00 - [11] Originally by: Atreus Tac Originally by: Allahs Warrior Edited by: Allahs Warrior on 02/08/2009 16:16:50 Train amarr for success against blasters with pulses 1v1 when you start at 24km, yes. Train minmatar to turn off amarr lasers with neuts and make them absolutely useless while you orbit and shoot cap-free. edit: you sir are stupid Oh yeah, the other point I was going to make is that you believe that blasters are fine just becuase they can beat lasers when they start in their very short optimal. This, imo, is very narrow mined as this is such a small proportion of fights that it is foolish to base such a broad statement on it. If you dont like your race train another one! you might get there before the next nerf
Beverly Sparks	Posted - 2009.08.02 17:01:00 - [12] Edited by: Beverly Sparks on 02/08/2009 17:02:22 Originally by: Allahs Warrior Originally by: Atreus Tac Originally by: Allahs Warrior Edited by: Allahs Warrior on 02/08/2009 16:16:50 Train amarr for success against blasters with pulses 1v1 when you start at 24km, yes. Train minmatar to turn off amarr lasers with neuts and make them absolutely useless while you orbit and shoot cap-free. edit: you sir are stupid Oh yeah, the other point I was going to make is that you believe that blasters are fine just becuase they can beat lasers when they start in their very short optimal. This, imo, is very narrow mined as this is such a small proportion of fights that it is foolish to base such a broad statement on it. If you dont like your race train another one! you might get there before the next nerf Your lack of knowledge is showing in almost every one of your posts, but I doubt you can see that. Congratulations on figuring out that Blasters are the best point blank weapon.
Allahs Warrior Gallente Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests	Posted - 2009.08.02 17:56:00 - [13] You just cant see my brilliance
Rune v3nus	Posted - 2009.08.02 17:58:00 - [14] Originally by: Allahs Warrior You just cant see my brilliance weak
LordThyGod	Posted - 2009.08.02 20:29:00 - [15] i've been flying blaster rokh for a long time and ive never had a problem, most of the tiem i dont even have a mwd on, it might take a bit longer, but i do get in range, and i usualy end up as top damage dealer. Blasters are like a sledgehammer to the face, yea your bb gun will get to engage first, but lets see whos on the ground at the end :P
Allahs Warrior Gallente Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests	Posted - 2009.08.02 21:16:00 - [16] LordThyGod, you get me. I can't quit you.
Djerin Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.08.02 21:38:00 - [17] Edited by: Djerin on 02/08/2009 21:44:35 Originally by: LordThyGod i've been flying blaster rokh for a long time and ive never had a problem, most of the tiem i dont even have a mwd on Yeah, and got on what, 2 bs mails with it? One of those was on Sisi even. Nice try. :lol: ---- Sarmaul's crosstrainorgtfo
Cambarus Clearly Compensating	Posted - 2009.08.02 21:40:00 - [18] I also fly gallente and amarr, so I'm speaking with some experience here: 1) Solo fights almost never happen, using them in any way to compare weapon systems is at best flawed and at worst moronic. 2)24km is NOT the maximum fighting range. See point 1. This is especially true on region gates and even some others, where the gate has a radius of like 20km, and someone can easily appear 15km from the gate's radius opposite you. And really with any sort of small to medium sized fleet engagement you end up with people all over the place, that's why most gangs with BSs have dedicated tacklers, because targets tend to land/appear outside point range for the BSs. 3) The issue with blasters isn't their viability at close range, but their lack of viability at anything other than point blank. Blasters are useful within one very small range area, whereas pulses are useful all over the place I did a bit of eft whoring to illustrate my point: (used perfect skills with both setups to be fair) Megathron with neutrons and faction AM hits for 1308 dps with ogres at 4.5km. With null you get 1100 at 11km Geddon with 4 HSs and MP2s with faction ammo hits for 1223 dps at 15km optimal (including ogres) Which means that comparing the 2, if the fight happens between 0km and roughly 6-7km, the mega will in theory win (though by at most 100dps, which is not a lot considering this is with perfect skills, and 4 damage mods) Between 7 and 15km however the geddon wins. Now 7-15km is still pretty close range, but the geddon's already doing better. Switch out to scorch. Now the geddon's doing a hair over 1k dps, but at 45km. The mega can hit with his drones, but that's it. Therein lies the big problem. It's not that blasters don't do well at close range, but that even under ideal circumstances they only do very slightly better than pulse lasers, and unlike blasters pulse lasers take all of 1 second to switch from shooting 93.5% of blaster damage at point blank to 78% of the point blank blaster range at 10X the range. While the mega has to MWD to each new target and only scratch them until he gets into range, the geddon can simply switch ammo and do nearly the same dps the whole way down.
Novantco The Scope	Posted - 2009.08.02 21:57:00 - [19] Originally by: Cambarus Good Post Well said.
Seishi Maru The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.08.02 21:57:00 - [20] Personnally I think blasters could be helped in an alternative way. At my view MWD should be changed into a slightly higher speed (make MWD bonus 700%), but straight line only (diminish agility while active by a lot). This way blasters can cut range faster but MWD does not trigger again a new nano age. Also make while MWD active weapons range is 1/10 (effectively making them useless). That would hurt almost nothing blasters. In fact the extra speed would help much more than the other things would help. On other hand would hurt much more weapons with longer range. At same time boost AB accelerateion and top speed a little bit ( to around 200% T2 with max skills) so they can be the "control range" tools.

LordThyGod	Posted - 2009.08.03 01:39:00 - [21] wait, ive posted killmails? news to me :P
arbiter reformed Minmatar Annihilate. Avarice.	Posted - 2009.08.03 02:08:00 - [22] blasters have always been fine, lazors have almost always been fine. Signature graphics that may only contain your character name, corporation logo, corporation or personal slogan or other text that is directly related to your in-game persona, or content directly related to Eve Online. All content must be in good taste.Applebabe
Ronin Reborn Wrath of Fenris	Posted - 2009.08.03 03:40:00 - [23] No weapon compares favorably to Mega Pulse II and to a slightly lesser extent Heavy Pulse II. That said, I personally think that blasters are back on 'the way up'. Back in '06 dedicated blasterboats were nigh useless with everything flying around at 3-5kms. Blasters today compare well to autocannons and have some situations in lowsec where they're better than pulse. I'm not sure if autos/blasters need to be buffed or pulse nerfed but its scorch that makes those other weapons systems seem so useless. One gets 45km optimal, the other two get to 'fight in falloff'.
EvE Templar	Posted - 2009.08.03 05:15:00 - [24] Edited by: EvE Templar on 03/08/2009 05:21:51 Edited by: EvE Templar on 03/08/2009 05:21:07 guy is in KIA. leave him alone :D i have a question to you allahs- have you EVER flown a BLASTER BS in pvp? whats more, have you ever lost one? He is 2008.12 player as well. How much SP/Experiance can he have? Well, I'm a gallente pilot. Range vs. DPS and tracking wasn't much issue to me, before QR. These days is it (ishtar sucks, deimos sucks, eh...). You DARE to say we have more tracking and we should be happy cause of that... great... But how much relevant this 'bonus' is, when compared to distance? Did u knew, that fighting on a closer distance requires more tracking? Let's compare Mega pulse t2 (multi) and neutron t2 (antimatter), skills L5. Tracking of mega pulse is 0.04219 making him able to track object orbiting with speed 167m/s @4km (optimal of neutron) 629m/s @10km (mega pulse optimal) 713m/s @17km (optimal+falloff of neutron 1048m/s@25km (optimal+falloff of mega pulse) Valuse for neutron are: 215m/s @4km 538m/s @10km 914m/s @17km 1345m/s@25km We can clearly see, that is has more tracking. Oh yeah, indeed. But when you will have your target at your optimal, then transversal will be to high for your tracking to keep up with it (unless it's a bs). This is bad, since webs were nerfed terribly. If you will try to fight in falloff then :welp: you are outta dps due to range. Quote: And remember, 24km is max fighting range No. This is not fighting range. Fighting range is 48km. Tell me, who will be able to kill arazu at that range- blaster boat with null and 11optimal and 16 falloff or laser boat with 45km optimall and 10km falloff? Now... there is something else in the market then battleships and those are BCs, Cs and Frigate class ships. Tell me, who will win in presented situation of 24km distance- brutix with 5.6km optimal and 7.8km falloff on null or harbringer with 23km optimal and 5km falloff? don't make me to go to cruisers cause amarrs will win even more. Only frigates are out, since they are warp scram range and diffrence is really small. How also, will you count advantage that it takes 1second for amarr to change ammo and 10sec for gallente to change ammo? Diffrence in this time might mean dead or alive for you. And tracking isn't and advantage of gallente. Neutrong have better tracking them 800mm acs by 0.0001. ACs don't use cap, needs less pg and cpu :< But please, leave everyone alone, cause i recently finished training minmatars and training amarrs now :D
Fon Revedhort Monks of War Banzai Boyz	Posted - 2009.08.03 05:45:00 - [25] Edited by: Fon Revedhort on 03/08/2009 05:45:26 Originally by: Ronin Reborn I'm not sure if autos/blasters need to be buffed or pulse nerfed but its scorch that makes those other weapons systems seem so useless. One gets 45km optimal, the other two get to 'fight in falloff'. That's right there - the scorch crystals are just too good. I'd suggest cutting the optimal range bonus and giving those a slight falloff one, so it's like 17.5 km optimal plus 7.5 km foloff at heavy pulses and 35 + 15 at megapulses Anyway, you can't do much about it if you keep the same optimal range progression in S -> M -> L weapon classes. Bringing megapulses inline, so they hit say at 30 km at max will suddenly make M and S lasers loosing all the advantage over rivals. The only real way is to nerf Scorch L directly And I'm amarrian myself. ---[center] Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.08.03 06:28:00 - [26] I remain of the opinion that one of the biggest problems with blasters is the stoic insistence that only antimatter is ever worth using. I mean, it's really funny seeing people about range:tracking ratios, whilst at the same time deliberately halving their optimal range. Why not complain at how slow an offlined MWD is at the same time? Blasters remain the highest dps highest tracking weapons in the game. They're still thoroughly outclassing auto cannons - which you'll note have even shorter optimal ranges, and worse tracking, and have more falloff as a great way to start off doing worse than 'on paper' DPS. shrug. Blasters have their weak spot in the current metagame, where range is becoming increasingly valuable due to lower ship speeds - autos share this problem though - where missiles and lasers are basically mid range weapons to start off with. When mid range fights are more common, I don't feel it's unreasonable that the mid range weapons _should_ be shining somewhat. Have you considered fitting rails to your blaster ship instead?
Yakov Draken Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.08.03 10:23:00 - [27] Originally by: Grimpak in how many situations can you think of a megathron landing right on top of your ass? All the time - is this a trick question? We drop our short range BS's on top of people at gates, station undocks, and safe spots. Originally by: Grimpak pitting an apoc and a megathron against each other, considering that there's a 5% chance of the 'thron landing at point blank on the apoc, who would win?. You are trolling right? It is really easy to drop stuff in at zero on people using covert ops. We do low sec BS combat and our experiance is blasters are fantastic and the Mega is an awesome BS. We live and die based on the performance of our short range BS's, fly lots of Mega's, and our BS combat stats are excellent. I read battlereports where short range BS's fleets melt face in O.O and Mega's are there with their blasters in great number. Its about using them right. If you can't do any good with short range face melting tactics using blaster Mega's you are doing it wrong. Short range face melting in BS's is an entirely viable option in Eve and blaster are a premier tool for the job.
Irida Mershkov Gallente War is Bliss	Posted - 2009.08.03 12:10:00 - [28] Originally by: James Lyrus I remain of the opinion that one of the biggest problems with blasters is the stoic insistence that only antimatter is ever worth using. I mean, it's really funny seeing people about range:tracking ratios, whilst at the same time deliberately halving their optimal range. Why not complain at how slow an offlined MWD is at the same time? Have you considered fitting rails to your blaster ship instead? Well that's generally because Antimatter is the only ammo worth using to achieve our paper high DPS. Rails? Rails are even worse than blasters imo. They're sub-par to EVERYTHING, except possible artillery, and that's a gamble.
Kessiaan Minmatar DEATHFUNK Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.08.03 12:40:00 - [29] Edited by: Kessiaan on 03/08/2009 12:44:57 Originally by: James Lyrus I remain of the opinion that one of the biggest problems with blasters is the stoic insistence that only antimatter is ever worth using. I mean, it's really funny seeing people about range:tracking ratios, whilst at the same time deliberately halving their optimal range. Because Antimatter is the only ammo worth using most of the time. If you need range you load up Null. It still sucks as far as range ammos go but it's better than nothing. Personally my experience has been that blasters scale very poorly with gang size. Solo, they're fine. In small gangs up to five or so people they're fine. Anything larger either the target or you is dead before you can get to range. As for rails, rails are really good with Spike - excellent range, hit hard, and at the range you're supposed to use Spike at, the tracking isn't all that bad, especially given that sniping ships almost always have tracking enhancers. Rails with anything else are kind of 'meh', Javelin does good damage but you have to be way close and you basically web yourself when you load it, antimatter doesn't have the self-web penalty but lacks DPS when shot out of rails, don't even get me started on iron, sure it has range but it does about as much damage as a noobship's civilian blaster.
Djerin Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.08.03 13:03:00 - [30] Edited by: Djerin on 03/08/2009 13:04:08 Originally by: Kessiaan Because Antimatter is the only ammo worth using most of the time. If you need range you load up Null. It still sucks as far as range ammos go but it's better than nothing. The Atlas-guy is spot on here. It's actually similar to AC, where people are mainly using the ranged T2 ammo and only switch to EMP occasionally to crank out a little extra DPS, when the target is locked down completely. In both cases the pilots don't even bother to bring the ammo types, that have both mediocre range and mediocre damage. The reason is simple. When you are actually able to dictate range you only need one ammo type. And when your enemy dictates range that's usually the opposite of were you want to fight. It is extremely rare, that nobody dictates range and so there's almost never any need to bring different ammo. And unlike with lasers we cannot change ammo within 1 second, but have to wait 10 secs on every ammo switch. So we cannot start with Null and work our way through various ammo types to end up with antimatter while getting to point blank. ---- Sarmaul's crosstrainorgtfo

Tanja Cyprus	Posted - 2009.08.03 13:11:00 - [31] Originally by: Atreus Tac ..... Lasers are a much more complete weapon because their tracking is too good for their range (scorch im looking at). Their damage/optimal ratio is way better that blasters. They dish out better damage types and web nerf/speed nerf has hurt balster more than any other ship. .... Woah ... nerf missiles!!!
Too Dangerous	Posted - 2009.08.03 13:16:00 - [32] Originally by: Atreus Tac Hmmmm...no Quote: Lasers have to bank on the fact that your tracking is junk for your optimal There tracking is (as you would put it) VERY good in ratio to their optimal. Quote: The only problem is that this raw mathematical approach never happens when solo in "real EVE" good for their range. So your are saying that in eve lasers are better because eve isnt played on paper? Quote: If you don't like that, then fly amarr Ahh so now you are saying that to have more success in 1v1 train amarr. Okay this arguement seems flawed. Quote: Otherwise, get a covops warpin, and a friend to web him, and in small gang fights with a good warp-in, gallente ALWAYS will win. or you can get 2 other people in two other battle ships because 3vs1 is better. Let me get this straight. What you are trying to say is blasters are fine if you have 2 other people to help you fight 1 ship. But in true 1v1 in eve amarr are way better and to be good train amarr. you sir are STUPID. This arguement is flawed in every way. Lasers are a much more complete weapon because their tracking is too good for their range (scorch im looking at). Their damage/optimal ratio is way better that blasters. They dish out better damage types and web nerf/speed nerf has hurt balster more than any other ship. This tbh.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.08.03 13:22:00 - [33] Originally by: AstroPhobic There are no 1v1s.
Al Anders	Posted - 2009.08.03 14:06:00 - [34] Edited by: Al Anders on 03/08/2009 14:13:01 As far as i think larger AC's need a bit better optimmal + falloff escalation or better damage. Blaster need that apparently too. following calculations based on unskilled (according to range) turrets T1M4 best according to "powergreed" use. Lets look: Large beams (tachs)(min 26+20 MF) and large pulses (megas)(MAX 36+8 scorch) overlap perfectly. AC(800) (min 4.8+37 barrage = 41.8 km for 50%) and arty(1400) (24+35 EMP) overlap poorly (but enought good) blasters(neu) (9+13 Null = 22 km for 50%) and railguns(450) (29+24 EMP) do not overlap entirely. It has a 6 km gap inbetween weapon optimal ranges, and if we're remind that railguns have a poor tracking - their optimal at 29 km - looks like a joke. So what's needed.AC's must gat affirmative clipsize to be called AC's and ROF at least as pulses (lack of accuracy due to falloff will be compensated by hail of slugs) Blasters are fine as close combat weapon but looks like large blasters apparently need falloff boost. 22 km for 50% hit it's a pity. And their just 20% over pulse DPS. According to their fallof and accuracy their tend to be in niche between AC's (huge fallof, low opt) and lasors (huge opt, low falloff.) So T2 LR ammo best blastas (neuts with null) must looks like a roughly 0.9(5+36)/2 = 18 km optimal and 0.9(38+10)/2 = 24 falloff. That would give them play in the pulse + AC league in PvP and PvE. And AC's must be damage boosted of better ROF+clipsize boosted for fill their role of the "Guy who fills space with a bullets" That my own opinion. Don't blame me please. That text not about what is suck. That about the fact that hybrids have a lack of viability and have a deadzone where no railguns nor blaster have no use.
Zal Dakkar	Posted - 2009.08.03 14:20:00 - [35] Originally by: James Lyrus I remain of the opinion that one of the biggest problems with blasters is the stoic insistence that only antimatter is ever worth using. If blasters do not use antimatter then they are no longer the highest dps turret and still have inferior range. Null can be useful, but it is no where near as good as scorch - particularly when one considers that lasers can change out ammo near instaneously.
Thercon Jair Minmatar Nex Exercitus Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2009.08.03 17:56:00 - [36] Someone mentioned Rails have awful tracking. Let's see.. 0.009625 rad/sec for 425mm T2 Rails, 0.009 rad/sec for 1400mm T2 Arties. Oh, minnies have worse tracking. And then you get to stick those on a ship with a tracking bonus. One of the problems is also that there are modules affecting optimal range, while they don't affect falloff, yet there's ewar modules that can kill your falloff. So you're stuck with optimal range extending modules on a ship with poor optimal and high falloff. Quite clearly those modules will affect turrets with high optimal and poor falloff more. I can see myself using tracking enhancers to extend my falloff range on ACs, to get more damage on range, while not increasing my base DPS (if they did modify falloff range). Even that would scale poorly against more optimal, but it were certainly a step to bring the two a bit closer together. Real men do it the hard way: fly Minmatar!
Bibbleibble	Posted - 2009.08.03 17:58:00 - [37] Edited by: Bibbleibble on 03/08/2009 17:58:05 Originally by: Thercon Jair Someone mentioned Rails have awful tracking. Let's see.. 0.009625 rad/sec for 425mm T2 Rails, 0.009 rad/sec for 1400mm T2 Arties. Oh, minnies have worse tracking. And then you get to stick those on a ship with a tracking bonus. One of the problems is also that there are modules affecting optimal range, while they don't affect falloff, yet there's ewar modules that can kill your falloff. So you're stuck with optimal range extending modules on a ship with poor optimal and high falloff. Quite clearly those modules will affect turrets with high optimal and poor falloff more. I can see myself using tracking enhancers to extend my falloff range on ACs, to get more damage on range, while not increasing my base DPS (if they did modify falloff range). Even that would scale poorly against more optimal, but it were certainly a step to bring the two a bit closer together. CCP have already said that they don't want to introduce falloff effecting things because of the Vagabond. I know. It really does make little sense. Here's the quote I've based this on: Originally by: CCP Zulupark Artillery: Having scripts for falloff would be pretty cool for the tempest specifically but when you think about how it could affect Vagabonds with AC's I start getting a little scared. All ships don't have to be completely uniform and have the same ranges, that would be boring. Having said that however we need to look into this. ________________________________________________ For changes to Minmatar Battleships click here (Now with added summary!)
Ronin Reborn Wrath of Fenris	Posted - 2009.08.03 19:40:00 - [38] Yeah that's just Zulupark though. He also thinks the tempest is awesome. I dont think having falloff increasing tracking mods would help blasters. Hype could fit 1-2. Mega doesn't have room for it in a standard fit, while the Deimos and Astarte have thier mids spoken for. Giving the Deimos more pg, or adjusting the stats on the rigs so they take less, would actually make a ambits + nuetrons + null fit pretty workable. But thats on a falloff bonused ship with falloff bonused ammo... The problem for acs is complete lack of scaling. Ambits help a bit. Blasters recieve no note worthy help from either optimal or falloff increasing mods/rigs/implants. Really though blasters aren't that bad. They're good gank and gtfo weapons. Theyre good on fast ships, ie taranis and thorax hull. They're good for station games and when you have a warp in. They're decent at camping non-regional gates. But they were never meant to be a 'always works' weapons system. They scale terribly as gang size increases and gangs today are larger, due in part to TQ being more populated. Really, Minmitar are far more justified saying thier turrets suck compared to Gallente. At least we do damage.
Wardeneo Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.08.03 20:17:00 - [39] Edited by: Wardeneo on 03/08/2009 20:22:34 Originally by: Allahs Warrior I dont think you guys understand what it means to have HIGHEST DPS. Highest DPS in the game means that if you're hitting them 1v1 (since we've been comparing 1v1 setups), and you've got similar tanks, you win. lol EFT Noob, just coz u have highest dps and simlar tanks dont mean S.H.I.T the problem with blasters is they only do kin/therm damage (the same for amarr but EM/Therm) and if there tank is got good kin/therm resists then u have CP dps, thats the good thing about min/caldari, u can change dmge type for best affect, i think u need to pvp more then 2 sit EFT quoting 2bh, ive flown most races on various characters, and i know in pvp the ability 2 change dmge types is very usefull, and in a lot of cases has helped me win 1v1's, Originally by:** Allahs Warrior Doesn't matter what race, what kind of guns, whether they have drones or not, whether they have active or passive tank, or whatever. You win. In small gangs, where you can web them effectively and therefore actually hit them, you win, every time. biggest loads of bollucks ive herd in ages, my slep beat an astarte the other day 1 v 1, he had a web/ i didnt and both have good tanks both were active both had drones but i cud swap out to therm dmge (which happened to be his lowest resist) and i won Originally by: Allahs Warrior Lasers have to bank on the fact that your tracking is junk for your optimal otherwise they lose EVERY TIME you get in range (which gallente will outrun amarr with higher battleship base speed). tracking is not junk, it only junk at blaster range (close range) (lasers work better at medium-long range) and u dont lose every time, a corp m8s zealot killed a diemos last month 1 v 1 and zealot was webbed at 500M from diemos, and bs base speed dont mean S.H.I.T, coz it depends on the mods applied to the loadout how much mass the bs has got etc. 2bh i cant be bothered to comment on the rest of ur post, ive got bored of ur "un-accurate" discusion after the 2nd paragraph, -morale of the story is go pvp instead of eft/basic stat whoring! as to the blasters are fine argument, i actually dont care, everything in eve seems 2 suck, the only difference is that persons "OPPINION", and 2bh blasters are ok the problem lies with the ships are normally speced in them (mega, diemos etc)and the worst problem is the noob pilots that fly them wrong, i have seen allmost all ships in pvp and the all do well in there own way, just depends on the loadout and whos flying them... -wardeneo- P.S FLAME ON
Yakov Draken Minmatar Tides Of War	Posted - 2009.08.03 21:19:00 - [40] Originally by: Wardeneo lol EFT Noob, just coz u have highest dps and simlar tanks dont mean S.H.I.T the problem with blasters is they only do kin/therm damage (the same for amarr but EM/Therm) and if there tank is got good kin/therm resists then u have C**P dps, thats the good thing about min/caldari, u can change dmge type for best affect, i think u need to pvp more then 2 sit EFT quoting 2bh, I do heaps of pvp in a highly efficient pvp corp and I think you are talking crap. Doing a thermal/kinetic mix is fine and combined with explosive dealing drones you end up with a nice mix. Sure being able to switch damage types is nice but it is not as important as you imply. Blasters rock so long as you are capable of dictating your range of combat and considering gates bring us together up close it is not that hard. For low sec BS combat using blasters is not hard at all and null is pretty sweet. There comes a time when you just have to say it like it is: All this whinging about blasters, while they remain one of the dominant weapon types in actual pvp, is pathetic. We encounter, and use, blaster fit BS all the time and we encounter them in the hands of the good corps. So what is this about? Are you guys all to afraid to fight up close - is that the issue? Is all the blaster whine really about pilots who haven't got what it takes to get in close and brawl so they pretend it is not viable? When I see Ravens, Maelstroms, Rokhs, in an opposing low sec gang I smile and know our chances of winning just went up. You guys are whinging about the wrong things.

Trader Jjenna	Posted - 2009.08.04 00:39:00 - [41] ^^ This really. Between my alts, I fly almost every ship in the game save Raven's. I used to be a nano-all day long ganker. Prior to the nano nerf my two favorite speed boats were the vagabond (Shock) and guess what - a speed thorax. I still like them both although these days I have added HM Cerb and Beam Sniper Zel to my list of favorites. Most PvP I am in is either some big fleet engagement or is at a gate. When something jumps into you or vice versa, you lock something down and the blaster boat gets there just fine. The web nerf also plays both ways. Yes its harded to lock down targets with a web, but frankly before the nano/web nerf I would hop in my rapier and kill a blaster boat way more easily because my one rapier could stop it DEAD in its tracks. Now - how many rapiers you see? I won't complain if you get the range on blaster boats buffed a bit - I'll just fly the mb/c they will be OP.
Asuka Smith Gallente StarHunt	Posted - 2009.08.04 01:18:00 - [42] As someone who flies a Deimos with great success despite the stigma surrounding the ship, let me say that blasters are better on a quick gank type assault in small gangs. However, those sorts of engagements are far less common in most of 0.0/low-sec. Lasers excel in the fleet environment, and thus they are kings of the roost at the moment due to the current tactical situation. However that could change with sovereignty updates (winter perhaps?). Let me conclude by saying that while I do not regret my training in blasters by any means, if I could have my time again I would be an Amarr character at this moment.
Kismo	Posted - 2009.08.04 01:21:00 - [43] Originally by: Asuka Smith Let me conclude by saying that while I do not regret my training in blasters by any means, if I could have my time again I would be an Amarr character at this moment. We all would.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.08.04 06:34:00 - [44] Originally by: Kismo Originally by: Asuka Smith Let me conclude by saying that while I do not regret my training in blasters by any means, if I could have my time again I would be an Amarr character at this moment. We all would. Don't worry. I finish T2 energy turrets in a week, and amarr BS 5 comes next. So the clock is ticking, and in about a month, they'll be nerfed.
AstroPhobic Divine Retribution	Posted - 2009.08.04 16:40:00 - [45] Originally by: James Lyrus Originally by: Kismo Originally by: Asuka Smith Let me conclude by saying that while I do not regret my training in blasters by any means, if I could have my time again I would be an Amarr character at this moment. We all would. Don't worry. I finish T2 energy turrets in a week, and amarr BS 5 comes next. So the clock is ticking, and in about a month, they'll be nerfed. I anticipated the lack-of-ner***e and started training right after the resistance change. Huzzah! The question is though, who will CCP boost next? They won't nerf amarr, and I'm guessing it won't be minmatar. Will it be the blaster whines that cause them to cave? I'm betting that blasters are next in line for wtfbbqpwnsauce. Torps 5 finished this morning... time to start on large hybrids 5 for my phoon.
Kismo	Posted - 2009.08.04 16:50:00 - [46] Originally by: AstroPhobic I anticipated the lack-of-ner***e and started training right after the resistance change. Huzzah! The question is though, who will CCP boost next? They won't nerf amarr, and I'm guessing it won't be minmatar. Will it be the blaster whines that cause them to cave? I'm betting that blasters are next in line for wtfbbqpwnsauce. Torps 5 finished this morning... time to start on large hybrids 5 for my phoon. If you recall, I have long said that blasters would be fixed before projectiles. ;-)
Nito Musashi	Posted - 2009.08.04 16:59:00 - [47] since ACs have been sucking since the dawn of eve, or just about. they should get some luvin next, then they can move onto blasters with a tad bit of dps boost or a fix for tracking overall. hell here is a novel idea tho give all races different damage type ammos, why 2 races get them and 2 get the shaft? are the techies and scientists too st00pid to say oh if we only had some exp/kin ammo or some em/therm ammo to make fighting other race ships that have their tank in those areas....seems the military in eve is about as cleaver as a drunken ccp dev ad a cosplay party.
Zal Dakkar	Posted - 2009.08.04 17:15:00 - [48] Originally by: Asuka Smith As someone who flies a Deimos with great success despite the stigma surrounding the ship... LOL. Let me guess, you have a frig tackle a lone BS and you warp in and rip it a new one? That's about all it can do. Pulses are far superior in nearly every situation. And even in situations where a blaster boat is superior (low sec station/gate BS fighting, warp in at 0, small gang vs lone BS) a pulse boat would still do decently well in comparison.
Ansuru Starlancer UK1 Zero	Posted - 2009.08.04 22:50:00 - [49] Originally by: AstroPhobic I anticipated the lack-of-ner***e and started training right after the resistance change. Huzzah! The question is though, who will CCP boost next? They won't nerf amarr, and I'm guessing it won't be minmatar. Will it be the blaster whines that cause them to cave? I'm betting that blasters are next in line for wtfbbqpwnsauce. Torps 5 finished this morning... time to start on large hybrids 5 for my phoon. I hope you're right. Blasters've always been my favorite, I just can't use them very often anymore. It'd be ironic to have the new FOTM be something I already trained for instead of something I have no desire to bother training :p
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.08.04 22:58:00 - [50] Originally by: James Lyrus Originally by: Kismo Originally by: Asuka Smith Let me conclude by saying that while I do not regret my training in blasters by any means, if I could have my time again I would be an Amarr character at this moment. We all would. Don't worry. I finish T2 energy turrets in a week, and amarr BS 5 comes next. So the clock is ticking, and in about a month, they'll be nerfed. Nah, Amarr won't be nerfed because the entire fotm revolves around scorch and aurora. Now what I do see is minmatar getting a boost to thier bs line which should hopefully make then just as mean if not meaner than the amarr lineup at long range and short ranges and so balance the allies out. Originally by: Zaqar Anyway, you don't have to be Einstein to play Eve - a quick glance over the forums will tell you that -



Pages: 1 2 :: [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.