Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 13:42:00 -
[31]
Im not disputing he comments on T2ammo but lasers would be the best if there was no T2 ammo.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Crazy Tasty
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 15:03:00 -
[32]
Originally by: slightly sillydude Scorch M and L are way over the top imo. Especially considering the tracking. Medium get 20 something optimal and large get 40 something with no optimal bonuses or mods. In what sense is that close range ammo?
Thats because its not close range ammo, its long range ammo for short(ish) range guns. Same as Null for the blasters, and don;t forget, Null stills hits hard to around 20k on a Neutron Mega, thats covered the whole range of a gate most of the item + the tracking bonus to the Mega means more hits will be effective.
Easiest way to counter scorch is to get under its range, in close. Tracking really isn't very good with scorch, it only seems more effective because the target is usually going to be at range with low transversal.
Just fyi on tracking:
Heavy Nuetron Blaster 2 = .125 with navy AM Focused Pulse 2 - .1125 w/ amarr navy MF
Heavyset blaster still has better tracking than the mid size laser.
TL;DR, lasers are fine. They've always had the better range, its just now its not a meaningless stat. ------ // This is by design. When a ship jumps through a gate, it clears all aggression. // - BH ******** Pew on gate, if it gets hot, jump through and Ctrl-Q. Game mechanic endorsed by CCP. |
Jacob Holland
Gallente Weyland-Vulcan Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 15:14:00 -
[33]
The things which make Lasers so FoTM are precisely the same things people were calling as problems a year or so ago... Pulse Lasers are the kings of mid range weaponry. "Midrange is pointless! I can only tackle out to 24km!" They have high tracking considering their range. "But as all combat happens in tackle range it doesn't matter!"...etc.
The difference between FoTM and sucking is tiny fractions of a percent in many cases - I doubt it would take much to make Projectiles, or particularly Blasters, FoTM again TBH. --
Originally by: cordy
Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.
|
Iria Ahrens
Amarr 101st Space Marine Force Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 15:48:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 13/09/2009 15:55:53
Originally by: Jacob Holland The things which make Lasers so FoTM are precisely the same things people were calling as problems a year or so ago... Pulse Lasers are the kings of mid range weaponry. "Midrange is pointless! I can only tackle out to 24km!" They have high tracking considering their range. "But as all combat happens in tackle range it doesn't matter!"...etc.
The difference between FoTM and sucking is tiny fractions of a percent in many cases - I doubt it would take much to make Projectiles, or particularly Blasters, FoTM again TBH.
This. I remember this. Everyone though midrange was a useless place to fight. Amarr couldn't track close and didn't have the range for sniping.
Lasers are only FOTM because blasters and projectiles got indirectly nerfed. It only takes a small change to put the others on top again. What's hard for the devs is finding a way to keep each ammo type situation ally best at it's preferred range without giving secondary advantages that redefine the battlefield.
Give blaster boats tackling bonuses and they also turn into the fleet tacklers. Same with giving blaster boat some bonuses so they can get in range faster.
Modify the ranges and then the uniqueness of each ammo type is removed. --
EVE is about balls, brains, and paranoia. SP comes in a distant fourth place. |
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 15:51:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Jacob Holland The difference between FoTM and sucking is tiny fractions of a percent in many cases - I doubt it would take much to make Projectiles, or particularly Blasters, FoTM again TBH.
Wrong.
Do yourself a favor and run some comparisons between the guns (or just use NBs spreadsheet) - you'll be amazed at how big of a discrepancy there is in some cases. Or hell, make an EFT graph of a geddon, pest, blasterthron and torp raven short range/buffer fit. You'll see why the more informed posters say that something's got to give.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 16:40:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Crazy Tasty Thats because its not close range ammo, its long range ammo for short(ish) range guns. Same as Null for the blasters, and don;t forget, Null stills hits hard to around 20k on a Neutron Mega, thats covered the whole range of a gate most of the item + the tracking bonus to the Mega means more hits will be effective.
def mega_blaster_neutron_null(): return (400, 11250, 15625, 0.05582) def abaddon_megapulse_2_metastasis_mf(): return (400, 15000, 10000, 0.05484)
Did you know that an Abaddon can fit 2 metastasis rigs and get pretty well equal tracking to Null and be vastly superior in every way that generally matters in a gank BS?
Blaster Mega Base Turret DPS: 745 (530@20km) Abaddon Base Turret DPS: 916 (717@20km) Blaster Mega Drone DPS: 317 Abaddon Drone DPS: 210
Blaster Mega tracking with Null: 0.05582 Abaddon tracking with 2 Metastasis: 0.05484
Blaster Mega EHP: 102K Abaddon EHP: 111K
Consider the graph:
Quote: Easiest way to counter scorch is to get under its range, in close. Tracking really isn't very good with scorch, it only seems more effective because the target is usually going to be at range with low transversal.
Where they promptly switch with no reload delay to multifreq or similar and continue pounding you into the ground. Taking the Geddon (without web, no metastasis, TC etc) as an example: it outdamages the Mega (with web) all the way down to 8km.
Quote:
Just fyi on tracking:
Heavy Nuetron Blaster 2 = .125 with navy AM Focused Pulse 2 - .1125 w/ amarr navy MF
Heavyset blaster still has better tracking than the mid size laser.
And now you need to examine the optimal ranges that they operate at, and where they're capable of operating. Now examine the tracking at those ranges. Then examine how deep into falloff the blasters are. What this means: blasters are dealing less damage than lasers quite early on, despite the higher blaster tracking. Afterall: what really matters is how hard you hit your enemy, and tracking is only one part of the formula.
Quote: TL;DR, lasers are fine. They've always had the better range, its just now its not a meaningless stat.
They're not fine. They outdamage blasters well within web range, and they do it outside of web range. They leave battleship blasters nearly without a role. And that's neglecting projectiles which are just taking it up the ass.
Really, there are two 'top tier' weapons platforms (and this isn't by a "small" margin): - Lasers - Torps
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Crazy Tasty
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 16:49:00 -
[37]
Not even gonna get into all this EFT warrior BS, but I'm fully speced in both Gal and Amarr, I fly Amarr mostly because I like the range but they are not at all an I WIN button.
Lol @ metastasis rigs on a PvP Abba though. ------ // This is by design. When a ship jumps through a gate, it clears all aggression. // - BH ******** Pew on gate, if it gets hot, jump through and Ctrl-Q. Game mechanic endorsed by CCP. |
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 16:53:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida You also have Navy AM, Fleet EMP etc. They are all way better than T2 alternatives. And barrage combined with the inherent high tracking of ACs makes all the difference. Lasers have a comparatively low tracking.
Fleet EMP is actually much inferior to Navy MF (simple fact), and Navy AM is "inferior" simply because of the range it operates at. And simply put: as range increases the "apparent tracking" (chance to miss + hit quality resulting from tracking + falloff) of lasers actually increases very dramatically next to blasters and autocannons, and much faster than you'd really expect.
Quote: Most of these are due to the synergy between Tracking Enhancers and Pulse Lasers. Amarr have oodles of lowslots and pretty much HAVE to use tracking/damage mods since any target that gets closer than 1/2 optimal will normally be "under the guns". Flipside is sub-par tank/hitpoints .. but it is the current fitting paradigm which results in a perceived imbalance.
Not really... that's just base standard fit + damage mod that I'm talking about. Though I will say that tracking enhancers make it way nicer.
Quote: Using the fact that gangs are getting bigger as an argument is neither here nor there. Lasers on Amarr laser boats work very poorly when not in a gang situation, whereas Gallente/Minmatar work equally well in and out of gangs.
I don't see why you wouldn't use gangs as an argument. I mean, we could talk about what would happen if you could use a Rifter in a game of Counter-Strike, but if the game or the players don't allow it, it doesn't matter. And the "metagame" of Eve dictates that even if you try to solo or small gang, chances are your opponents won't be.
Quote: If you are unable to dictate engagement range (ex. jumping into an enemy) ships like the Zealot die in the first few seconds as they are high dps/range but fragile .. essentially cruiser sized Coercers
Funny that you say that about the Zealot: - Vagabonds die quickly when they can't dictate range also - Zealots are obviously worth shooting first... - They're not always that fragile (can mount sooo much a better tank than Muninn / Vaga for instance)
Quote: Good to hear. Lasers are very enjoyable when you play to their strengths, just be wary of the pit-falls (you'll know what I mean when you lose a Zealot to a t1 frigate)
Yes, as I have been saying: it's far easier to bring those strengths out in today's Eve than historically. Far, far easier. And since CCP doesn't seem to have any indications of stopping the Buff Amarr train, I'll just hop on.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 16:58:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Crazy Tasty Not even gonna get into all this EFT warrior BS, but I'm fully speced in both Gal and Amarr, I fly Amarr mostly because I like the range but they are not at all an I WIN button.
Lol @ metastasis rigs on a PvP Abba though.
Yeah LOL indeed. That's what makes it so sad: it does the Megas job about as well, and it's still better in most other regards. Just think: and you have better rigs that you can fit to make it even better.
And I wouldn't say that they're simply "i-win" but they definitely tilt the probabilities drastically in one way or the other. :)
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 17:17:00 -
[40]
According to those numbers you just used, the Mega Pulse Abaddon using T1 ammo has to use TWO tracking rigs to get the same tracking as a T2-tracking-penalising-ammo using Neutron Megathron. The Megathron then has those two rig slots to use for armour/damage ....
And what happens when the Megathron gets its claws on the Abbaddon and rams itself up its tail pipe?
Lasers are VERY good if you get the chance to initiate combat in optimal, but after that it is all down hill.
M/L lasers are godly, but may the lord have mercy on you if anything gets you scrammed/webbed, you sure as hell don't have slots to do same and will instantly be at a speed disadvantage.
I am forced to Dual Light Pulse on my frigates because the Medium Pulse fit can be tracking tanked by Rifters, that is how bad it gets in close .. Since the HPII Zealot is the same and can be tracking tanked by a close cruiser I can only surmise that the exact same is in effect with Mega Pulse.
PS: And no using orbit command doesn't cut it, tracking tanking requires manual flying to succeed.
|
|
Cleron
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 17:21:00 -
[41]
Scorch, pretty simple. You lose around 50% DPS or 50% range with out it, depending on what you wanted. That said Scorch was the first time pulse lasers felt like they had a role in the game. The range early on was never enough, given the poorer tracking back then, and the optimal joy was all too shortly lived. With scorch Amarr finally had lasers that could be **fit** with a tank & had the ability to dictate range. Once it gets nerfed every one will be back trying to stuff beams in their highs, well at least we have rigs now days.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 17:45:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida According to those numbers you just used, the Mega Pulse Abaddon using T1 ammo has to use TWO tracking rigs to get the same tracking as a T2-tracking-penalising-ammo using Neutron Megathron. The Megathron then has those two rig slots to use for armour/damage ....
Which still comes out inferior to the Abaddon. What I'm trying to point out is that the Abaddon can be fit to almost entirely perform the Mega's role and so much more. It's turrets outdamage the Mega from 5km, and from ~8km including drone damage. There isn't a noticeable difference in damage due to tracking, even with Antimatter.
Quote: And what happens when the Megathron gets its claws on the Abbaddon and rams itself up its tail pipe?
Well, the Abaddon outdamages the CN AM Mega starting at ~8km. If the Abaddon fit a scrambler he could probably maintain range long enough to win. I wouldn't count on it, and I wouldn't fit a scrambler. Simply: I would expect the Mega to win a 1v1.... for whatever that's worth.
Quote: PS: And no using orbit command doesn't cut it, tracking tanking requires manual flying to succeed.
OMGNORLY?!?!
-Liang
Fakeedit: Why am I even bothering to point this stuff out? I'll be partaking in the Overpoweredness Train soon too. -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Dristra
Amarr Idle Haven
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 18:01:00 -
[43]
This thread the failure is complete, something happens, we look at circumstances and I propose thing.
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 18:37:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Dristra This thread the failure is complete, something happens, we look at circumstances and I propose thing.
wat?
|
Ap0ll0n
Gallente Lone Star Joint Venture Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 11:55:00 -
[45]
Only advantage lasers have, is the ability to switch ammo instantly.
Thats the only problem i have when flying my Astarte or Deimos. If i could instantly switch from CN AM to Null, it would be very good, and on par with lasers.
|
VanNostrum
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 11:58:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Ap0ll0n Only advantage lasers have, is the ability to switch ammo instantly.
Thats the only problem i have when flying my Astarte or Deimos. If i could instantly switch from CN AM to Null, it would be very good, and on par with lasers.
This! i wrote a long post about this last night but server went down before i could post it lol
Basicly scorch is not good when enemy gets under guns, it's the ability to switch to MF instantly (which has better tracking and much higher dps) that makes amarr ships good at close-mid range.
|
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 12:04:00 -
[47]
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Originally by: Sidus Isaacs Lasers are fine.
What people are really complaingin about is:
Scorch M/L
But imo they are ok, its just other T2 ammo that bites so hard.
As someone with large energy turrets 5/BS 5 - no. Too much damage at too much range with too much tracking at these optimals.
I think is only too much tracking. Good range and damage are not overpowered if you have a well defined weakness. Before the 25% tracking boost, any ship could easily outtrack laser when at under half its optimal.
Nerfing scorch range would only REMOVE FLAVOR from game. So its not the solution. Better is to keep its main flavor and adjust the rest.
And is not liek if lasers suddenly became overpowered. Not long ago they were considered crap.
The thing is eve moved into a type of combat with many more ships. Even small gangs now have 15+ ships. And when this level of firepower is present, then RANGE >>> everything else
Want to FIX lasers AND blasters at same time? Find a way to promote SMALLER SCALE PVP. PRojectiles are another story and need a miracle...
|
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 12:13:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
They're not fine. They outdamage blasters well within web range, and they do it outside of web range. They leave battleship blasters nearly without a role. And that's neglecting projectiles which are just taking it up the ass.
Really, there are two 'top tier' weapons platforms (and this isn't by a "small" margin): - Lasers - Torps
-Liang
be fair.. you are comparing t2 ammo with a tracking penalty. The megatron could fit range mods and falloff rigs and use antimatter for a better result than that ( since you are already fitting a rig that is NOT likely to be on any abaddon.
Not saying lasers could not get a small reduction on tracking, but that your presentation of the fact is a bit unfair.
Now would be possible to see a graph of a Megatron with Antimatter (1 trackign rig) vs abaddon with MF on Mega Pulse..(1 tracking rig) vs abaddon without trackign rigs?
That would represent current mega vs current abaddon.. to a hypotetical abaddon if Lasers got a 15% tracking nerf....
I think that is a good target for an annalysis. We need to be careful to not overdo things. or CCP might throw ammar back into stone age as they did with the first lasers nerf looong ago.
|
Caroline Nikon
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 12:30:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Liang Nuren it, and I wouldn't fit a scrambler. Simply: I would expect the Mega to win a 1v1.... for whatever that's worth.
Why? Isn't that a pretty STRONG assessment ? Abaddon if a full fledged combat ship with huge armor tank bonus and damage bonus and tier 3, while it pays the price with being the only ship in game with something close to capacitor issues.
Megatron is a ship with 1 damage bonus and 1 trackign bonus... that means LESS focused on full brawling capability against other battleships! So you cannot really expect to megatron always win!
The result should depend on several factors like. If fight started at under 10 km.. mega should likely win. If fight starts at 25 km.. sorry but abaddon should win.
|
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:02:00 -
[50]
Tachs don't belong in the game, by any measure of balance or statistics. It is the only oversized weapon in EVE, and its given to the system that's already the strongest.
Mega Beams are already balanced between 1400mm Arties and 425mm rails relative to other weapon sizes.
If Tachs has Mega Beam stats, and Dual Heavies were made into a lower tier, and projectiles got their 10% ammo nerf fixed... I'd probably have to stop posting because I'd have almost nothing to complain about
|
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:04:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Lili Lu on 14/09/2009 14:03:50
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida According to those numbers you just used, the Mega Pulse Abaddon using T1 ammo has to use TWO tracking rigs to get the same tracking as a T2-tracking-penalising-ammo using Neutron Megathron. The Megathron then has those two rig slots to use for armour/damage ....
Which still comes out inferior to the Abaddon. What I'm trying to point out is that the Abaddon can be fit to almost entirely perform the Mega's role and so much more. It's turrets outdamage the Mega from 5km, and from ~8km including drone damage. There isn't a noticeable difference in damage due to tracking, even with Antimatter. Quote:
So wait, Liang, you provided a "comparison" where you rigged one ship and not the other?
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:07:00 -
[52]
EVE speeds have adjusted so fights are more often at mid range now. Is it really any surprise that the 'mid range' weapon system is starting to shine?
|
Waagaa Ktlehr
Amarr Evolution IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:18:00 -
[53]
We have God on our side, the rest of you are heretics.
It is so naive to think you can be superior without the help of God.
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:21:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Seriously Bored Tachs don't belong in the game, by any measure of balance or statistics. It is the only oversized weapon in EVE, and its given to the system that's already the strongest.
Mega Beams are already balanced between 1400mm Arties and 425mm rails relative to other weapon sizes.
If Tachs has Mega Beam stats, and Dual Heavies were made into a lower tier, and projectiles got their 10% ammo nerf fixed... I'd probably have to stop posting because I'd have almost nothing to complain about
Mega beams are not balanced with 1400 and 425. Mega stats are the worst for range when you include falloff. So should lasers be the weapons with the least range? Tachyons are a ***** to fit and eat mega cap. (<heh) BTW, I was amazed to experience how easily 8 1400s fit on a Mael compared to 8 tachs on an Abaddon. I don't see anything wrong with having tachs in the game. Quit whining about Tachyons, buff projectiles instead.
If tachs were removed Amarr would simply be the one left on the bottom, the way Minmatar is now. It's better to lift matar off the bottom than simply to replace them with someone else (especially someone else that was crap for far too long in the game). Anyway, tachs are in the game, good luck convincing CCP to remove them.
|
Spaztick
Terminal Impact Kairakau
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:24:00 -
[55]
It's very apparent at battleship levels, where the small differences between the smaller weapon systems and ships are hugely amplified. As of right now, lasers track battleships no problem and projectiles cannot outtrack lasers up close, and blasters don't outdamage their laser counterparts or are able to outtrack.
There is something inherently wrong with that.
Also get rid of tachyons or keep them exclusive to the Paladin.
Quote: [21:18:10] SFShootme > first a carrier that goes boom, then mr viper had to find one of my goon alts, and now i'm down 182b ;( |
Cpt Branko
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:24:00 -
[56]
Originally by: James Lyrus EVE speeds have adjusted so fights are more often at mid range now. Is it really any surprise that the 'mid range' weapon system is starting to shine?
It shined before, really. EVE speeds favoured mid-range before - if you remember, nanoships were all the rage, and they tended not to stick at range where other ships can easily hit and wanted guns which enabled them to hit others.
What made mid-range even more favoured post QR is a combination of three things: - difficulty in holding ships at chosen range without scrambler or scrambler+web for the very short range ships (eg. med blasters) which requires to drop to mere 10.8km point - more deficient tracking at very close ranges thanks to the new web being inferior then scram+web for purposes of tracking (before you say they stop things better which is true, consider that a MWD-ing ship in old EVE made itself trivial to track if they turned MWD on and trivial to track with the MWD off; now since it's MWD is off when it's scrambled, it's 4x harder to track) - the reduction in speed of non-nano ships which made both closing range and getting the 'full tackle' (scram+mwd) take longer since the new scrambler has shorter range then the web (10.8 vs 13). The longer it takes to close range, the more inferior the short range ship is.
Long range setups got flat out better, of course, as burning to >150km is no longer so easy.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:31:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Seishi Maru
I think is only too much tracking. Good range and damage are not overpowered if you have a well defined weakness...
Yes, my point is something has to give. That range+tracking is okay if you nerf the damage. That Tracking + damage is okay if you nerf the range. That damage+range is okay if you nerf the tracking.
Quote: And is not liek if lasers suddenly became overpowered. Not long ago they were considered crap.
Mmm, I disagree. The big change was the resist change - which increased EM damage on armor 25% for gall, cal, and amarr, and 33% on minmatar. So while lasers always naturally shredded shield, they got a big boost to damage in armor.
60% -> 50% EM res is a 25% boost in damage, 70% -> 60% is a 33% boost. It was a huge change but under the disguise of a little bitty "10%" nerf.
Quote: The thing is eve moved into a type of combat with many more ships. Even small gangs now have 15+ ships. And when this level of firepower is present, then RANGE >>> everything else
Well yes, damage at range. Lasers are no longer "TEH SUXXOR" on armor, and they fit very nicely on the highest EHP ships in game. It's just a win-win.
Quote: Want to FIX lasers AND blasters at same time? Find a way to promote SMALLER SCALE PVP. PRojectiles are another story and need a miracle...
Blasters could use a little bit of lovin (either tracking or MOAR DAMAGE), and I believe you know my stance on projectiles. Oh, and boost rockets.
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:47:00 -
[58]
Originally by: AstroPhobic 60% -> 50% EM res is a 25% boost in damage, 70% -> 60% is a 33% boost. It was a huge change but under the disguise of a little bitty "10%" nerf. Quote:
This is one change I agree was overdone. I don't know why they didn't drop the base em resist to 55% instead. See how it went, and then if was needed later drop to 50%.
Yes, also buff projectiles, blaster falloff or tracking, and rockets.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 14:49:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Seishi Maru Not long ago they were considered crap.
Only if you think 'not long ago' was almost a year and a half...
Quote: Even small gangs now have 15+ ships. And when this level of firepower is present, then RANGE >>> everything else
Which is why I say that gang size matters when balancing.
Quote: Find a way to promote SMALLER SCALE PVP.
They're too busy promoting large scale PVP. See: support for fleet battles.
Quote: you are comparing t2 ammo with a tracking penalty. The megatron could fit range mods and falloff rigs and use antimatter for a better result than that ( since you are already fitting a rig that is NOT likely to be on any abaddon.
Comments: - The Mega requires all the mids/lows/rigs (trimarks) it has for tank - The Abaddon still has a better tank - The Abaddon still has equivalent tracking - The Abaddon still has better damage with AM, and with Null
Quote: to a hypotetical abaddon if Lasers got a 15% tracking nerf....
It's easier to show a graph of a 15% tracking nerf.
Originally by: Nikon[/quote sorry but abaddon should win.
Not fit like that it won't. It's a trade off of being an effective ganker vs being an effective solo PVP ship.
Originally by: Lili Lu So wait, Liang, you provided a "comparison" where you rigged one ship and not the other? Laughing
The Mega was Trimark fit - and must be in order to have a somewhat 'reasonable' tank. The Abaddon still had a superior tank.
Originally by: James Lyrus EVE speeds have adjusted so fights are more often at mid range now. Is it really any surprise that the 'mid range' weapon system is starting to shine?
No. That's part of my point. The boosts that have been done in effort to make 'gang weapons' viable at solo PVP utterly overpower them in gangs the size we see now.
Originally by: Lili Lu If tachs were removed Amarr would simply be the one left on the bottom
Megabeam Apoc is a better sniper than a 1400 Maelstrom/Tempest. By alot.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 15:01:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Long range setups got flat out better, of course, as burning to >150km is no longer so easy.
Hmm. That's a good point, and... actaully generally I don't mind a bit of reason to have tactical mobility during a fight.
But it does rather highlight that artillery is rather horrible.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |