Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 19:18:00 -
[181]
Originally by: Caleb Fury I just took advantage of CCP's deal, "The Power Of Two." I am power-leveling a new character atm so I guess I will train projectiles. I need to get on the next FoTM train.
That's cool - I suspect you have a really long time to get him up to speed before they boost projectiles. But good on you for getting started early! Maybe we'll have you whining for a boost with the rest of us when the 6 months is up and you're stuck paying for a useless character. :)
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 19:39:00 -
[182]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
That's cool - I suspect you have a really long time to get him up to speed before they boost projectiles. But good on you for getting started early! Maybe we'll have you whining for a boost with the rest of us when the 6 months is up and you're stuck paying for a useless character. :)
-Liang
Hmm, by my math, he should be able to step into a perfectly fitted/skilled Phoon just around the time that Projectiles get a buff.
In the mean time there's always the Rifter, Rupture, and Cane, I guess.
|
Confessor
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 23:35:00 -
[183]
GAT A BUNCH OF FRIGGIN CRY BABIES. It MUST be the fact that most of you whiners didnt play eve for the last 3 -4 years. Amarr was completly laughable until last year when it was brought to bear with the other 3 races. Get a friggin grip on your joystick and quit *****ing about amarr and PLAY.
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 23:42:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Confessor GAT A BUNCH OF FRIGGIN CRY BABIES. It MUST be the fact that most of you whiners didnt play eve for the last 3 -4 years. Amarr was completly laughable until last year when it was brought to bear with the other 3 races. Get a friggin grip on your joystick and quit *****ing about amarr and PLAY.
You play Eve on a joystick?
Also, as Liang likes to say: "Two wrongs don't make a right."
|
Princess Misha
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 00:51:00 -
[185]
Amarr ships and weapons are perfectly fine. T2 ammo are not.
true scorch is a blessing but remember a few years back everyone laught at mid-range engagements.
So maybe insted of current T2 ammo : they may boost range (pulse) and damage (beam), tracking (blaster) and damage (rails) and fall off (auto) and damage (artillery).
Remove all the unnecessary drawbacks and damage boost on close-reange ammo while the long range ammo becomes more of an alpha strike modifying ammo, increase both damage and rate of fire. Samilar dps in all T2 ammo but offering differnt tactical options
|
Stil Harkonnen
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 02:39:00 -
[186]
Originally by: Princess Misha Amarr ships and weapons are perfectly fine. T2 ammo are not.
true scorch is a blessing but remember a few years back everyone laught at mid-range engagements.
So maybe insted of current T2 ammo : they may boost range (pulse) and damage (beam), tracking (blaster) and damage (rails) and fall off (auto) and damage (artillery).
Remove all the unnecessary drawbacks and damage boost on close-reange ammo while the long range ammo becomes more of an alpha strike modifying ammo, increase both damage and rate of fire. Samilar dps in all T2 ammo but offering differnt tactical options
i would say buff blaster damage instead of blaster tracking. I like the tracking, but blasters don't do enough more damage than lasers do to make up for the far inferior range.
|
NightmareX
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 13:46:00 -
[187]
Edited by: NightmareX on 22/09/2009 13:51:16
Originally by: Stil Harkonnen
Originally by: Princess Misha Amarr ships and weapons are perfectly fine. T2 ammo are not.
true scorch is a blessing but remember a few years back everyone laught at mid-range engagements.
So maybe insted of current T2 ammo : they may boost range (pulse) and damage (beam), tracking (blaster) and damage (rails) and fall off (auto) and damage (artillery).
Remove all the unnecessary drawbacks and damage boost on close-reange ammo while the long range ammo becomes more of an alpha strike modifying ammo, increase both damage and rate of fire. Samilar dps in all T2 ammo but offering differnt tactical options
i would say buff blaster damage instead of blaster tracking. I like the tracking, but blasters don't do enough more damage than lasers do to make up for the far inferior range.
Uhm. Do you really think before you say buff Blasters damage?.
Do you even know what will happen if CCP buff the DPS output on Blasters?. If no, then stop asking for something that will make alot of other things unbalanced to each others then.
Like for example. If you buff the Blasters damage by like 10-15%, then you have to buff active tanking, and if you have to buff active tanking, you have to buff passive tanking again. And i can go on with this list for a long time then.
No the thing that IS needed to do, is to nerf the DPS Lasers have at med ranges with Scorch. Lets say nerf the DPS with Scorch for 10% at med range. And maybe nerf the Lasers DPS by 5% in close range, so Lasers isn't in the territory where Blasters is supposed to be best.
And then we need Projectiles boosted to. And when those 2 things are done, then we will have all of the weapon systems pretty balanced to each others.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:16:00 -
[188]
Originally by: NightmareX ..No the thing that IS needed to do, is to nerf the DPS Lasers have at med ranges with Scorch. Lets say nerf the DPS with Scorch for 10% at med range. And maybe nerf the Lasers DPS by 5% in close range, so Lasers isn't in the territory where Blasters is supposed to be best.
And then we need Projectiles boosted to. And when those 2 things are done, then we will have all of the weapon systems pretty balanced to each others.
The only reason why blasters seem to do so poorly damage wise compared to lasers is that laser boats almost always use multiple damage mods and blasters buffer the crap out of their ships. Blasters combined with drones do 1.5-2 times more damage than lasers .. shorter range, higher damage. Increase the base speed a tad on blaster ships so they can close faster and thus save a slot or two from the approach buffer and they too can use damage mods, combine it with a slight tracking increase and they'll "pwn" face.
Small and Medium ACs are among the best guns around. The extreme tracking makes almost all shots land which is better than having lots of the near misses that scorch produces without tracking mods. Medium artillery could use a little added to damage modifier and large projectile ammo a flat 10-15% damage increase to boost BS AC and sniping performance.
Scorch is lovely if the target moves in predictable straight lines, if it doesn't you are just burning cap. After the wrecking chance for targets over the tracking of guns was removed lasers lost a lot against fast targets. Tournament showed just how vulnerable lasers are to tracking tanking, a bloody Vulture tracking tanked a Abaddon for goodness sake
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:16:00 -
[189]
Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 22/09/2009 13:51:16
Originally by: Stil Harkonnen
Originally by: Princess Misha Amarr ships and weapons are perfectly fine. T2 ammo are not.
true scorch is a blessing but remember a few years back everyone laught at mid-range engagements.
So maybe insted of current T2 ammo : they may boost range (pulse) and damage (beam), tracking (blaster) and damage (rails) and fall off (auto) and damage (artillery).
Remove all the unnecessary drawbacks and damage boost on close-reange ammo while the long range ammo becomes more of an alpha strike modifying ammo, increase both damage and rate of fire. Samilar dps in all T2 ammo but offering differnt tactical options
i would say buff blaster damage instead of blaster tracking. I like the tracking, but blasters don't do enough more damage than lasers do to make up for the far inferior range.
Uhm. Do you really think before you say buff Blasters damage?.
Do you even know what will happen if CCP buff the DPS output on Blasters?. If no, then stop asking for something that will make alot of other things unbalanced to each others then.
Like for example. If you buff the Blasters damage by like 10-15%, then you have to buff active tanking, and if you have to buff active tanking, you have to buff passive tanking again. And i can go on with this list for a long time then.
No the thing that IS needed to do, is to nerf the DPS Lasers have at med ranges with Scorch. Lets say nerf the DPS with Scorch for 10% at med range. And maybe nerf the Lasers DPS by 5% in close range, so Lasers isn't in the territory where Blasters is supposed to be best.
And then we need Projectiles boosted to. And when those 2 things are done, then we will have all of the weapon systems pretty balanced to each others.
Oh it's Nightmare X. No need for me to reply.
|
NightmareX
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:20:00 -
[190]
Originally by: Caleb Fury Oh it's Nightmare X. No need for me to reply.
Oh, why not?.
I'm not even sure what your gonna say though.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:23:00 -
[191]
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Caleb Fury Oh it's Nightmare X. No need for me to reply.
Oh, why not?.
I'm not even sure what your gonna say though.
Why would active tanking need to be buffed because blasters got a damage buff?
|
NightmareX
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 14:27:00 -
[192]
Edited by: NightmareX on 22/09/2009 14:32:32
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: NightmareX ..No the thing that IS needed to do, is to nerf the DPS Lasers have at med ranges with Scorch. Lets say nerf the DPS with Scorch for 10% at med range. And maybe nerf the Lasers DPS by 5% in close range, so Lasers isn't in the territory where Blasters is supposed to be best.
And then we need Projectiles boosted to. And when those 2 things are done, then we will have all of the weapon systems pretty balanced to each others.
The only reason why blasters seem to do so poorly damage wise compared to lasers is that laser boats almost always use multiple damage mods and blasters buffer the crap out of their ships. Blasters combined with drones do 1.5-2 times more damage than lasers .. shorter range, higher damage. Increase the base speed a tad on blaster ships so they can close faster and thus save a slot or two from the approach buffer and they too can use damage mods, combine it with a slight tracking increase and they'll "pwn" face.
Small and Medium ACs are among the best guns around. The extreme tracking makes almost all shots land which is better than having lots of the near misses that scorch produces without tracking mods. Medium artillery could use a little added to damage modifier and large projectile ammo a flat 10-15% damage increase to boost BS AC and sniping performance.
Scorch is lovely if the target moves in predictable straight lines, if it doesn't you are just burning cap. After the wrecking chance for targets over the tracking of guns was removed lasers lost a lot against fast targets. Tournament showed just how vulnerable lasers are to tracking tanking, a bloody Vulture tracking tanked a Abaddon for goodness sake
Some true words here.
But anyways, look at this. This is about the base speed of the Navy Mega.
Megathron Navy Issue:
ò Fittings: 605 CPU, 16275 powergrid ò Dronebay increased by 50m3, bandwidth unchanged ò Speed: +5% max velocity and agility increased by 5%
I'm just happy that my Navy Mega gets 5% better speed and 5% better agility though. But in the end, i don't think it will help that much though. But something is better than nothing.
Originally by: Caleb Fury
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Caleb Fury Oh it's Nightmare X. No need for me to reply.
Oh, why not?.
I'm not even sure what your gonna say though.
Why would active tanking need to be buffed because blasters got a damage buff?
See, you don't even know that active tanking would melt badly to Blasters (Neutrons) then. As active tanking is now, they are perfectly balanced to the different weapon types.
A Raven for example, melts fast enough to a good fitted Neutron Mega. So a DPS buff on Blaster is something i'm totally against.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
Majuan Shuo
Sons Of 0din
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 15:53:00 -
[193]
Nightmare X is trying to make the "Paper is fine, nerf rock. -Scissors" statement <a href="https://eve-search.com/externalLink.asp?l=http%3A%2F%2Frumandmonkey%2Ecom%2Fwidgets%2Ftoys%2Ftestgen%2F6199%2F"><img src="http://stat.rumandmonkey.com/tests/9/9/6199/25765.jpg" title="Gunslinger" alt="Gunslinger" border="0" /></a><br />Gunslinger<br / |
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 16:17:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida The only reason why blasters seem to do so poorly damage wise compared to lasers is that laser boats almost always use multiple damage mods and blasters buffer the crap out of their ships. Blasters combined with drones do 1.5-2 times more damage than lasers .. shorter range, higher damage.
What are you talking about here? Theese are incredibly misinformed statements. Virtually everyone puts 3 damage mods on their blaster ships. Hell, people are taking up shield tanking them to help stuff up even more damage mods and help with speed/agility. - Thorax: 3 damage mods - Brutix: 3 damage mods - Megathron: 3 damage mods - Hype: 3 damage mods
Now, look at (for example) Armageddon DPS vs Megathron DPS. I do believe you'll notice that the Geddon deals 90% of the DPS of a Megathron. What's more interesting about this is that the Geddon can deal great damage with great effective tracking all the way out to 45km. And then to top it off (because we like cherries on top!) a Geddon without a web will outdamage a tracking bonused Megathron with a web from 8km.
Lasers have too much range to be considered "close range weapons". Lasers have too much tracking and too much damage to be considered "medium range weapons". Something has to give.
Oh, I know, I know, people are going to bring up damage types. They always say that the standard BS tank is 3 EANM + DC - which is sometimes true. But not everything in Eve is armor tanked... and in fact, the higher "effective" tracking that lasers get at range really give them a colossal advantage when shooting small ships. Which are coincidentally shield tanked and generally want to stay at range.
Quote: Small and Medium ACs are among the best guns around. The extreme tracking makes almost all shots land which is better than having lots of the near misses that scorch produces without tracking mods.
What. The. ****. Are. You. Talking. About?
There's a thing called "falloff". It really ****s up how often and how hard you hit any target. But, to humor you: do you know why the Vagabond (for example) ****s frigs up? Because frigates have no hitpoints so the damage that does and is good damage. It has nothing to do with the Vagabond having "good damage" or "good tracking" - because it doesn't.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 16:19:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Majuan Shuo Nightmare X is trying to make the "Paper is fine, nerf rock. -Scissors" statement
No, his concern is valid enough. Blasters need the "in your face" range to be of any real use, it is getting there before honour tank kicks in that is the problem No harm in a person wanting his favourite play style at the top of the Dev work pile .. we all do it
@Nightmare; I am not a blaster pilot and crappy and math so perhaps you could run numbers instead. As I understand the blaster problem it is range first and tracking second that are the major obstacles, especially against laser boats. What if the current MWD bonus was changed to a 5%+/Level speed giving the blaster boats that needed surge to a target?
Things like tracking, capacitor etc. can always be tweaked to compensate for any major pitfalls.
|
NightmareX
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 16:22:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: Majuan Shuo Nightmare X is trying to make the "Paper is fine, nerf rock. -Scissors" statement
No, his concern is valid enough. Blasters need the "in your face" range to be of any real use, it is getting there before honour tank kicks in that is the problem No harm in a person wanting his favourite play style at the top of the Dev work pile .. we all do it
@Nightmare; I am not a blaster pilot and crappy and math so perhaps you could run numbers instead. As I understand the blaster problem it is range first and tracking second that are the major obstacles, especially against laser boats. What if the current MWD bonus was changed to a 5%+/Level speed giving the blaster boats that needed surge to a target?
Things like tracking, capacitor etc. can always be tweaked to compensate for any major pitfalls.
I'm not so good to do maths hehe.
So if you want some really good maths, then ask Liang or Astro.
I can the basic maths though. But that isn't enough tbh.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 16:23:00 -
[197]
Originally by: NightmareX Uhm. Do you really think before you say buff Blasters damage?.
Yes.
Quote: Do you even know what will happen if CCP buff the DPS output on Blasters?. If no, then stop asking for something that will make alot of other things unbalanced to each others then.
Then Blasters will have more damage inside their sphere of death and it will (by extension) extend slightly further out. It will not affect smaller ships that much since they can't be tracked anyway.
Quote: Like for example. If you buff the Blasters damage by like 10-15%, then you have to buff active tanking, and if you have to buff active tanking, you have to buff passive tanking again. And i can go on with this list for a long time then.
Actually, active tanking is pretty bad to start with. Half the time, active tanking is a bad idea with *one* opponent on the field. And by the time there are three, it's always a bad idea - even with Crystals and boosters and 5% hardwirings. Active tanking has gone the way of the dodo as gang sizes have increased - that has nothing to do with blasters being generally much below par.
Quote: No the thing that IS needed to do, is to nerf the DPS Lasers have at med ranges with Scorch. Lets say nerf the DPS with Scorch for 10% at med range. And maybe nerf the Lasers DPS overall by 5% in close range, so Lasers isn't in the territory where Blasters is supposed to be best.
5% isn't nearly enough to balance blasters and lasers. IMO, we'd probably have to see a 10-15% (maybe more) overall laser DPS nerf in order to bring a bit of balance back. Which, you the oncoming flamenaught should note, is still better DPS than they were outputting before the resistance changes. Those were some biiiiig changes.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 16:30:00 -
[198]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
@Nightmare; I am not a blaster pilot and crappy and math so perhaps you could run numbers instead. As I understand the blaster problem it is range first and tracking second that are the major obstacles, especially against laser boats. What if the current MWD bonus was changed to a 5%+/Level speed giving the blaster boats that needed surge to a target?
Things like tracking, capacitor etc. can always be tweaked to compensate for any major pitfalls.
IMO, it would not be that incredibly useful: - The MWD bonus isn't really common anymore. This really limits the scope of the idea as a "blaster boost". - Absolute top speed generally isn't what's painful - it's the time it takes to get to that top speed. This suggests it might be better to nudge top speed a bit and increase agility. - More damage and/or more tracking would generally be more useful (imo).
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Tom Peeping
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 17:31:00 -
[199]
As a pilot with chars specced out in multiple races, I gotta say, lasors are working as intended. It's only in the last year that people were saying that Mid-Range PVP was dead and now you're saying that it's the only game in town? I see lots of fights every day involving jumping gates in 0.0. Very little midrange at all, just up close and in your face.
The other races really shine here... including Caldari, since the travel time isn't a major factor. Blasters? Autocannons? Better than the lasers here, and this is a type of PVP that happens VERY frequently. Yes, Amarr are good at mid-range, but that's not the only game in town. Right up in your face, a blaster boat outdamages my comparable sized laser chars by a significant margin, and the autocannons do significantly better at hitting the fast moving targets. On top of this Amarr's mid range damage is easier to e-war counter than ANY other race, precisely because it's operating at a longer range, AND even with the cap bonuses, it's still not hard to cap out if you use your MWD much at all. Much easier to cap out than other races.
The only weapon I see any need for balance on in game is missiles, because rocket's just stink, and HAMS should do just a bit more dmg versus small ships.
Just a reminder, that just because you personally happen to fight using a certain style, and because of that you're having trouble countering someone else's certain style, does not mean that the game is out of balance. Working as intended.
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.22 18:12:00 -
[200]
Originally by: Majuan Shuo Nightmare X is trying to make the "Paper is fine, nerf rock. -Scissors" statement
Ahh I see. Thank you for clearing that up for me. Coz I didn't know what he was trying to say.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |