Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 23:36:00 -
[1]
So up until recently when I switched to Drone boats, I had been mostly Amarr specced. I am about to finally get T2 Medium guns and will see what the fuss is about. I don't care about any particular nerfs which may be coming to lasers, since I suck at Eve and laser effectiveness isn't going to make me pwn any faces all of a sudden.
So Eve community, whats makes lasers "overpowered" if they are?
-Is it lack of reload times?
-Is it Scorch ammunition in particular?
-Is it the general consensus that projectiles need work?
-Also, will nerfing lasers automatically help the other weapon systems?
I've heard people say, "Well if Scorch range got reduced, it would be okay." So it seems like a large part of it could be related to the ammo. The issue is however, it's that it must be Scorch M and Scorch L because I can use Scorch S and its not really useful on frigate vessels (I could be wrong).
I am definitely not one of these guys trying to keep an edge by protecting what he is training, I just would like to know if there are particular things that could be changed and if nerfing lasers will solve the whole issue.
Thanks again guys. Fly safe
|
Kovorix
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 23:51:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Kovorix on 12/09/2009 23:52:15
The issue is that they are the midrange king of weapons. Pretty much all small-medium engagements in eve happen in what can be defined as midrange, and lasers are the only weapon which can do good damage while covering the entire field.
I think they could probably use a slight damage and/or tracking nerf, but nothing drastic. As it stands, I think it would be more balancing if CCP better defined projectile's role, as they are kind of like lasers, just crappy.
I personally believe blasters are more or less okay, perhaps in need of a tracking boost, but many people will debate that.
|
Denuo Secus
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 23:59:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Denuo Secus on 13/09/2009
Originally by: Caleb Fury So up until recently when I switched to Drone boats, I had been mostly Amarr specced. I am about to finally get T2 Medium guns and will see what the fuss is about. I don't care about any particular nerfs which may be coming to lasers, since I suck at Eve and laser effectiveness isn't going to make me pwn any faces all of a sudden.
So Eve community, whats makes lasers "overpowered" if they are?
-Is it lack of reload times?
-Is it Scorch ammunition in particular?
-Is it the general consensus that projectiles need work?
-Also, will nerfing lasers automatically help the other weapon systems?
I've heard people say, "Well if Scorch range got reduced, it would be okay." So it seems like a large part of it could be related to the ammo. The issue is however, it's that it must be Scorch M and Scorch L because I can use Scorch S and its not really useful on frigate vessels (I could be wrong).
I am definitely not one of these guys trying to keep an edge by protecting what he is training, I just would like to know if there are particular things that could be changed and if nerfing lasers will solve the whole issue.
Thanks again guys. Fly safe
I won't say lasorz are overpowered. They are kings of the med range. And quick ammo change helps alot. There damage type drawback is past. So indeed - it's a nice weapon. And I see the problems when comparing blasters with lasors. But I personally would buff blasters instead nerf lasors!
But at the same time they are very vulnerable against every EW type. When duelling with my Amarr specialized corp mate I know exactly what to do against him:
- TD negates it's damage potential by a huge margin - ECM ofc - Neut will ruin it's ability to fire more than any other weapon system - SD maybe if they are used at med range (not sure here) - In addition: it's damage type is predictable
-
Save the missiles from the glowing blob :S
R ----------> * A --------> * V --------> * E -------> * N ---------> *
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 00:10:00 -
[4]
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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
VanNostrum
The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 00:15:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Caleb Fury So up until recently when I switched to Drone boats, I had been mostly Amarr specced. I am about to finally get T2 Medium guns and will see what the fuss is about. I don't care about any particular nerfs which may be coming to lasers, since I suck at Eve and laser effectiveness isn't going to make me pwn any faces all of a sudden.
So Eve community, whats makes lasers "overpowered" if they are?
-Is it lack of reload times?
-Is it Scorch ammunition in particular?
-Is it the general consensus that projectiles need work?
-Also, will nerfing lasers automatically help the other weapon systems?
I've heard people say, "Well if Scorch range got reduced, it would be okay." So it seems like a large part of it could be related to the ammo. The issue is however, it's that it must be Scorch M and Scorch L because I can use Scorch S and its not really useful on frigate vessels (I could be wrong).
I am definitely not one of these guys trying to keep an edge by protecting what he is training, I just would like to know if there are particular things that could be changed and if nerfing lasers will solve the whole issue.
Thanks again guys. Fly safe
there are no particular nerfs coming to lasers
|
Zaerlorth Maelkor
The Maverick Navy Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 00:15:00 -
[6]
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.
This really. Especially T2 close range ammo for both projectiles and hybrids suck donkey balls. However, you might want to consider a few things, first of all; I now have one of those annoying sigs. second; you should probably move on to some more interesting things than reading this sig.
|
The Djego
Minmatar Hellequin Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 00:18:00 -
[7]
Tracking+range+dps in a very good mix with scorch, aswell as preaty stunning DPS with multis(a bit worse off against the plated tank but they crush most T2 ships with ease).
In general the ease with range in EvE PVP what slowed down quite a bit with QR making range a lot more important.
For me paticular, Lasers where preaty awsome even before QR. Big change was the reduced speed, missle changes and the 60% Web that nerfed the hardest DPS dealers in one way or the other(paticular blaster ships) while suiting Amarr the best.
Basicly if someone give blasters back the bite(mostly a usefull web, some minor ship changes and a bit more DPS) and minis a bit more ease at range with AKs + Tempest and particular large AK issues I don¦t see much need to nerf Lasers. Torps should also sligthly buffed again in her ability to hit BS sized targets for next to full damage without much webbing/painting(not realy a huge one, but I feel it lost a bit bite what should be restored since the torp raven was preaty much fine pre QR in my books, speeking from the reciving end here).
Amarr ships work preaty well, the bad thing is they also scale very very well, meaning that the gank+range+tank focus works in preaty much any gang(even solo) and gets better as more ships you throw into a fight(thats the main diffrence to mini and gallente ships).
- yes projektiels need work - any nerf to one thing is a boost to a other thing - Scorch S can hit up to 10km with full damage, even if you think changing range in a frig is easy it gets harder in bigger ships and in PVP it can make a very big diffrence combined with clever piloting having one ship doing next to full damage and the other one next to zero ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
|
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 00:20:00 -
[8]
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.
|
Denuo Secus
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 00:20:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Zaerlorth Maelkor
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.
This really. Especially T2 close range ammo for both projectiles and hybrids suck donkey balls.
Conflag is meh too. Every close range ammo is topped by faction ammo. Scorch as long range T2 ammo is great - exactly like Barrage and Null.
-
Save the missiles from the glowing blob :S
R ----------> * A --------> * V --------> * E -------> * N ---------> *
|
Gram Hellfire
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 00:22:00 -
[10]
you can remove pulse lasers and i would not care; just don't touch my beams :)
|
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 00:22:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Zaerlorth Maelkor
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.
This really. Especially T2 close range ammo for both projectiles and hybrids suck donkey balls.
I was reading the stats on Conflag, and its would appeap to suck aswell.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 00:30:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Denuo Secus Conflag is meh too. Every close range ammo is topped by faction ammo. Scorch as long range T2 ammo is great - exactly like Barrage and Null.
Fortunately, you have AN MF! Also, Barrage isn't as good as you think it is. I mean, yeah, it makes Minmatar ships flyable, but it loses alot of its damage by the time it connects with you 15-20km later. :)
As for what's wrong with lasers? They deal too much damage at range, compared to the other ships. I know, I know, there's down sides: - Cap use - Static damage types (and EM being the "easiest" to tank on Armor tanked BS) - Fittings - Ship versatility (See: 3 mid slot Geddon)
But there's lots and lots of up sides: - EM isn't that bad. And most times, almost 50% of the damage comes from Thermal. - EM is that awesome vs Shield tanks (See: Frigs/Cruisers/Battlecruisers) - Lasers have fantastic tracking at range. - Optimal bonus mods affect ships with high optimal more - No hit quality degradation in optimal - Near blaster level base DPS at 3x the range - Damage projection over entire field of battle - "Instant" ammo change - Better overall ships as ship sizes increase - Ships get better as gang sizes increase. Gang sizes are increasing.
Eh, the list really goes on and on and on. Lasers have a lot of advantages. Thus, I'm training them on 2 characters now, and I'll be starting the third soon. The recent round of faction ship buffs has shown me the light: CCP has no intention of stopping the Boost Train to Amarr, nor the Nerf Train to Minmatar. :)
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 01:19:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Liang Nuren Lasers have a lot of advantages. Thus, I'm training them on 2 characters now, and I'll be starting the third soon. The recent round of faction ship buffs has shown me the light: CCP has no intention of stopping the Boost Train to Amarr, nor the Nerf Train to Minmatar. :) -Liang
Scorch is good. Part of it is exagerated by optimal bonuses on zealots and apocs. The answer is not to nerf it, lasers, or amarr ships, but to buff other guns/ammo. Blasters need more falloff. Projectiles need more damage, and/or less split in types of it, or more rof.
|
Renarla
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 03:54:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Caleb Fury
-Is it Scorch ammunition in particular?
Pretty much. Scorch allows Cruisers and especially Battleships to do almost as much damage as Blasters at over 5 times the range. However, on another note, I now have one of those annoying sigs. |
Darthewok
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 04:18:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Lili Lu The answer is not to nerf it, lasers, or amarr ships, but to buff other guns/ammo. Blasters need more falloff. Projectiles need more damage, and/or less split in types of it, or more rof.
^^
nerfing lasers will make EVE less fun. boosting the range of other races' short range guns will make EVE more fun.
ofc plse still allow Amarr a slight damage advantage otherwise there is no point to Amarr, as the whole race has no other major advantages than good guns (minny has speed, gal has drones, caldari has ECM, amarr has only... gunz).
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 04:25:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Darthewok (minny has speed, gal has drones, caldari has ECM, amarr has only... gunz).
Fixed. Also, I think you're forgetting the Curse, Sac, etc. :)
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Cracken
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 04:39:00 -
[17]
Blasters do not need more falloff what is needed is alot more dps in their very narrow engagement envelope and a very small increase in tracking.
(The important points are bolded for you convenience.
|
Darthewok
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 04:44:00 -
[18]
heh ok amarr has some other advantages than lasers. curses and sac and such. however, a lot of their ships are pretty one-dimensional flying guns and not a whole lot more.
|
Mahke
Aeon Of Strife
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 05:55:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Gram Hellfire you can remove pulse lasers and i would not care; just don't touch my beams :)
you can remove beam lasers and i would not care; just don't touch my pulses :)
|
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 06:05:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Darthewok
Originally by: Lili Lu The answer is not to nerf it, lasers, or amarr ships, but to buff other guns/ammo. Blasters need more falloff. Projectiles need more damage, and/or less split in types of it, or more rof.
^^
nerfing lasers will make EVE less fun. boosting the range of other races' short range guns will make EVE more fun.
ofc plse still allow Amarr a slight damage advantage otherwise there is no point to Amarr, as the whole race has no other major advantages than good guns (minny has speed, gal has drones, caldari has ECM, amarr has only... gunz).
Thirding this.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
|
Spaztick
Terminal Impact Kairakau
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 06:42:00 -
[21]
It was a mix of:
- The armor changes (removing 10% EM armor resist to other areas, namely explosive, effectively buffing Amarr DPS by ~15% and nerfing Minmatar's). - The tracking boost to lasers (unecessary and unneeded, especially considering their huge optimals). - Scorch. God damn does Scorch **** me off.
So in a nutshell Amarr got a huge DPS, tracking and optimal boost.
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 ;( |
arbiter reformed
Minmatar Annihilate. Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 07:09:00 -
[22]
Edited by: arbiter reformed on 13/09/2009 07:10:15 MISSILES FTW TBH
im amarr and fly the sac as my choice of hac since the locus nerf, (unless im sniping) and i have more gun skills than missiles.
REAL MEN FLY PHANTASMS
its the zealot with pulses that can be crazy, the 20km scorch op isnt overpowerd but maybee the 45 km optimal the zealot can get aparently is, all i know is when my zealot had 57 km pulses and 3 times the traking no1 seemed to call for nerfs and it wasnt like there speed compensated for it lol. anyway i think its acceptable on a zealot as you have a serious lack of defences past your optimal (ie most frigates will solo you once there in) and the single lse zealots you see everywhere are basicly t1 cruiser hp wise even deimoss have more staying power lol
scorch l is a bit much tho traking could do with a nerf 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 |
Manu Hermanus
FaDoyToy
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 07:16:00 -
[23]
a while ago players were faster and would fit active tanks and nos would work all the time, so gallente did quite well, closing 20km distances in under 30 seconds. also players tended to look at balance issues in either 1v1 or blob VS blob situations and small-med gang setups were mostly ignored. so 1v1 mega vs amarr ship the mega would get close where its superior tracking/damage/damage type would beat most amarr ships
on my first gate camp one of the first things I noticed was that my optimal is 14km... wait that is how far away things decloak from me... BRILLIANT! plus our area had a bunch of people set up for kin/therm, so em had a nice hole to go for.
hell I had a 1km/s torp raven, now that was good for ratting
on close range weapons: personally I think the minmatar should have vastly more falloff so at current ranges they do more damage (short to mid range), and have a chance at getting a lucky hit at med-long range (although also sucks how falloff reduces hit quality and quantity so much). gallente should have absolute supremacy under 10km, amarr takes over around 15km. and minmatar gets a) in between, b) up close against amarr, c) kites gallente, d) speed tanks caldari
I guess the issue with that is that gallente doesn't fit into the current mid gang rr fleet metagame. although if you know you are going to be going up against a heavily amarr fleet get your ass a good warp in point
tbh I don't know how much of is it that some people are just whiny and lazy and will complain if they feel something else has even the slightest advantage?
or maybe the solution is each turret type should have its own formula and we should stop trying to force all turrets to perform as intended by squeezing so many variables into the same formula? it might make it a bit harder to generalize tracking info, but all the formulas in the worlds aren't anywhere near intuitive as compared to "get in there and melt face" or use your range advantage to control the flow of battle.
although the "rr gang" has to be in a tight bubble or else their RR is ineffective. so a mega should be pretty much the best choice there anyways. not to mention em is the worst type to shoot.
|
Leather Jack
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 07:45:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Manu Hermanus gallente should have absolute supremacy under 10km, amarr takes over around 15km. and minmatar gets a) in between, b) up close against amarr, c) kites gallente, d) speed tanks caldari
|
slightly sillydude
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 10:05:00 -
[25]
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?
|
Fon Revedhort
XMX Corp Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 10:16:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Fon Revedhort on 13/09/2009 10:16:26
I for one support the idea Scorch is the problem.
It could use a bit of rebalancing, like making it more a falloff ammo just like barrage or null. So that HP II hits at 15 for full damage and then it goes into 10 km of falloff (instead of current 22.5+5) and MP II - 30+20 (instead of 45+10).
Sounds reasonable to me. ---[center] Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 10:40:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Liang Nuren Fortunately, you have AN MF! Also, Barrage isn't as good as you think it is...
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.
Originally by: Liang Nuren But there's lots and lots of up sides: - EM isn't that bad. And most times, almost 50% of the damage comes from Thermal. - EM is that awesome vs Shield tanks (See: Frigs/Cruisers/Battlecruisers) - Lasers have fantastic tracking at range. - Optimal bonus mods affect ships with high optimal more - No hit quality degradation in optimal - Near blaster level base DPS at 3x the range - Damage projection over entire field of battle - "Instant" ammo change - Better overall ships as ship sizes increase - Ships get better as gang sizes increase. Gang sizes are increasing.
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. 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. 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
Originally by: Liang Nuren Eh, the list really goes on and on and on. Lasers have a lot of advantages. Thus, I'm training them on 2 characters now, and I'll be starting the third soon.
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)
Issues that needs to be looked at to ballance weapons: - M/L Projectile Ammunition, need more oomph. - M/L Blasters, increase tracking and/or optimal. Still haven't heard result of new tracking formula fix so may be a non-issue now. - T2 close range ammo. Useless in 99% of fights, ouclassed by faction ammo. Needs redesign.
|
Cpt Branko
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 11:11:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 13/09/2009 11:13:22
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.
The problem with Barrage is the nature of falloff firing; it's simply inferior to firing in optimal. It does make ACs a lot better then they would be without Barrage, but you shouldn't overestimate its effectiveness (and effective use of Barrage in a 20km sphere demands 3x falloffs on a T1 ship).
If I plan on engaging often from 20km in gangs, I will always take artilleries over ACs, because they do in fact outdamage them in that range bracket and get 3 extra rig slots.
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
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".
Vs smaller targets or something (where all guns will fail).
There is no reason not to track a target of equal size, in 1/2 AN MF optimal well enough with a minimum of traversal control. I deal with badly tracking guns on a daily basis - I tend to use medium arties a lot (and they're the worst tracking gun, bar none).
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
BiggestT
Caldari Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 12:43:00 -
[29]
If they reduce the ridiculous fitting req's for shield rr, shield tanks/ shield gangs would be stronger, em holes would have less of an impact, and lasers might not need a nerf.
Conversely it may make lasers more OP as they'd be essential to stop the shield-rr raven gangs *shrug* EVE Trivia EVE History
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.13 13:34:00 -
[30]
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?
Well I definitely see what you're saying, but how short is short? Do you need to lower the optimal on the guns themselves? Maybe less of a range bonus from Scorch?
|
|
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.
|
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 15:09:00 -
[61]
Originally by: James Lyrus
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.
Is small and medium artillery lame as well? Don't have minny anything on Caleb.
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 15:20:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
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.
But you were comparing the performance of the short range guns. And, now you are comparing a tier 2 BS to a tier 3 for tank?
Originally by: Liang Nuren
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
Yeah, of course the Apoc is, because of the ship bonus, duh. The megabeams themselves would bring up the rear for range of all BS guns, so on an Abaddon they would essentialy be insufficient for fleet. Isn't it much better to buff projectiles and the Tempest? Is another round of nerfing preferable?
|
Kaileen Starsong
Amarr Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 15:24:00 -
[63]
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.
Yeah, you could as well call this Scorch overboost. That said, for most intents and purposes the damage boost of ships firing AN MF was closer to 10-11%(drones and em/therm split, naturally) - which is not all that bad. You could say that Minnies got nerfed the hardest - but it was only the other side of their OP racial resist amount compared to other races(i.e. 10->20% Exp resist is 11% hardening, while 60->70% is 25% one).
Before nanonerf and resist-nerf lasers were pretty meh(but passable, you could fare quite ok if you used range advantage) vs armor, exception being BSes(namely, Arma) due to huge range. Then stuff got nerfed, Zealot got 5th turret(on which people have quite mixed opinion) and this passive(buffer)-shield-on everything started, so...
I still think that resist nerf and all other stuff except speed rebalancing didn't make lasers OP or anywhere close. What did was the huge boost of mid-range combat, even now I wouldn't call lasers OP, though.
|
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 15:25:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Lili Lu
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?
Yes, they are balanced with 1400 and 425. At the medium and small levels of guns, Beam lasers have exactly the same optimal and 1/2 the falloff as Artillery, while having 30% more DPS and 50% better tracking. This is true of Mega beam lasers (Megas actually have 70% better tracking).
Tachs on the other hand have 10% more optimal, 57% of the falloff, 42% more DPS, and 50% better tracking than 1400mm Artillery. I can do the math comparing rails if you want too. The stats are not balanced in line with any other tier of weaponry in the game.
And Amarr would not be left on the bottom. An Apocalypse fitted with Mega Beam lasers still has superior DPS within its range, and still outranges everything but a Rokh.
"Fixing" artillery based on comparison to Tachs would either break their stat balance trend at the large level, or overpower them at the medium and small levels.
And yes, Tachs are hard to fit and take a ton of cap to use. Does that stop you from fitting them? Does that stop you from using them to totally outclass any other ship at long range?
|
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 15:26:00 -
[65]
Liang, won quote you becauxse that post has too many sub quotes to fix and deal with :
But The point is a reasonable fit abaddon should win against a megatron if fight starts at average range. You cannot base balance also on a setup that is NOT gonna exist in eve ( tracking rigs instead of trimarks).
If abaddon would Loose ALWAYS to a megatron solo.. then why would anyone fly an abaddon solo? Things should not be ABSOLUTE in eve.
Blaster ships should win most of the close range fights, but should be ****d if they start the fight too far away. That is the main tradeoff. Blaster ships should rip a close range hac that decides to engage the megatron.... while the abaddon should be killed by the hac (due to tracking). Think the best way to achieve that is to return pulse lasers tracking to their old values. If you reduce range, pulse laser loose their flavor.. and that is not what eve needs! If you reduce damage, then they risk becoming purely crap against an armor tanked minmatar ship.
Also the theoretical combat you have described, includes drones and resists? Because although reduced since the EM resist changes, lasers still face a moderately higher resist against MOST PVP targets, and megatron can disha lot of explosive damage with besearkers.
Still an evidence that tracking can still be exploited is, last week I had a 1 vs 1 against an armageddon, while in my AB tempest (yes you call lol, I call it perfectly valid since made me win). With 1 track disruptor (with bad skills) and AB web and scrambler I was able to out-track the pulses ENOUGH so that a single lar was tanking 100% of the incoming damage.
Just increase this a bit and things will be alright.
|
Hull Blaster
Gallente Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 15:35:00 -
[66]
For me lasers are slightly overpowered because they're the only weapon type which allows you to switch ammo types instantly without waiting for a 10 second reload. This opens up tactical opportunities other weapon types just don't have. If I want to switch from anitmatter to thorium for the extra range optimals i have to wait 10 seconds... which in pvp is an eternity.
|
Caroline Nikon
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 15:36:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Seriously Bored d at the large level, or overpower them at the medium and small levels.
And yes, Tachs are hard to fit and take a ton of cap to use. Does that stop you from fitting them? Does that stop you from using them to totally outclass any other ship at long range?
In fact it does... its not easy to make a good apoc fit that uses 8 tachyons. Most people are forced to use 7 tachyons or drop 1 damage mods (that result in same dps as droping 1 gun).
Also try check how long an abaddon can feed tachyons on a sniper configuration .. 8 of them .. 3 damage mods? That is a serious disadvantage.
Tachyons are ok, they are MORE FLAVOR TO THE GAME! people need to stop trying to kill the differences. What balance need is OTHER differences that give OTHER advantages to OTHER races.
Like instead of trying to make arties have same range as rails... KEEP THEM SHORT RANGED. But give them a MASSIVE boost to alpha strike and short term dps, so that they are BY far the best sniper gun up to 150 km.
That is flavor.. with balance.. not simply changing skin of ships and weapons all alike each other.
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 15:56:00 -
[68]
With all these Battleship comparisons being thrown about, I take it the main issue is Large Energy Weapons then?
Astro said earlier that if you kept the range and damage but lost the tracking, then it would be ok. I thought tracking didn't matter however at long ranges? Especially against BS-sized targets firing at each other.
|
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:02:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Caroline Nikon
Tachyons are ok, they are MORE FLAVOR TO THE GAME! people need to stop trying to kill the differences. What balance need is OTHER differences that give OTHER advantages to OTHER races.
The issue is that Tachs are the only "extra flavor."
If 1000mm ACs existed that were 40% harder to fit, but had the optimal of Blasters, 10% more DPS than Pulses, and 20% more falloff than 800mm ACs, do you think anyone would complain? That would be the equivalent of Tach "flavor."
Originally by: Caroline Nikon
Like instead of trying to make arties have same range as rails... KEEP THEM SHORT RANGED. But give them a MASSIVE boost to alpha strike and short term dps, so that they are BY far the best sniper gun up to 150 km.
That is flavor.. with balance.. not simply changing skin of ships and weapons all alike each other.
What you don't understand is that if anything becomes "by far the best" to use at a particular range, it becomes FoTM. Hence, lasers.
I don't want Artillery to have the optimal of Rails. I want it to have the same optimal as lasers, twice the falloff of lasers, 30% less DPS than lasers, and 50% of the tracking. The same balance and "flavor" that currently exists for medium and small weapons.
(I want it to have a larger clip, but that's for a different thread.)
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Clown Punchers. Clown Punchers Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:05:00 -
[70]
A lot of minmatar hate being thrown around.
I'd like to remind everyone that the rupture is capable of 500 dps, and that arties alpha higher then any other weapons platform.
But you know, according to everyone (Liang and Astro) projectiles suck.
Originally by: F'nog
Originally by: Stareatthesun No no no ... Polaris is where CCP keeps the death star that will destroy eve when the servers shut down.
Thankfully I've got Interceptors trained to V. S |
|
Caroline Nikon
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:08:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Seriously Bored
Originally by: Caroline Nikon
Tachyons are ok, they are MORE FLAVOR TO THE GAME! people need to stop trying to kill the differences. What balance need is OTHER differences that give OTHER advantages to OTHER races.
The issue is that Tachs are the only "extra flavor."
If 1000mm ACs existed that were 40% harder to fit, but had the optimal of Blasters, 10% more DPS than Pulses, and 20% more falloff than 800mm ACs, do you think anyone would complain? That would be the equivalent of Tach "flavor."
Originally by: Caroline Nikon
Like instead of trying to make arties have same range as rails... KEEP THEM SHORT RANGED. But give them a MASSIVE boost to alpha strike and short term dps, so that they are BY far the best sniper gun up to 150 km.
That is flavor.. with balance.. not simply changing skin of ships and weapons all alike each other.
What you don't understand is that if anything becomes "by far the best" to use at a particular range, it becomes FoTM. Hence, lasers.
I don't want Artillery to have the optimal of Rails. I want it to have the same optimal as lasers, twice the falloff of lasers, 30% less DPS than lasers, and 50% of the tracking. The same balance and "flavor" that currently exists for medium and small weapons.
(I want it to have a larger clip, but that's for a different thread.)
and can't you see that this is poor and limited balancing? You can pretty much add a 1600mm arties that scale on same level as tachyons. THat adds to the game. You want to subtract from the game!
Subtractign never makes people happy!
Outside of apocalypse.. 1400mm are BETTER than tachyons! Yes that from someone that can use both t2 ones with both races BS at level 5.
Tachyons just seem over because of their synergy with apoc bonus and HUGE capacitor that makes the only weapon in game that TRULLY drinks cap.. to not have to bother with it. As I said, try using tachyons on an abaddon and see how good they are at a fleet fight even compared to a LOL 1400mm T2 on maelstrom.
They might need adjustment.. but that is no excuse to removign them from game sicne this would DIMINISH the game.
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:09:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Megan Maynard A lot of minmatar hate being thrown around.
I'd like to remind everyone that the rupture is capable of 500 dps, and that arties alpha higher then any other weapons platform.
But you know, according to everyone (Liang and Astro) projectiles suck.
I don't think its that Megan. You notice most comparisons being made between battleships sized weapons. In addition. I think Liang and Astro are Minmatar enthusiast and mainly Eve enthusiasts, hence their rallying behind weapon balance.
No one hates Minny. Its just that no one flies them.
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Clown Punchers. Clown Punchers Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:14:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Seriously Bored
Originally by: Caroline Nikon
Tachyons are ok, they are MORE FLAVOR TO THE GAME! people need to stop trying to kill the differences. What balance need is OTHER differences that give OTHER advantages to OTHER races.
The issue is that Tachs are the only "extra flavor."
If 1000mm ACs existed that were 40% harder to fit, but had the optimal of Blasters, 10% more DPS than Pulses, and 20% more falloff than 800mm ACs, do you think anyone would complain? That would be the equivalent of Tach "flavor."
Originally by: Caroline Nikon
Like instead of trying to make arties have same range as rails... KEEP THEM SHORT RANGED. But give them a MASSIVE boost to alpha strike and short term dps, so that they are BY far the best sniper gun up to 150 km.
That is flavor.. with balance.. not simply changing skin of ships and weapons all alike each other.
What you don't understand is that if anything becomes "by far the best" to use at a particular range, it becomes FoTM. Hence, lasers.
I don't want Artillery to have the optimal of Rails. I want it to have the same optimal as lasers, twice the falloff of lasers, 30% less DPS than lasers, and 50% of the tracking. The same balance and "flavor" that currently exists for medium and small weapons.
(I want it to have a larger clip, but that's for a different thread.)
Arties have a longer range then lasers btw. It's the amarr apoc that us minmatar are jealous of. They are also higher in alpha and damage. The reloading is the biggest *****.
When people say amarr BS's hit farther and are better for fleet stuff, they are talking about the apoc.
When people say that lasers perform better mid range, they are talking about the zealot.
These two ships are pretty damn good, but the zealot isn't exactly cap stable, and the apoc doesn't touch the damage of a tempest.
Originally by: F'nog
Originally by: Stareatthesun No no no ... Polaris is where CCP keeps the death star that will destroy eve when the servers shut down.
Thankfully I've got Interceptors trained to V. S |
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:15:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Megan Maynard A lot of minmatar hate being thrown around.
I'd like to remind everyone that the rupture is capable of 500 dps, and that arties alpha higher then any other weapons platform.
But you know, according to everyone (Liang and Astro) projectiles suck.
Now check why basically ALL The threads about projectiles have the word LARGE written on them....
then check that rupture has nothing LARGE about it.
Medium AC are great and medium arties are okish. Even CCp admited that large projectiles have issues.
|
Tom Peeping
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:22:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Seriously Bored Edited by: Seriously Bored on 14/09/2009 15:36:35 And yes, Tachs are hard to fit and take a ton of cap to use. Does that stop you from fitting them? Does that stop you from using them to totally outclass any other ship at long range, on a ship with no damage bonus whatsoever?
Um... actually, when you run out of cap? Yes it does stop you from using them to totally outclass any other ship at long range. You have to very seriously nerf your ship to fit a full rack of tachs... to ignore the various nerfs one must do, and compare with ships that don't have to totally nerf... and then compare only DPS is sorta LOLTASTIC!
Way to ignore reality and substitute your own.
|
Kaileen Starsong
Amarr Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:22:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Caleb Fury
I don't think its that Megan. You notice most comparisons being made between battleships sized weapons. In addition. I think Liang and Astro are Minmatar enthusiast and mainly Eve enthusiasts, hence their rallying behind weapon balance.
No one hates Minny. Its just that no one flies them.
More like Spreadsheet Online enthusiasts (ok-ok, that actually applies more to Liang, Astro's style is usually trolling with a sense ).
On BS level laser advantages just get more pronounced, which actually allowed them not to suck back in days where lasers were considered meh. Large ACs/Arties are quite horrible though, for various reasons. Blasters/Rails are in better shape, but Rails were never uber-dps/alpha-at-range weapons, while blasters lost quite a lot after web nerf due to their close-range nature.
Oh, and there're of course not much people flying Minnies on forums, try looking in-game ;)
|
SuiJuris
Absinthe Brothers Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:27:00 -
[77]
Edited by: SuiJuris on 14/09/2009 16:27:39 FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME QUIT COMPAIRING ANYTHING TO LARGE PROJECTILES, they are hopelessly broken and any weapon when compaired to them looks amazing.
For the people who Want balance, Projectiles need fixed altogether (at the battleship lvl)
On another lvl the only reason a Abaddon would beat a Megathron in a 1v1 is the MASSIVE tank and the Abaddon still wouldn't win if the Megathron had enough common sense to fit a single large Neut, Case and Point in a friendly 1v1 with a corp mate I put a Geddon, standard fit against his Abaddon 1v1, I lost but he was in 10% armor because he couldn't keep his guns running.
At the battleship lvl nothing but EHP and DPS matters though right? Cause Heavy Neuts arn't useful for anything, nor are Tracking disruptors in those extra mids that other races have, nor is having enough midslots for dual eccm.
Amarr is the Slugfest race, Thats all the tricks they have at the tech 1 lvl, Get into range and slug it out. shouldn't they be good at it? --- http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1177119 |
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Clown Punchers. Clown Punchers Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:29:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Seishi Maru
Originally by: Megan Maynard A lot of minmatar hate being thrown around.
I'd like to remind everyone that the rupture is capable of 500 dps, and that arties alpha higher then any other weapons platform.
But you know, according to everyone (Liang and Astro) projectiles suck.
Now check why basically ALL The threads about projectiles have the word LARGE written on them....
then check that rupture has nothing LARGE about it.
Medium AC are great and medium arties are okish. Even CCp admited that large projectiles have issues.
No, what they have a problem with is: 1. Large arties have terrible clip size if you use EMP. (Don't use EMP?) 2. Large autos are terrible on the phoon. (Not really a gun boat anyway.) 3. The amarr line of ships, aka the apoc, performs at longer range. (The minmatar have no range bonus battleships.) 4. At mid range pulse lasers outperform autos. (Alpha is more important then DPS in a fleet fight.)
So what I garner from all this is some people want the minmatar to have Range, Damage, capless weapons, and the ability to change damage types.
Which would basically make the minmatar guns stupidly overpowered. CCP will not do this.
What CCP did do is fix the bonus's on the Nag. What CCP should do is make tracking computers apply to falloff as well as optimal as the counter, tracking disrupters, does both of these things.
My tempest out damages everything but another tempest. The phoon is only outperformed by the domi in a fleet support role, and that is will change once the shield and armor values are flipped in the next patch. And my maelstrom is hands down the nastiest tank/gank combo in the t1 field of battleships. (1400's with 3 gyros and a stupidly massive tank is pretty lawl.)
Originally by: F'nog
Originally by: Stareatthesun No no no ... Polaris is where CCP keeps the death star that will destroy eve when the servers shut down.
Thankfully I've got Interceptors trained to V. S |
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:30:00 -
[79]
Originally by: SuiJuris Edited by: SuiJuris on 14/09/2009 16:27:39 FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME QUIT COMPAIRING ANYTHING TO LARGE PROJECTILES, they are hopelessly broken and any weapon when compaired to them looks amazing.
For the people who Want balance, Projectiles need fixed altogether (at the battleship lvl)
On another lvl the only reason a Abaddon would beat a Megathron in a 1v1 is the MASSIVE tank and the Abaddon still wouldn't win if the Megathron had enough common sense to fit a single large Neut, Case and Point in a friendly 1v1 with a corp mate I put a Geddon, standard fit against his Abaddon 1v1, I lost but he was in 10% armor because he couldn't keep his guns running.
At the battleship lvl nothing but EHP and DPS matters though right? Cause Heavy Neuts arn't useful for anything, nor are Tracking disruptors in those extra mids that other races have, nor is having enough midslots for dual eccm.
Amarr is the Slugfest race, Thats all the tricks they have at the tech 1 lvl, Get into range and slug it out. shouldn't they be good at it?
I thought Blaster boats were supposed to be sluggers?
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:42:00 -
[80]
Partial solution pt.1: Make active tanking viable again by a massive buff to local repairers thus giving everyone (especially Amarr) something to burn their cap on instead of the infinite plates. Gives the capless nature of projectiles a chance to actually matter and allows for neutralizers to have a tangible impact.
Partial solution pt.2: Increase M/L projectile ammo damage across the board, +15-20% should allow artillery and acs to compete directly with other weapons. Small balance is actually pretty good at present since tracking plays a much larger role in the little-leagues.
Can't find the page again, but BattleClinic once had a FoTM page which showed what ships were being used based on the killboard entries. Beam Zealot took top spot from Falcon immediately after speed changes if I recall. Would be interesting to see what such a list looks like now that people have had a chance to come to terms with MWD disabling scramblers, AF buff (aka. nano-nerf) and ECM range decrease.
|
|
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:43:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Caroline Nikon
and can't you see that this is poor and limited balancing? You can pretty much add a 1600mm arties that scale on same level as tachyons. THat adds to the game. You want to subtract from the game!
Subtractign never makes people happy!
If you wanted to add 1600mm Arties and 650mm rails to the game that had the same power ratio to Tachs that 1400mm and 425mm has to Mega Beam, and were equally as hard to use, I'd be happy. Balance is balance to me.
Quote:
Tachyons just seem over because of their synergy with apoc bonus and HUGE capacitor that makes the only weapon in game that TRULLY drinks cap.. to not have to bother with it. As I said, try using tachyons on an abaddon and see how good they are at a fleet fight even compared to a LOL 1400mm T2 on maelstrom.
Right, Tachs wouldn't be as bad of an issue if they didn't seem purpose built for the Apoc, or vice versa. The problem is that they give one ship the best of every world: best damage, best tracking, almost best range. Even with one unused turret.
An Abaddon (or Geddon) might not be able to fit Tachs well, but how do they do with Mega Beam? They'd still be able to melt the Maelstrom, even if they had to stop to regen cap occasionally.
As it stands, two turret systems were given rifles, while the third was given a GPS-guided rocket launcher. Whether you take the monster weapon away, or give one to the other turret systems, we need balance somewhere.
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:48:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Megan Maynard Arties have a longer range then lasers btw. It's the amarr apoc that us minmatar are jealous of. They are also higher in alpha and damage. The reloading is the biggest *****.
When people say amarr BS's hit farther and are better for fleet stuff, they are talking about the apoc. When people say that lasers perform better mid range, they are talking about the zealot.
These two ships are pretty damn good, but the zealot isn't exactly cap stable, and the apoc doesn't touch the damage of a tempest.
I too fly both races and can agree with this. The optimal bonuses on the zealot and apoc exagerate the "short range" gun differences. Also, with projectile optimal (Munnin) bonus applying to shorter base optimals, and having no range bonused BS, and the irritating clip sizes, Minmatar arty is left with substandard performance.
These deficiencies can be addressed. Give the Tempest a falloff bonus (in exchange for the damage bonus imo to differentiate it from the Mael, but others might want to swap for the rof bonus, whatever). It then becomes a better sniping platform, and ac platform. Maybe drop a high on the Munnin for another mid (allows another tracking computer, whatever). These would be independent of any changes to projectiles (for instance increased clip size, and why isn't fusion the highest damage ammo?).
The point is too many people/cows whining about the always greener grass across the fence calling for it to be sprayed/nerfed, without having experience with the mainteance or taste of both grasses.
|
Spaztick
Terminal Impact Kairakau
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:00:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Megan Maynard A lot of minmatar hate being thrown around.
I'd like to remind everyone that the rupture is capable of 500 dps, and that arties alpha higher then any other weapons platform.
But you know, according to everyone (Liang and Astro) projectiles suck.
So what you're saying is because the rupture is a decent cruiser that that makes Tachyons fine? Nevermind that artillery has the lowest optimal, tracking, dps or clip size of all the LR weapons, it has the highest alpha! That makes it good guys!
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 ;( |
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:05:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Spaztick
Originally by: Megan Maynard A lot of minmatar hate being thrown around.
I'd like to remind everyone that the rupture is capable of 500 dps, and that arties alpha higher then any other weapons platform.
But you know, according to everyone (Liang and Astro) projectiles suck.
So what you're saying is because the rupture is a decent cruiser that that makes Tachyons fine? Nevermind that artillery has the lowest optimal, tracking, dps or clip size of all the LR weapons, it has the highest alpha! That makes it good guys!
Way to not read everything Megan has said.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:27:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Caleb Fury Is small and medium artillery lame as well? Don't have minny anything on Caleb.
Can't speak for small arty, but med arty is only useful for frig popping.
Quote: But you were comparing the performance of the short range guns. And, now you are comparing a tier 2 BS to a tier 3 for tank?
Would you prefer that I compared the Abaddon to the Hype? No, I compared ships doing a role.
Quote: Yeah, of course the Apoc is, because of the ship bonus, duh. The megabeams themselves would bring up the rear for range of all BS guns
Ship bonuses matter. And Megabeams, meet 1400 Artillery. Or hell, 1200 Artillery.
Quote: Is another round of nerfing preferable?
The game is broken as is. I don't care either way how it's fixed.
Originally by: Seishi Maru But The point is a reasonable fit abaddon should win against a megatron if fight starts at average range.
I expect it would. The question was what would happen if the fight started at 5km.
Quote: You cannot base balance also on a setup that is NOT gonna exist in eve ( tracking rigs instead of trimarks).
I fully plan to fit my Abaddon or Geddon with at least 2 tracking rigs. Way cheaper than Trimarks and utterly obsoletes the Mega.
Quote: But you know, according to everyone (Liang and Astro) projectiles suck.
I'm not attacking you for having made a "bad decision" in training. No need to get defensive. And it's hardly only me that says they suck... or maybe you missed the OVERWHELMING RESPONSE from the players when CCP asked what was wrong with Eve?
Quote: 1400mm are BETTER than tachyons!
No they are not. That is an utterly indefensible position.
Quote: but that is no excuse to removign them from game
I agree. No need to remove them. Far and away the best answer for long range weaponry is to boost projectiles, not nerf lasers.
Quote: Oh, and there're of course not much people flying Minnies on forums, try looking in-game ;)
Speaking of looking in-game: - Minmatar BS's are far and away the least bought BS's. This isn't because they aren't ever lost. - Amarr is acknowledged as FOTM as far as skill point allocation goes in the latest Econ blog.
Not sure how you can get more "in game" than CCP monitoring what we all do and commenting on it.
Quote: At the battleship lvl nothing but EHP and DPS matters though right? Cause Heavy Neuts arn't useful for anything, nor are Tracking disruptors in those extra mids that other races have, nor is having enough midslots for dual eccm.
Hvy neuts are useful, and so is TDs and ECCM. But Hvy Neuts, TDs, and ECCM become less useful as gang sizes go up. Which they are.
Originally by: Megan Maynard (Don't use EMP?)
YAY lets nerf our own DPS!
Quote: Large autos are terrible on the phoonpest
Fixed it for you.
Quote: (Alpha is more important then DPS in a fleet fight.)
100% untenable position, easily and repeatedly proven wrong. The same as many of your other arguments.
Quote: The point is too many people/cows whining about the always greener grass across the fence calling for it to be sprayed/nerfed, without having experience with the mainteance or taste of both grasses.
And too many cows that have tasted the super green grass refusing to stop being overpowered. The same kind of defensiveness was brought up when people talked about nerfing the ecm, damps, dictors, nanos, nanos, etc.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:33:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
No, what they have a problem with is: 1. Large arties have terrible clip size if you use EMP. (Don't use EMP?) 2. Large autos are terrible on the phoon. (Not really a gun boat anyway.) 3. The amarr line of ships, aka the apoc, performs at longer range. (The minmatar have no range bonus battleships.) 4. At mid range pulse lasers outperform autos. (Alpha is more important then DPS in a fleet fight.)
Plenty of issues with this:
1. Large arties have a terrible clip size regardless of ammo type. They are affected four times as much by reload time as rails. 2. Large autos are terrible on the Tempest as well. 3. True. 4. Pulse laser outperform ACs at ALL ranges. DPS matters more than Alpha in any situation where you can't one-shot something. And two rounds of HP buffs took care of that.
Originally by: Megan Maynard
My tempest out damages everything but another tempest.
You Tempest hits something hard once, in the time that an Apoc can hit something 4/5ths as hard 1.5x as often. It doesn't out damage anything but a gank-fit Scorpion, and we know how common those are.
|
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:35:00 -
[87]
Me? Trolling? Why I never....
@Megan: while I won't really bother to respond, saying that those asking for a projectile buff want super pwn weapons with no downsides is pretty baseless.
|
Kaileen Starsong
Amarr Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:39:00 -
[88]
@Liang
Med Arties are quite passable compared to Large ones. If you fit them on Hurricane Can be notably better than ACs in 5+ gangs.
Oh and.. don't tell me you're using EMP as default ammo in arties? (regarding that remark of "let's nerf our DPS ourselves")
|
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:42:00 -
[89]
Edited by: AstroPhobic on 14/09/2009 17:45:52
Originally by: AstroPhobic Me? Trolling? Why I never....
@Megan: while I won't really bother to respond, saying that those asking for a projectile buff want super pwn weapons with no downsides is pretty baseless.
Quote: Astro said earlier that if you kept the range and damage but lost the tracking, then it would be ok. I thought tracking didn't matter however at long ranges? Especially against BS-sized targets firing at each other.
To a certain extent. Part of the issue right now is a geddon at 10km can track better than a mega at 5km (I pulled that out of my ass but I think it's correct). Lasers having good tracking at 30-45km isn't the issue, but still having very good tracking at close ranges is. It's too comparable to the mega at close range and is completely superior at mid range.
Ed: oops, pressed quote instead of edit. I blame my phone.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:50:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Kaileen Starsong @Liang
Med Arties are quite passable compared to Large ones. If you fit them on Hurricane Can be notably better than ACs in 5+ gangs.
Oh and.. don't tell me you're using EMP as default ammo in arties? (regarding that remark of "let's nerf our DPS ourselves")
I'm a huge fan of 720mm Artycanes. However, I feel that their role is primarily limited to ganking frigs (which I love to do shamelessly). And WRT RF EMP: When I went from RF PP/Fusion to RF EMP, I'd say I doubled my Frigate 1-shot rate. Previously, I'd just leave them in about half hull when they warped out. :)
And if you're referring to sniping at range in artillery... I try not to do that in general. IMO, if you're going to use artillery, play to their strengths. And artillery strength is up close putting the alpha on someone, not out at range doing "meh" alpha where DPS catches up oh so much faster.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
|
Kaileen Starsong
Amarr Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:56:00 -
[91]
Edited by: Kaileen Starsong on 14/09/2009 17:57:38 Well, that's a bit of a difference in usage, heh. I'm more thinking about BC/Cruiser gangs. You'd have basically 3 ways to fly Hurricane - ACs+Plate(works nice), ACs+LSE(comedy-fit most of the time - OH YEAH IT'S GOOD AT STAYING ALIVE) and Arties+LSE. With LSEs you'd want to stay at distance and arties really can and do outperform ACs at 15km+. Allows for much better gang efficiency, too ;)
PS. That's for low-sec, 0.0 is different, naturally.
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 18:10:00 -
[92]
Edited by: Lili Lu on 14/09/2009 18:15:15
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Quote: The point is too many people/cows whining about the always greener grass across the fence calling for it to be sprayed/nerfed, without having experience with the mainteance or taste of both grasses.
And too many cows that have tasted the super green grass refusing to stop being overpowered. The same kind of defensiveness was brought up when people talked about nerfing the ecm, damps, dictors, nanos, nanos, etc. -Liang
And where did those nerfs get us. Recons with wierd roles and still no balance (ecm still preferable). Broken damp ships. Broken web ships. NOS being sorta a joke module (I'll suck your blood uh until we have equal amounts (v-v) ). Weak dictors...
Time to stop the madness. And, I think you really agree anyway "I agree. No need to remove them. Far and away the best answer for long range weaponry is to boost projectiles, not nerf lasers."
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 18:47:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Kaileen Starsong Well, that's a bit of a difference in usage, heh. I'm more thinking about BC/Cruiser gangs. You'd have basically 3 ways to fly Hurricane - ACs+Plate(works nice), ACs+LSE(comedy-fit most of the time - OH YEAH IT'S GOOD AT STAYING ALIVE) and Arties+LSE. With LSEs you'd want to stay at distance and arties really can and do outperform ACs at 15km+. Allows for much better gang efficiency, too ;)
PS. That's for low-sec, 0.0 is different, naturally.
IMO, there's 2 ways to fly a Cane: - Vagacane - Artycane (RF EMP, gank any frigs/inties/dictors you see, etc)
And yes, I know about Arties vs ACs at 15km, but they lack the tackle defense that the Vagacane has (which is important in 0.0 and lowsec both).
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 19:21:00 -
[94]
I don't know why this thread is about canes now, but I prefer acs on a shieldcane simply because if I wanted to fit arties I would rather just fly a harb.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
SuiJuris
Absinthe Brothers Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 19:34:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega I don't know why this thread is about canes now, but I prefer acs on a shieldcane simply because if I wanted to fit arties I would rather just fly a harb. Because Lasers are better at Mid Range...
Made it swing full circle for ya Dav, now the thread might get back on topic --- http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1177119 |
MukkBarovian
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 19:42:00 -
[96]
Edited by: MukkBarovian on 14/09/2009 19:47:53 #1 You cannot buff active tanks unless you've completely given up on solo pvp. People need to be able to kill each other. And then even if you buff them alot people in large fleets will still prefer RR, because RR scales with gang size. At some point RR will outpreform local tank guaranteed.
All buffing local tank would do if **** over solo players and encourage a minimum of blobbing to just kill someone. This is not going to fix the problem that blasters/lasers are only balanced at near 1v1 situations.
#2 Lasers do less DPS than blasters by a moderate chunk. Something like 80% to 70% of blaster DPS. They dont get 20% to 30% more range though. To go from blaster optimals to laser optimals you multiply by whole numbers. Lasers also have an absolute tracking that is pretty crap. The problem is that the tracking formula is borked. Range always increases tracking preformance. So at laser optimals, they track comparatively better than blasters do at their optimals.
#3 The tracking formula is totally borked. It takes into account angular velocity and signature radius. Angular velocity is a function of how fast a ship is going and how far away that ship is. The further away a ship is, the smaller the angular velocity just like geometry IRL.
Signature radius doesn't ever change. This is a problem. If you went to a marksman, and asked him which was easier to hit: A stationary target 10m away or a stationary target 1 km away? He would tell you the one right in front of him would be a turkey shoot. You can confirm this with a squirtgun if you really need to. Stationary targets that are farther away are harder to hit because they physically appear smaller to you.
Simple testing with an EVE ship will tell you completely the opposite. Signature radius doesn't scale with range. It stays constant.
If they fixed the tracking formula so that signature radius also depended on range it would go a long way towards fixing blasters and lasers.
#4 The RRBS fleet depends completely on gank/tank. Amarr BS have the best gank/tank combination at the expense of all utility. Utility doesn't matter much in huge fleet fights.
#5 ^This is all large guns. When you go down from battleships t1 Amarr ship tend to suck really bad with the exception of the harbinger, and the arbitrator which isn't even a laser boat.
By comparison Minmatar have one of the nicest lineup of sub-battleship t1 ships in the game.
The difference probably has something to do with the mobility of battleships compared to smaller craft and the nature of projectiles.
Projectiles, like lasers, do a fraction of the damage of blasters. About 80% - 70%. Instead of optimal they get falloff. But they retain tracking that is almost as good as blasters. This means that they do moderately good dps at short range. When they go to optimal + falloff their dps is halved but the tracking is very good. This is why a vagabond can pop a disruptor fit ceptor orbiting at 24km very quickly.
Small fast minmatar ships can take advantage of this. At one end of the spectrum a minmatar pilot can close much more quickly to 0 than a plated galente one. The minmatar pilot will be able to do more damage on the way in because falloff lets them start shooting sooner. And fast minmatar boats will reach optimal range sooner. If the target dies relatively quickly a nanod shield-buffer minmatar ac boat can easily outdamage a galente blaster boat simply because it takes more time for the galente to put the fury of his guns on the primary.
If a small minmatar ship is fighting a laser boat he can give the lasor boat all kinds of issues by just orbiting it at 500m. He will outdamage it and outtrack it.
On the other side of the spectrum a minmatar cruiser sized ship can orbit an enemy outside of web/scram range, hold range unless a tackle frigate comes in, and put a steady stream of low dps on the target. Some targets like blaster boats would be unable to hit back.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 19:53:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Liang Nuren on 14/09/2009 19:53:23
Originally by: MukkBarovian When they go to optimal + falloff their dps is halved but the tracking is very good.
Your opinion is very well reasoned, but you're lacking some information here. At optimal + falloff, DPS isn't half... it's ~38.5% if you totally neglect tracking. The reason a Vaga ****s over inties is because inties really have no Hitpoints and there's a falloff bonus that makes it reasonable to deal damage beyond 13km. A zealot can do the same (at range).
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Iria Ahrens
Amarr 101st Space Marine Force Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:13:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Iria Ahrens on 14/09/2009 23:14:22 Why isn't it half. The tracking guides all say falloff = 50% fewer hits. So should be half right? What little detail am I overlooking? --
EVE is about balls, brains, and paranoia. SP comes in a distant fourth place. |
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:14:00 -
[99]
Edited by: Liang Nuren on 14/09/2009 23:15:26
Originally by: Iria Ahrens Why isn't it half. The tracking guides all say falloff = 50% fewer hits. So should be half right?
50% fewer hits, yes. But chance to hit affects hit quality.
Original Formula by Naughty Boy ((1.0/2.0) ** ((((Transv/(Range*Tracking))*(Sig_Res/Sig_Rad)) ** 2) +((max(0,Range-Optimal))/Falloff) ** 2))
Original hit quality formula by KzIg (http://www.scrapheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?p=114333#114333) Expected damage per shot = normal damage * [min(chance to hit, 1%)*3 + max(0,chance to hit - 1%)*(0.99+chance to hit)/2]
-Liang
Ed: Also, I have personally verified KzIg's formula. It seems to hold up within 1% (which I attribute to human (me) error).
-- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:41:00 -
[100]
I would support a slight nerf to lazors if in exchange they made their cap usage along the same lines as other races and gave Amarr ships back their wasted ship bonus that is there JUST so they can use lazors. You don't see Gallente ships wasting a bonus just so it can use a blaster. Or Minmatard ships wasting a bonus JUST so it can use it's racial weapon.
That being said, I think Lazors are fine. It just makes other races have to think how they fight the Amarr.
|
|
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:53:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning Or Minmatard ships wasting a bonus JUST so it can use it's racial weapon.
Clueless poster spotted!
All minnie ships have a built in 5% ROF bonus to counter the weak base stats on projectiles, in an attempt to keep them off other races' ships.
Quote: That being said, I think Lazors are fine. It just makes other races have to think how they fight the Amarr.
I lol'd
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:59:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning I would support a slight nerf to lazors if in exchange they made their cap usage along the same lines as other races and gave Amarr ships back their wasted ship bonus that is there JUST so they can use lazors. You don't see Gallente ships wasting a bonus just so it can use a blaster. Or Minmatard ships wasting a bonus JUST so it can use it's racial weapon.
That being said, I think Lazors are fine. It just makes other races have to think how they fight the Amarr.
What secondary ship bonus would YOU propose if the laser cap usage was changed? If they were all the same, or used about the same amount of cap, I would guess that people would start putting lasers on everything.
|
Tom Peeping
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:00:00 -
[103]
Originally by: BiggestT If they reduce the ridiculous fitting req's for shield rr, shield tanks/ shield gangs would be stronger, em holes would have less of an impact, and lasers might not need a nerf.
Conversely it may make lasers more OP as they'd be essential to stop the shield-rr raven gangs *shrug*
Uggg... shield rep is already so much more efficient than armor rep that this is just silly. The only reason armor is the pvp king at the moment is because it's better at buffer. If they make shield RR even easier to fit, honestly it moves to overpowered.
|
Tom Peeping
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:06:00 -
[104]
Originally by: MukkBarovian Edited by: MukkBarovian on 14/09/2009 19:47:53
Signature radius doesn't ever change. This is a problem. If you went to a marksman, and asked him which was easier to hit: A stationary target 10m away or a stationary target 1 km away? He would tell you the one right in front of him would be a turkey shoot. You can confirm this with a squirtgun if you really need to. Stationary targets that are farther away are harder to hit because they physically appear smaller to you.
Just pointing out that is as it should be. Signature radius and direct vision are not the same thing. No offense mate but you're comparing apples and oranges with your marksman example.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:15:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning ...
Protip: fit a cap booster. Protip: rate of fire is the Minmatar racial skill that makes the weapons useful.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:21:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Tom Peeping
Originally by: MukkBarovian Edited by: MukkBarovian on 14/09/2009 19:47:53
Signature radius doesn't ever change. This is a problem. If you went to a marksman, and asked him which was easier to hit: A stationary target 10m away or a stationary target 1 km away? He would tell you the one right in front of him would be a turkey shoot. You can confirm this with a squirtgun if you really need to. Stationary targets that are farther away are harder to hit because they physically appear smaller to you.
Just pointing out that is as it should be. Signature radius and direct vision are not the same thing. No offense mate but you're comparing apples and oranges with your marksman example.
It actually does make sense, but trying to bring realistic sense into video game balance is a mistake.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Deathbarrage
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:24:00 -
[107]
Ok please stop throwing numbers and get a grip. Please realize that pure numbers, damage downrange, tracking, don't really mean anything if you don't put it in an actual situation or talk about an actual ship. Guns are only a small part of today's eve pvp scene. I hear alot of very situational advantages of lasers. I understand that amarr has a niche ad mid-range, this in fact has been the main point of whining from the amarr players (''Mid-range is no pvp field''). Tbh your expectations aren't quite realistic. Gallente players don't want lasers to be as powerfull downrage as they are now because they want to be able to close the gap while repping peacefully, get ''under the guns'' and be able to effectively reach their nich, short rane, 10 out of 10 times so they can **** amarr. Minmatar want to be able to not be tracked so they can beat laser boats 10 out of 10 times. I haven't actually heard alot of complaining from caldari ships though i suppose that may have something to do with the fact that amarr ships are so ridiculously easy to EW down to a piece of flying dishwasher.
All in all please take a step back and put into perspective the very thin area of the current laser niche. You can throw numbers all you want and it will in fact sound pretty serious but at the end of the day it will come down to the fact that if you don't want to fight an amarr ship in its limited niche-area, you won't have to. You can always warp out (and perhaps warp back in at range more to your liking). On the other hand, if an amarr ship is in either the minmatar or gallente's area of expertise, you can't warp out, you're screwed. Put a megathron, dominix or a hyperion vs an amarr ship under 20km i won't hear any of you guys whining. No matter how you put it a minmatar ship within 20km can destroy a pulse-fitted ship. Ask all the happy sleipnir pilots or crazy AC maelstroms, who i haven't seen in this forum post yet anyway. Just take a step back, stop throwing meaningless numbers and put into perspective the actual (not situational) relevance of a 45km pulse laser optimal, other than the fact that you actually have to think about how you're going to react when you see an amarr ship these days.
I've (almost) only talked about the BS-sized weapons/ships but tbh i think the same goes for cruiser-sized ships. As a matter of fact it's easier for a cruiser-sized ships to dictate range because the amarr ''niche scorch optimal'' is inside tackling range, bar the zealot.
I'm not complaining amarr suck, on the contrary, just saying that now that amarr ships are actually viable, don't try to hit it back down just because you trained a fotm a couple of years ago and are too shortsighted to adapt.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:27:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Tom Peeping Just pointing out that is as it should be. Signature radius and direct vision are not the same thing. No offense mate but you're comparing apples and oranges with your marksman example.
You're totally correct, but there's no logical inconsistency in what he said. In Eve, sig radius is treated as "how big something is" - from scanning to missiles to guns. He was saying that range should play a role in how big something appears to be to your guns. WHICH IS TRUE.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:29:00 -
[109]
Edited by: AstroPhobic on 15/09/2009 00:32:34
Originally by: Deathbarrage All in all please take a step back and put into perspective the very thin area of the current laser niche.
I read this and stopped reading, and I also stopped taking you seriously.
The problem with lasers is that they fill EVERY niche. And yes, I have t2 weapons for every race/ 60m+ combat SP between my main/alt.. don't kid yourself, and stop whining like someone stole your big bag of candy.
|
Ecky X
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:39:00 -
[110]
I'd like to point out that "getting under his guns" becomes meaningless the moment a 2nd enemy ship is on the field.
|
|
Deathbarrage
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:43:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Ecky X I'd like to point out that "getting under his guns" becomes meaningless the moment a 2nd enemy ship is on the field.
a so now you are implying you should be able to kill 2 amarr ships, and if you can't lasers are OP
nice
add to the equasion a gangmember of yours with 2 TD's...
|
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:45:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Deathbarrage
Originally by: Ecky X I'd like to point out that "getting under his guns" becomes meaningless the moment a 2nd enemy ship is on the field.
a so now you are implying you should be able to kill 2 amarr ships, and if you can't lasers are OP
nice
add to the equasion a gangmember of yours with 2 TD's...
Quoting failure.
Honestly dude if you don't know anything about eve combat just don't respond. The situation applies to 2 on 2 as well, d'oh
|
Iria Ahrens
Amarr 101st Space Marine Force Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 00:48:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 14/09/2009 23:15:26
Originally by: Iria Ahrens Why isn't it half. The tracking guides all say falloff = 50% fewer hits. So should be half right?
50% fewer hits, yes. But chance to hit affects hit quality.
Ohh, thank you Liang. That makes sense now that you point it out. --
EVE is about balls, brains, and paranoia. SP comes in a distant fourth place. |
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 01:00:00 -
[114]
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Originally by: Twilight Mourning Or Minmatard ships wasting a bonus JUST so it can use it's racial weapon.
Clueless poster spotted!
All minnie ships have a built in 5% ROF bonus to counter the weak base stats on projectiles, in an attempt to keep them off other races' ships.
Quote: That being said, I think Lazors are fine. It just makes other races have to think how they fight the Amarr.
I lol'd
Hello pot, I'm kettle.
Minnies get a built in bonus... which means it's an extra bonus above and beyond. Amarr have one of their bonuses wasted which means T1 get only 1 bonus and T2 get only 3 bonuses. While if what you are saying is true, Minmatar T1 get 3 bonuses and T2 get 5? Yah, that's fair.
Hi pot.
|
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 01:12:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning Minnies get a built in bonus... which means it's an extra bonus above and beyond. Amarr have one of their bonuses wasted which means T1 get only 1 bonus and T2 get only 3 bonuses. While if what you are saying is true, Minmatar T1 get 3 bonuses and T2 get 5? Yah, that's fair.
Hi pot.
Reading comprehension ftw?
Projectiles are PRENERFED. IE balance them with other weapon systems, then nerf the ROF by 25%. Then add 5% ROF bonuses to every minmatar ship in order to get them back to where they started. So a double damage bonused minnie ship is essentially a single damage bonused minnie ship, and all minnie ships have essentially one bonus.
D'oh
|
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 01:36:00 -
[116]
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Clueless poster spotted!
All minnie ships have a built in 5% ROF bonus to counter the weak base stats on projectiles, in an attempt to keep them off other races' ships.
So you're saying I didn't comprehend what you wrote there? Maybe you should work on saying what you mean instead of word vomiting just the stuff that comes to mind.
So minmatar's get a bonus because their guns suck, yet amarr get penalized because their guns are good is what you are saying? So on that logic Minmatar guns need to be boosted and Amarr ships need to be boosted?
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 01:52:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning So minmatar's get a bonus because their guns suck, yet amarr get penalized because their guns are good is what you are saying? So on that logic Minmatar guns need to be boosted and Amarr ships need to be boosted?
No, I think he's trying to say that Amarr get a bonus because their guns "suck" capacitor. You really are a clueless troll. :)
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:23:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Twilight Mourning So minmatar's get a bonus because their guns suck, yet amarr get penalized because their guns are good is what you are saying? So on that logic Minmatar guns need to be boosted and Amarr ships need to be boosted?
No, I think he's trying to say that Amarr get a bonus because their guns "suck" capacitor. You really are a clueless troll. :)
-Liang
Calling me a troll implies that I'm posting for attention. I was posting my opinion on the Amarr ships. Which is that they lose one of their ship bonuses so that they can even use their weapon effectively.
He posted like he was correcting me so I was trying to get clarity which he failed to give. You on the other hand by calling me a clueless troll are being that which you are calling me by insulting me.
Now if you care to explain what you are saying then I will listen, otherwise you aren't any better than that which you are trying to say I am. Troll.
|
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:24:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Clueless poster spotted!
All minnie ships have a built in 5% ROF bonus to counter the weak base stats on projectiles, in an attempt to keep them off other races' ships.
So you're saying I didn't comprehend what you wrote there? Maybe you should work on saying what you mean instead of word vomiting just the stuff that comes to mind.
So minmatar's get a bonus because their guns suck, yet amarr get penalized because their guns are good is what you are saying? So on that logic Minmatar guns need to be boosted and Amarr ships need to be boosted?
terrible troll, biomass asap please.
|
Ecky X
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:34:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Deathbarrage
Originally by: Ecky X I'd like to point out that "getting under his guns" becomes meaningless the moment a 2nd enemy ship is on the field.
a so now you are implying you should be able to kill 2 amarr ships, and if you can't lasers are OP
nice
add to the equasion a gangmember of yours with 2 TD's...
.
I'm not implying you should be able to kill 2 amarrs ships with a Minmatar ship, I'm stating that if there are a number of enemy ships on the field greater than 1, tracking is irrelevant and should not be a major balancing factor.
|
|
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:44:00 -
[121]
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Originally by: Twilight Mourning
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Clueless poster spotted!
All minnie ships have a built in 5% ROF bonus to counter the weak base stats on projectiles, in an attempt to keep them off other races' ships.
So you're saying I didn't comprehend what you wrote there? Maybe you should work on saying what you mean instead of word vomiting just the stuff that comes to mind.
So minmatar's get a bonus because their guns suck, yet amarr get penalized because their guns are good is what you are saying? So on that logic Minmatar guns need to be boosted and Amarr ships need to be boosted?
terrible troll, biomass asap please.
/salute Pot
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:57:00 -
[122]
- Almost all minmatar ships have a RoF because RoF sucks for Projectile guns; - Almost all amarr ships have a cap bonus because lasers are the most cap hungry weapon system - Almost all gallente ships have a tracking bonus because blasters need tracking badly at the range they are supposed to opperate.
So far so good, as this induces people to use the right weapon system for the right race.
The problem is that AFTER those bonus, when those weapon systems were SUPPOSED to be balanced (whatever this means), Lasers are still too much better at almost all circumstances likely to be found in this game.
Something must be done to either improve other turret systems and consequently give them a competitive position against lasers, or lasers need to be decreased in efficience, i.e. nerfed.
That is so plainly obvious that it should be common sense by now and not something people need to argue about. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:22:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning /salute Pot
Anyone with half a brain could follow along with context. You're trying to get a rise out of people for giggles or who knows what, I don't care. Semantics don't bother me. If you had a real point, you would argue it, but you don't, instead you point out a rather ambiguous phrase and say "OMG GOT U".
Please, return to your CAOD bridge, trolls don't sit well in S+M.
|
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:29:00 -
[124]
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Originally by: Twilight Mourning /salute Pot
Anyone with half a brain could follow along with context. You're trying to get a rise out of people for giggles or who knows what, I don't care. Semantics don't bother me. If you had a real point, you would argue it, but you don't, instead you point out a rather ambiguous phrase and say "OMG GOT U".
Please, return to your CAOD bridge, trolls don't sit well in S+M.
I actually did make a point to which you decided to troll me on and name call. So care to join me in CAOD? For if what you say is correct you have no more business in here than I do... Pot.
|
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:31:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning I actually did make a point
Where? I didn't see one. If you're referring to the "built in bonus" - you've obviously been proven wrong there. Anything else?
|
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:47:00 -
[126]
Originally by: AstroPhobic
Originally by: Twilight Mourning I actually did make a point
Where? I didn't see one. If you're referring to the "built in bonus" - you've obviously been proven wrong there. Anything else?
Reading comprehension failure! My first post was talking about how most of the Amarr ships have one of their bonuses as a reduction in cap to energy lasers. So instead of a bonus to ROF, Dmg, range, etc... They have to have one to reduce the cap of their gun so it's even viable on their ship. Thus losing a bonus that could be used on something more useful to the pilot.
|
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:49:00 -
[127]
So you're either incredibly thick or a troll. I'll go with the latter. That'll be all, please return to your normally scheduled programming.
|
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:17:00 -
[128]
Originally by: AstroPhobic So you're either incredibly thick or a troll. I'll go with the latter. That'll be all, please return to your normally scheduled programming.
OK, Pot. Have fun with that.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:28:00 -
[129]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning Reading comprehension failure! My first post was talking about how most of the Amarr ships have one of their bonuses as a reduction in cap to energy lasers. So instead of a bonus to ROF, Dmg, range, etc... They have to have one to reduce the cap of their gun so it's even viable on their ship. Thus losing a bonus that could be used on something more useful to the pilot.
I'd like to introduce you to a module called the "Cap Booster", which makes all such problems go away. Now if only projectiles had a single slot module which made them do 900 turret DPS at 45km...
BUT DID YOU KNOW that a Tach Maelstrom outdamages a pimed out Arty Maelstrom (fits below) all the way out to 65km? But that it uses ZOMG cap? Has better cap stability than my Raven does...
Tach Maelstrom 8x Tach II 2x Pithi B-Type SSB 3x Hardener II, Med Cap Booster II 3x AN Heatsink, 2x RCU II 3x Energy Discharge Elutriation DPS: 732 DPS@38km
Arty Maelstrom 8x 1200mm Arty II (RF EMP) LSB II, 3x Hardener II, 2x TC II 3x Domi Gyro, 2x Domi TE 2x Ambit II, Ambit I DPS: 600 DPS@31km
So.... yeah, can I have a laser cap use bonus on my Maelstrom so that I can take those two rigs off for something better? Like maybe another locus or tracking?
And that's only if you're interested in mission running. If you want to get into PVP, we can see just how much pulse is better than ACs... :)
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Cpt Branko
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:31:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Can't speak for small arty, but med arty is only useful for frig popping.
The only reason to use medium ACs over artillery in a LSE-buffered Hurricane is being solo / 2 man gang and needing the extra tracking. In gangs, you want arties on your shield buffered Hurricane.
Arty fit gives you three advantages (over LSE-ACs): (a) More DPS out of 15km range. (b) Vastly more EHP due to not needing 3x falloff rigs to hit at range. (c) Ability to hit up to your locking range.
The only argument for ACs is needing the extra tracking; and you only realistically need the extra tracking for a very limited set of engagements in solo fights.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:50:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Cpt Branko The only argument for ACs is needing the extra tracking; and you only realistically need the extra tracking for a very limited set of engagements in solo fights.
Comments: - 2 LSE + Ambits gives more EHP than 1 LSE + 2 CDFE. - ACR is required for 720s and anything in the extra highs - ACR is required for 650s and 2 Neuts (though you can consider HAM IIs in the slot instead) - 2 LSE+3 Ambits vs LSE/3 CDFE => 36K vs 38K EHP. Is losing that much tracking worth a mere 2K EHP?
I grant you that an Arty Vagacane is decent if you fit a TC to it, but I don't think it's great.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:52:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
BUT DID YOU KNOW that a Tach Maelstrom outdamages a pimed out Arty Maelstrom (fits below) all the way out to 65km? But that it uses ZOMG cap? Has better cap stability than my Raven does...
Tach Maelstrom 8x Tach II 2x Pithi B-Type SSB 3x Hardener II, Med Cap Booster II 3x AN Heatsink, 2x RCU II 3x Energy Discharge Elutriation DPS: 732 DPS@38km
Arty Maelstrom 8x 1200mm Arty II (RF EMP) LSB II, 3x Hardener II, 2x TC II 3x Domi Gyro, 2x Domi TE 2x Ambit II, Ambit I DPS: 600 DPS@31km
So.... yeah, can I have a laser cap use bonus on my Maelstrom so that I can take those two rigs off for something better? Like maybe another locus or tracking?
And that's only if you're interested in mission running. If you want to get into PVP, we can see just how much pulse is better than ACs... :)
-Liang
Not that I want to defend the person you are responding to, but wtf is this for comparison? You are using 1200s instead of 1400s. You have no tracking mods on the tachyon Mael. And what rats are either going to be used against matters alo (One can fit an Abaddon with 1400s as well). And a cap booster is fine as long as the 800 charges last. Once they're gone, and they go fast, you can do ****all with the lasers. Missions with multiple rooms and having to run a shield tank plus lasers will not be doable with what a dozen or so 800 charges in the hold along with ammo.
Arty does need buffing, but why do you seem to pull unequal comparisons all the time like comparing the tank on a mega and an abaddon. What exactly would you do with lasers not to land them in the ****ter again. Focus on what could be done to buff projectiles. That appears to be what CCP is doing. All the hot air about lasers being OP is a waste of time.
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 05:00:00 -
[133]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 15/09/2009 05:01:39 @Lili Lu: He used 1200 because it is a better fitting for missions and it is a pve comparison.
1400 have an awfull tracking and not a big advantage in damage to 1200. They are only used because of the additional range they give for fleet combats.
Oh and if he had used 1400, the tachyon version would still have more damage btw. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Cpt Branko
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 05:04:00 -
[134]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Cpt Branko The only argument for ACs is needing the extra tracking; and you only realistically need the extra tracking for a very limited set of engagements in solo fights.
Comments: - 2 LSE + Ambits gives more EHP than 1 LSE + 2 CDFE. - ACR is required for 720s and anything in the extra highs - ACR is required for 650s and 2 Neuts (though you can consider HAM IIs in the slot instead) - 2 LSE+3 Ambits vs LSE/3 CDFE => 36K vs 38K EHP. Is losing that much tracking worth a mere 2K EHP?
I grant you that an Arty Vagacane is decent if you fit a TC to it, but I don't think it's great.
-Liang
Alternatively, use 650IIs, and two meds for buffer (TEs > TC anyway).
[Hurricane, artycane new rigs] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Damage Control II
10MN MicroWarpdrive I Warp Disruptor II Invulnerability Field II Large Shield Extender II
650mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet EMP M 50W Infectious Power System Malfunction Small Energy Neutralizer II
Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I
Warrior II x5 Warrior II x1
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 05:45:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Lili Lu Not that I want to defend the person you are responding to, but wtf is this for comparison? You are using 1200s instead of 1400s.
WRT 1200s vs 1400s: There's this thing called "clip size". Maybe you've heard of it? 1400s have utterly terrible clip size. The 1200 mission fit is a 100% viable mission fit, and about as good as you're going to get with artillery.
Quote: You have no tracking mods on the tachyon Mael.
1200 arty tracking (2 domi TE): 0.01681 Tach II tracking: 0.0174
I know, I know.. it's nice when you can fit them, but beam tracking is waaaaaaay better than arty tracking.
Quote: And what rats are either going to be used against matters alo (One can fit an Abaddon with 1400s as well).
You can expect to get equal/better DPS against: - Guristas (Yes, Guristas... even when you use RF PP) - Blood - Sansha - Serpentis - Amarr Navy - Etc
The only pirate race I that I checked where projectile "damage type selection" mattered more than the extra damage from Tachs was against Angels.
Quote: And a cap booster is fine as long as the 800 charges last. Once they're gone, and they go fast, you can do ****all with the lasers. Missions with multiple rooms and having to run a shield tank plus lasers will not be doable with what a dozen or so 800 charges in the hold along with ammo.
You drastically underestimate the number of cap charges you can hold in a Maelstrom - especially if all your cargo space isn't used up by ammo! I think you should be able to squeeze 20 cap boosters in for the mission. This means: - Your cap boosters will last a minumum of 440 seconds (8 minutes of the ~15 you might reasonably expect to spend on a L4 mission) - A single cap boost (800s) will last (800 cap / (8 guns * 4.7 cap) * 6.88 sec) = 146 seconds of gun firing - I've never used more than 15 cap boosters in a mission with my XL tanked Arty Maelstrom (leaving 5 for running the guns 730 seconds... 12 mins) - All of this ignores natural cap recharge. - Your are cap stable without the cap booster and guns
Quote: Arty does need buffing, but why do you seem to pull unequal comparisons all the time like comparing the tank on a mega and an abaddon.
Yes, artillery does need buffing. And I've got to convince one idiot at a time that thinks lasers are still in the ****ter. And you know what? When I came out and said "DUDE!!! Look at how awesome lasers are!!!" nobody believed me. I got lots of "boo" and "hiss" from people just like you. And now look. It makes a difference.
Quote: What exactly would you do with lasers not to land them in the ****ter again.
Not sure. I've thought about it alot, and I've historically been a fan of nerfing laser tracking (removing the 25% pulse tracking boost from 2 years ago). The advantage here is that it nicely emphasizes roles: lasers at med/long range, and projectiles/blasters at short range. The problem is that webs trivialize any amount of tracking. And gang sizes are going up... and there's more webs on target, etc.
So maybe the best idea is to reverse the EM boost, or to lower damage by some (relatively small) percentage, or boost the **** out of everything else. Because huge boosts to bring balance because we don't want to nerf one weapon platform is obviously a good balancing move.
Quote: Focus on what could be done to buff projectiles. That appears to be what CCP is doing. All the hot air about lasers being OP is a waste of time.
If by "boosting" you mean "nerfing" sure. Removing a mid from the fleet pest? Nerfing the Firetail? Have you seeeeen what they're doing to the laser based faction ships? WTF?
There's no evidence at all that CCP has any sort of "miracle" regarding projectiles. And there's plenty of evidence that they have their collective heads WAAAAAAAAAAAAY the **** up their ass.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 06:08:00 -
[136]
On the flip side... I seem to recall some amazing PvP videos by Cown where he was using projectiles on an Abaddon and doing much better than with pulses because of the great tank it could have without using cap for weapons... Hmm... The projectiles must be overpowered because they don't use cap by your logic.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 06:12:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning On the flip side... I seem to recall some amazing PvP videos by Cown where he was using projectiles on an Abaddon and doing much better than with pulses because of the great tank it could have without using cap for weapons... Hmm... The projectiles must be overpowered because they don't use cap by your logic.
And I've seen them do great because of all the extra damage, and I've seen rail ravens do pretty awesome too so they must be overpowered as well.
Your anecdotal evidence is Failing.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 06:17:00 -
[138]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Twilight Mourning On the flip side... I seem to recall some amazing PvP videos by Cown where he was using projectiles on an Abaddon and doing much better than with pulses because of the great tank it could have without using cap for weapons... Hmm... The projectiles must be overpowered because they don't use cap by your logic.
And I've seen them do great because of all the extra damage, and I've seen rail ravens do pretty awesome too so they must be overpowered as well.
Your anecdotal evidence is Failing.
-Liang
Almost as bad as your EFT warrioring.
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 06:28:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning On the flip side... I seem to recall some amazing PvP videos by Cown where he was using projectiles on an Abaddon and doing much better than with pulses because of the great tank it could have without using cap for weapons... Hmm... The projectiles must be overpowered because they don't use cap by your logic.
Great tank as in ACTIVE TANK? Dude, welcome to 2007, active tanks are dead for anything but pve. They lie in the same coffin with solo pvp and subcapital fleet fights. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Aniyan
Amarr Erebus Innovations
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 06:58:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Gram Hellfire you can remove pulse lasers and i would not care; just don't touch my beams :)
It's the other way around with me. I've never had any luck with beams.
|
|
Cpt Branko
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 08:08:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning On the flip side... I seem to recall some amazing PvP videos by Cown where he was using projectiles on an Abaddon and doing much better than with pulses because of the great tank it could have without using cap for weapons...
Videos for a age long gone. There were so many changes in the meantime.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Lusulpher
Blackwater Syndicate Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 05:43:00 -
[142]
Edited by: Lusulpher on 16/09/2009 05:46:03
Originally by: Etho Demerzel - Almost all minmatar ships have a RoF because RoF sucks for Projectile guns; - Almost all amarr ships have a cap bonus because lasers are the most cap hungry weapon system - Almost all gallente ships have a tracking bonus because blasters need tracking badly at the range they are supposed to opperate.
So far so good, as this induces people to use the right weapon system for the right race.
The problem is that AFTER those bonus, when those weapon systems were SUPPOSED to be balanced (whatever this means), Lasers are still too much better at almost all circumstances likely to be found in this game.
Something must be done to either improve other turret systems and consequently give them a competitive position against lasers, or lasers need to be decreased in efficience, i.e. nerfed.
That is so plainly obvious that it should be common sense by now and not something people need to argue about.
/thread Bolded for ease of assimilation. All the trolling is to distract from the real issue in the title of this thread. CCP fix this mess. 7 |
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 06:13:00 -
[143]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Tach Maelstrom 8x Tach II 2x Pithi B-Type SSB 3x Hardener II, Med Cap Booster II 3x AN Heatsink, 2x RCU II 3x Energy Discharge Elutriation DPS: 732 DPS@38km
Arty Maelstrom 8x 1200mm Arty II (RF EMP) LSB II, 3x Hardener II, 2x TC II 3x Domi Gyro, 2x Domi TE 2x Ambit II, Ambit I DPS: 600 DPS@31km
Theorycrafting. How useful is your tach maelstrom once it burned all its cap charges?
And if you would fit your "comparison" arty maelstrom properly (and a whole lot cheaper) you'd match the tach mael easily:
8x 1200mm Arty II (RF EMP) LSB II, 3x Hardener II, 2x TC II (optimal range script in one of them) 2x Gyro II, 2x TE II, 1x DC II 1x Burst Aerator I, 1x Collision Accelerator I DPS: 776 DPS@35km, taking falloff into account say 750 DPS@38km ?
|
Holy Wanderer
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 07:06:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Omara Otawan Edited by: Omara Otawan on 16/09/2009 06:23:30
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Tach Maelstrom 8x Tach II 2x Pithi B-Type SSB 3x Hardener II, Med Cap Booster II 3x AN Heatsink, 2x RCU II 3x Energy Discharge Elutriation DPS: 732 DPS@38km
Arty Maelstrom 8x 1200mm Arty II (RF EMP) LSB II, 3x Hardener II, 2x TC II 3x Domi Gyro, 2x Domi TE 2x Ambit II, Ambit I DPS: 600 DPS@31km
Theorycrafting. How useful is your tach maelstrom once it burned all its cap charges?
About as useful as her numbers game. She reminds me of this old troll. Johnny Jojo or something... I don't know, it's been a while.
|
Dristra
Amarr Idle Haven
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 09:34:00 -
[145]
The use bonus of the hat which is needless to the boat of Amarr, seems that forgets everyone that, it is. The good gun, but the practical bonus it is not what so.
|
Laiyna
Madhatters Inc. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 10:13:00 -
[146]
Damage and tracking is not the only thing that determines the choise of a weapon. I put below some stuff that also determines what you choose, like being able to actualy fit and use it! I disregard damage bonus or cap reduction from hulls, they influence a lot of the choises, but in the end nobody stops you to use an autocannon on an amarr ship or lasers on a galante...
Best to worse: CPU Use
1) 800mm Repeating Artillery II 2) Mega Pulse Laser II 3) Neutron Blaster Cannon II
Best to worse: Power Use
1) 800mm Repeating Artillery II 2) Neutron Blaster Cannon II 3) Mega Pulse Laser II
Best to worse: Cap Use
1) 800mm Repeating Artillery II 2) Neutron Blaster Cannon II 3) Mega Pulse Laser II
Best to worse: Damage Types
1) 800mm Repeating Artillery II 2) Neutron Blaster Cannon II 3) Mega Pulse Laser II
In short for fittings, Autocannons are the most easy to fit, and it leaves lots of cap to actualy fit a desent tank, while lasers are the worste to fit and you can have trouble fitting any other modules...
I think the weapons are fine, all got strong points and weak points, learn to live with it, lasers are prity nice, but hard to fit well and predictable for damage, Autocannons are easy to fit, and you can choose easily the damage type you want to use.
Laiyna
|
Forge Lag
Jita Lag Preservation Fund
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 10:31:00 -
[147]
Edited by: Forge Lag on 16/09/2009 10:33:34 The whole "damage selection" and "no cap" of projectiles would be indeed cool if there was not for a) torpedoes and drones doing both better b) cap boosters c) projectiles DPS prenerfed forcing you to chose damage which you cannot do (only two real choices in T1 and no choice in T2).
That out of the way, lasers are fine. They have their notable advantages of having long range (pulse only), best tracking at optimal and hassle-free ammo. The problem really is with other weapon systems that offer no such advantage. Lasers also have notable drawbacks but those only matter if exploited - giving lasers soft spot without making you wrestle with drawbacks all the time, making them "fun" to use. Compared to torps and drones, all three are different but fine.
The real issue is turret systems are too similiar so that 10% here and 10% there makes one overpowered and one total crap. And on top of that two out of three lack a defining feature that would make people excited (see above why no cap pick damage does not count).
|
Dristra
Amarr Idle Haven
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 11:28:00 -
[148]
On a more serious note: Projectiles need a slight buff(or workaround). Lasers are okay.
|
Dors Venabily
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 12:05:00 -
[149]
Originally by: Ecky X
Originally by: Deathbarrage
Originally by: Ecky X I'd like to point out that "getting under his guns" becomes meaningless the moment a 2nd enemy ship is on the field.
a so now you are implying you should be able to kill 2 amarr ships, and if you can't lasers are OP
nice
add to the equasion a gangmember of yours with 2 TD's...
.
I'm not implying you should be able to kill 2 amarrs ships with a Minmatar ship, I'm stating that if there are a number of enemy ships on the field greater than 1, tracking is irrelevant and should not be a major balancing factor.
Well 2 tracking diruptors also can have optimal range scripts forcing the other ship to use lower dmg ammo or get in closer wher tracking will make difference. Now really I would not even think twice atacking a zealot in a thorax unless he is 50 out.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 14:04:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Omara Otawan Theorycrafting. How useful is your tach maelstrom once it burned all its cap charges?
People always say that about cap boosted PVE setups. That setup uses much less cap than the one I have now (AC+AB+XL), just that it does alot more damage and carries alot more cap boosters. So: It'll do fine.
Originally by: Laiyna Damage and tracking is not the only thing that determines the choise of a weapon. I put below some stuff that also determines what you choose, like being able to actualy fit and use it! ...
In short for fittings, Autocannons are the most easy to fit, and it leaves lots of cap to actualy fit a desent tank, while lasers are the worste to fit and you can have trouble fitting any other modules...
I think the weapons are fine, all got strong points and weak points, learn to live with it, lasers are prity nice, but hard to fit well and predictable for damage, Autocannons are easy to fit, and you can choose easily the damage type you want to use.
Not really, no. You'll notice that people frequently make fitting concessions to get higher tier weapons and damage mods. Furthermore, there has to be something *worthwhile* to fit if the extra fittings are going to be worthwhile. And then there's the fact that in PVE, effective damage (raw damage - resisted damage - "tracking+falloff" damage) really is all that matters.
Also, no, the weapons aren't fine.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
|
Pipova
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 14:43:00 -
[151]
I've read most of the tempest,projectiles and this thread. From what i understand, flavor of the month gang tactics, make the flavor of the month ships->weapon systems.
If i am not teribly mistaken weapon systems attributes -except missiles- have not changed for a year and a half now, atleast.
CCP went from speedboost to nosnerf to ecm nerf then speed nerf with some steps in there that i am propably missing. These changes were the cause of great frustration or joy to the playerbase depending the side they were by the time each change was implemented.
As it stands pulse lasers fit more to the current 'rules of engagement'. No need for big changes in my opinion, either a tracking nerf to lasers, or tracking increase to hybrids and projectiles, and/or the same thing regarding range.
Keep in mind thow that balance can be achieved only if the environment remains static and is ccp's intention to change it everynow and then just to keep people crosstraining, discovering new aspects of the game and thus paying more in subscriptions. A static game nomatter how big monomany can develop to a player is not enough to keep him paying the subscription forever. But a nerf and then a boost and then a nerf again and so on, keeps us paying.
In other words.
CROSSTRAIN. end of story. today is lasers, tomorrow projectiles.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 14:49:00 -
[152]
Originally by: Pipova CROSSTRAIN. end of story. today is lasers, tomorrow projectiles.
There's no proof that tomorrow is projectiles. In fact, I'd say there's proof that it won't be "tomorrow" by any reasonable understanding of the word. I'd guess it'll be a 12-18 months (expansion after Dominion) before we see any kind of weapon balancing taking place. They're making so many changes already (to everyone), and many of those that target Minmatar seem to be built around the currently terrible weapon platform environment.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 14:55:00 -
[153]
Originally by: Pipova
In other words.
CROSSTRAIN. end of story. today is lasers, tomorrow projectiles.
You're right on most of that. But I think it needs to be said...this "today" has lasted for a year and change now. And as for "tomorrow," anyone who was holding their breath for a projectile buff has long since died of suffocation.
|
Pipova
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 15:38:00 -
[154]
Liang i thing you are right about the time schedule. It is around 12-18 months. We are already through the first six i think or something like that.
This timeframe was the same back when lasers ruled everything and with a mega you couldnt do s***t, then missiles ruling then field, then the age of hybrids and medium autocannons(remember stabbabond) where lasers where sucking big c***s, then the laser boost which didnt make them all that great, because back then all you could hope for in a zealot was to scare away a vagabond or die horribly to a diemost if you got cought.
Nanonerf and rr gangs are the actual boost to lasers. I do like that medium range is now included in pvp and not only either upclose or far away, and i strongly believe that since all races have a lowsp ship effective in pve, new players that want to be effective in pvp should train/crosstrain the standing fotm. Its not like, that if you are in a t1 myrm or drake or whatever, you are loosing that much time in specialising somewhere else. In fact the time the new player has spent training the non-effective, no fotm race/ship will be used as a trustfund for later nerfs/boosts.
For skyhigh sp, only in one race (why would somebody do that? i actually dont know anyone) i am pretty sure the player can find atleast one ship per class that it is effective.
So in other words the year and half window, before a race goes from king of the hill, to peasant is enough for specialising being the king. Crosstaining is your friend if you 're into pvp.
Again for the current state of things a slight tracking and/or range calibration is more than enough.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 15:50:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Pipova Liang i thing you are right about the time schedule. It is around 12-18 months. We are already through the first six i think or something like that.
The problem is that projectiles have been sucking it up for more than one of these 12-18 month cycles. They're rebalancing alot of Eve ATM, and the assumptions they seem to be making don't jive with a projectile patch this time around, so IMO it will be *another* 12-18 months before this really happens. Furthermore, there have been none of the more ominous signs of a laser nerf.
Quote: Nanonerf and rr gangs are the actual boost to lasers. I do like that medium range is now included in pvp and not only either upclose or far away, and i strongly believe that since all races have a lowsp ship effective in pve, new players that want to be effective in pvp should train/crosstrain the standing fotm.
I dunno, that seems pretty much like folly to me. It's *asking* to get your kitten kicked, and I'm pretty about that.
Quote:
For skyhigh sp, only in one race (why would somebody do that? i actually dont know anyone) i am pretty sure the player can find atleast one ship per class that it is effective.
A couple of reasons (I have 40M SP in Minmatar/Caldari, and Gallente gunships): - It's a play style that they enjoy. - Cross training tends to leave your overall skills weak in any single ship. - The fate of a battle is decided on the wings of 2% bonuses. Frequently specialization into a terrible ship will let you beat out someone not nearly as specialized in a much better ship.
Quote: So in other words the year and half window, before a race goes from king of the hill, to peasant is enough for specialising being the king. Crosstaining is your friend if you 're into pvp.
I respect your opinion, but just can't agree with you. Cross training for FOTM early (before "reasonable" 4s in spec skills and 4-5 in all support) seems to be a recipe for heartache and failure to me - and leave you without an effective ship to fall back to when the (inevitable) nerfs happen.
-Liang
-- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Eli Porter
Amarr Altruism. Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 15:52:00 -
[156]
I think what made Amarr as good as they are now is the speed nerf. Amarr is weakest when it is engaged point blank. Mid-Long range Amarr can't be beat, and the fact that it takes a while longer now to reach close range is the prime contributor to making Amarr ships so popular.
Due to their inherent lack of versatility, Amarr make for a pretty weak solo race. They shine in large fleets, and that IMHO should not change.
Gallente ships easily beat Amarr if they get the initial warp-in for point blank. However if they want to get fast DPS on an Amarr ship before they get into range(Like in gate camps for example) they have to use Null nowadays. The 10 seconds reload/ammo switch time hits their slower ships hard, so I would reluctantly(Being a Biased Amarr user) support halving that time to about 5 seconds.
Minmatar shares Gallente's issue as well due to the time they need before they can inflict significant damage, though their Missile systems help with that a bit. Still, I would support the same reload change to Projectiles. Along with that issue, Minmatar have a plethora of other issues regarding long-mid range combat in both their ships and weapon systems(Namely the Tempest and Artillery).
Caldari's only issue(IMO) is fitting into RR BS fleets which are the norm nowadays. Even though Scorpions can work well, gank+armor tank is still missing in the Caldari's BS line when it comes to RR BS(Don't even try to say the Raven can work). Though Caldari work just fine in mid-long range combat, while having the best EWAR and missioning available. So I'm not sure a buff is in order. Maybe switch a low slot with a mid on the Raven, but I wouldn't be sure about that seeing as my Raven flying experiences are non-existent.
tl;dr, I would support small buffs to Caldari and Gallente, and major buffs to Minmatar. while keeping Amarr as it is.
|
SuiJuris
Absinthe Brothers Consortium
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 16:24:00 -
[157]
I would like to remind everyone in the thread AGAIN, that these unbalances are ONLY at the Battleship lvl, Blasters and projectiles are fine at the small / medium lvl --- I am taking pre orders for Navy Armageddons |
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 16:41:00 -
[158]
Originally by: SuiJuris I would like to remind everyone in the thread AGAIN, that these unbalances are ONLY at the Battleship lvl, Blasters and projectiles are fine at the small / medium lvl
They're not "fine" at small/medium level. They're just less broken (See: Artillery as still obviously broken at cruiser level)
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
AstroPhobic
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 18:07:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: SuiJuris I would like to remind everyone in the thread AGAIN, that these unbalances are ONLY at the Battleship lvl, Blasters and projectiles are fine at the small / medium lvl
They're not "fine" at small/medium level. They're just less broken (See: Artillery as still obviously broken at cruiser level)
-Liang
I've been saying this for ages. If you note in the assembly hall thread, my changes apply to all size weapons and ammo.
Imbalances in projectiles simply aren't as pronounced at the small level. Get to the medium level and it becomes a bit more visible (425mm ACs, medium artillery), and then get to large and it's very visible. Smaller minmatar ships thrive ONLY on oversized mods. Look at the claw. The rupture. To a smaller extent, the hurricane. Some of them have merit in speed (vaga, stabber).
Won't they become overpowered with my proposed changes, you ask? No, the ammo changes do nothing for barrage boats and those fitting lower tier ACs will lose falloff compared to higher tier.
|
Agallis Zinthros
Altruism. Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 19:43:00 -
[160]
Lasers don't need a nerf. With lasers you geta ccess to EM and Thermal, thats it. You will never do Expl or Kinetic. The other guns get ammo that can do those damage types as well as EM/Therm. It's not piracy, its surprise PVP. |
|
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 20:04:00 -
[161]
Originally by: Agallis Zinthros Lasers don't need a nerf. With lasers you geta ccess to EM and Thermal, thats it. You will never do Expl or Kinetic. The other guns get ammo that can do those damage types as well as EM/Therm.
And you do enough damage with "just EM/Thermal damage" to virtually negate the advantage that other damage types might have, especially at the long range level.
I just want to say for the record I don't want to nerf lasers as a whole, just Tachs (bring them in line with the balance currently present at other weapon sizes). The rest could be solved by fixing Projectile ammo, IMO.
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 20:05:00 -
[162]
Originally by: Agallis Zinthros Lasers don't need a nerf. With lasers you geta ccess to EM and Thermal, thats it. You will never do Expl or Kinetic. The other guns get ammo that can do those damage types as well as EM/Therm.
Sure, as blasters for example, which have all 4 kinds of damage, right? Oh wait...
And regarding Projectiles, you already pay for choosing your type of damage by having to downgrade to less damaging ammunition, and even your most damaging ammunition (EMP) has lower total damage than Multifreq or Antimatter, and this damage is horribly spread between Explosive and EM.
So no, being able to "choose" damage type does NOT compensate having less than half the damage of lasers in any realistic situation. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Davinel Lulinvega
|
Posted - 2009.09.16 20:17:00 -
[163]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning On the flip side... I seem to recall some amazing PvP videos by Cown where he was using projectiles on an Abaddon and doing much better than with pulses because of the great tank it could have without using cap for weapons... Hmm... The projectiles must be overpowered because they don't use cap by your logic.
Oh wow, how did I miss this? This may be the single worst post I have ever seen.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke!
inb4 stealth edit |
Psiri
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 02:40:00 -
[164]
Great DPS Good range Good tracking
Pick 2
- Them being cap intensive is nowhere near enough to balance the fact that they currently enjoy all three. Sure you don't get to choose damagetypes but honestly, I'd argue that it's only a few missile ships that do.
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 04:00:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Seriously Bored
Originally by: Agallis Zinthros Lasers don't need a nerf. With lasers you geta ccess to EM and Thermal, thats it. You will never do Expl or Kinetic. The other guns get ammo that can do those damage types as well as EM/Therm.
And you do enough damage with "just EM/Thermal damage" to virtually negate the advantage that other damage types might have, especially at the long range level.
I just want to say for the record I don't want to nerf lasers as a whole, just Tachs (bring them in line with the balance currently present at other weapon sizes). The rest could be solved by fixing Projectile ammo, IMO.
Yeah, we already had that discussion. Tachs aren't going anywhere. Dream on.
Thought this thread was about scorch? No indication of any laser nerfs incoming. There is indication of projectiles being buffed. It appears all you laser/Amarr haters will have to wait until the projectile changes, to see if your arguments will hold any semblance of validity.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 04:22:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Lili Lu There is indication of projectiles being buffed. It appears all you laser/Amarr haters will have to wait until the projectile changes, to see if your arguments will hold any semblance of validity.
TBQFH there is no indication of projectiles being buffed anywhere in the near future. In fact, there is very strong evidence that it will not.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 04:36:00 -
[167]
Originally by: Lili Lu
Thought this thread was about scorch? No indication of any laser nerfs incoming. There is indication of projectiles being buffed. It appears all you laser/Amarr haters will have to wait until the projectile changes, to see if your arguments will hold any semblance of validity.
There is no difference between buffing projectiles and blasters, and nerfing lasers. Any of the two solutions would have the same results regarding weapon balancing.
Unfortunately, as Liang said above, there are no indications of any buff to projectiles. =====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 04:36:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Lili Lu There is indication of projectiles being buffed. It appears all you laser/Amarr haters will have to wait until the projectile changes, to see if your arguments will hold any semblance of validity.
TBQFH there is no indication of projectiles being buffed anywhere in the near future. In fact, there is very strong evidence that it will not.
-Liang
In the faction battleships thread in test server forum the CCP guy, sorry getting late, can't look up, mentioned that the changes will be independent of changes being made to fixing projectiles. Now if they do that, and give the navy phoon and pest another mid-slot than what they posted, all may be well.
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 04:46:00 -
[169]
Originally by: Lili Lu In the faction battleships thread in test server forum the CCP guy, sorry getting late, can't look up, mentioned that the changes will be independent of changes being made to fixing projectiles. Now if they do that, and give the navy phoon and pest another mid-slot than what they posted, all may be well.
Let me quote it for you:
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium
We are aware of the current issues this ship has, mainly due to problems with the standard Tempest in the first place. We will discuss this further based on the feedback expressed here. We can't say much more than that unfortunately, since the core problem remains extremely delicate to tackle (and yes we are also aware of the various player threads and discussions that are on-going about the Tempest and projectiles in general).
Let's properly interpret this: - We know the fleet pest sucks because the pest sucks. - Yes, we hear your *****ing about it. Yes, we'll keep it in mind. No, we won't be fixing it because it's tricky.
Ancillary evidence:
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium We are already working on revamping 20 faction ships while adding 4 new navy battleships for Dominion; the changes are not even finalized and yet you are still thirsty for more? ...snarky (and funny) post about doing it yourself...
You should note that he doesn't even bring up the huge amount of sov changes that are going to happen in the next expansion. But I'd say between "(re)creating 24 faction ships" and the huge round of sov changes that CCP will (probably correctly) not attempt to tackle a "tricky" problem like projectiles.
IMO, the evidence is really overwhelming against us seeing a projectile boost inside the next 18 months.
-Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Albert O'Balsam
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 06:22:00 -
[170]
For anyone with a long memory let us not forget that lasers sucked bad for a couple of years in the early days and it took ages to get them changed at all. Now they are pretty good, but it is probably more to do with ship bonuses than the turrets themselves, as certain ships with lasers rule rather than all ships with lasers.
OK, so they rule in mid range engagements in PvP, but in PvE IMHO they are prety ordinary and try to get large lasers to hit anything smaller than a BC at mid range.
These are things the devs will have to consider when changing any balance in weapon type and I hope they in fact do.
|
|
Liang Nuren
The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 07:05:00 -
[171]
Originally by: Albert O'Balsam For anyone with a long memory let us not forget that lasers sucked bad for a couple of years in the early days and it took ages to get them changed at all. Now they are pretty good, but it is probably more to do with ship bonuses than the turrets themselves, as certain ships with lasers rule rather than all ships with lasers.
Being underpowered for X time does not entitle you to being overpowered for X time. Two wrongs do not make a right.
Quote: OK, so they rule in mid range engagements in PvP, but in PvE IMHO they are prety ordinary and try to get large lasers to hit anything smaller than a BC at mid range.
Man honestly if you think you have it bad with the best tracking long rang weaponry in game.... -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org |
Doddy
The Executives IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 07:29:00 -
[172]
Its just a scorch vs null/barrage question really. And i like barrage, alot. So is it really just a boost null question?. The quick reload time is nice but doesn't really have a huge effect, especially as the lasers are already effective at long ranges (the point people think needs nerfed).
|
Jin Entres
Malevolent Intervention
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 08:26:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Doddy Its just a scorch vs null/barrage question really. And i like barrage, alot. So is it really just a boost null question?. The quick reload time is nice but doesn't really have a huge effect, especially as the lasers are already effective at long ranges (the point people think needs nerfed).
If anything, Null should be nerfed. Did you know that on large guns, Null outdamages Barrage up to 20 km? Blasters shouldn't be that good at that range. The only compensating factor is reloading time which imposes a tangible loss of damage in wasted time (while Barrage is most of the time preloaded, however not always).
And yes, the quick reload does have a significant effect in many situations. It's always worth switching ammo on lasers when crossing optimal barriers. Not to mention that where switching between targets at different ranges, having instantaneous ammo change produces opportunities that would otherwise be unavailable*.
* Imagine, for instance, a situation where you are in a geddon fighting a BS up close while a hostile falcon uncloaks at 60 km. Or imagine fighting a cruiser sized ship up close when it decides to leg it and starts burning away, quickly escaping your Multifrequency range. Or imagine flying a Harbinger, jumping into a system and finding a Hurricane 20km away; you will get a headstart with scorch and can then switch to MF when it gets up close. These, and many other similar situations, demonstrate how instant switch can indeed be very significant. Laser users often like to downplay its usefulness -- possibly because many of them haven't experienced other turrets and have simply come to take the advantages of switching as granted and will not notice how much it can do for them until they try other turrets. ----------------------
|
Helicity Boson
Amarr The Python Cartel.
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 11:48:00 -
[174]
Medium and Large T2 lasers feel overpowered, the flexibility in range offered by scorch/multifreq is incredibly good, and tracking remains very decent with either ammo.
But, I will say this, I think it's mostly a matter of giving a slight buff to the other T2 ammo, particularly Null/Void and things will be mostly allright.
Hybrid ammo will never be buffed to the point where it's equal to the scorch/multi combo however, because the primary users (e.g. gallente) already get larger drone support on almost all ships to increase their DPS.
(and yes I know drones are not always equally useful in PVP situations, like when sentry guns are involved)
My noobish Khanid Pirate blog: http://helicityboson.blogspot.com/ |
Kaileen Starsong
Amarr Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 12:03:00 -
[175]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Albert O'Balsam For anyone with a long memory let us not forget that lasers sucked bad for a couple of years in the early days and it took ages to get them changed at all. Now they are pretty good, but it is probably more to do with ship bonuses than the turrets themselves, as certain ships with lasers rule rather than all ships with lasers.
Being underpowered for X time does not entitle you to being overpowered for X time. Two wrongs do not make a right.
While it doesn't if you look from the balance's point of view, you could also try picking a different angle. I'm sure devs love have to play bowling with playerbase, getting them to train different fotm and basically just adapt in a changing world. It also makes Eve quite fun to play in long perspective, but it obviously sucks for ones who are stuck with lower end of rope. I hope the actual balance won't be achieved, both due to the price of such achievement and to the inevitable stagnation after that.
I, too, believe that projectiles won't be getting any love for quite some time. The fact that devs are aware of the issues says nothing about deadline of said issue getting fixed. I.e. Zulupark(if anyone still remembers him) went "omg WAT?! This will be looked at" when he was pointed at the fact that T2 Sentry drones don't benefit from racial specializations. That was QUITE a while ago and it's such a minor(technically atleast) change, yet nothing is done.
Overheating has been broken from the start in regard of most non-gun modules(it's stacking penalized with different amplification modules, see ECM Amps, SB Amps, Gangmods(web/point, AB/MWD, rep/boost duration) and so on). Yet nothing has changed and CCP has actually taken the stance that it's "working as intended".
So don't hold your breath for changes in this aspect unless you want to die off suffocation.
|
Jin Entres
Malevolent Intervention
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 13:44:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Kaileen Starsong
This is often overrated. Yes, it's advantage and is quite an obvious one. In most cases it doesn't change much, though(Arma will still get jammed, Harb will win pretty much nothing as it first will have to target Hurri, then switch to scorch, then turn off guns, then switch to MF... consider that Hurricane will close very fast, you won't be winning much - and I'm saying that from PoV of a Hurricane).
In the hypothetical situations..
Geddon may well get jammed, but at least it has the opportunity to do something. Replace falcon with anything appearing at that range or outside of 30km in general providing any kind of support. Or replace the geddon with an Abaddon fitted with an ECCM, or postulate any similar situation and compare the laser users' possibilities to that of anyone else's.
Harbi can switch ammo while it is targeting, no? Assuming scorch isn't preloaded (which it always is for me). And would a harbi pilot sit still and let the 'cane come up close? Of course not, at the very least it will be hitting orbit at 20 and turning the mwd on. This alone will buy several seconds of pew pewing before the cane starts doing any real damage. And switching back to MF costs maybe 1 second which makes no difference (even easier now with weapon grouping). Not to mention that 'cane is only 15% faster than Harbi which leaves room for skill and implant differences aswell as piloting (such as use of overheating). It is quite possible for a Harbi pilot in such a situation to outrun the 'cane and never let it get within webbing range (or at the very least prolong the chase considerably).
You say it's overrated. I say it's underrated. It's mentioned or acknowledged as an advantage but rarely afforded much consideration beyond that. That is my experience with these discussions, anyway. I think it deserves to be recognised as more than just one more item on a list of minor advantages; it's not huge but it is distinct and can be quite significant. I have only come to appreciate its value after adding lasers and Amarr to my arsenal (some year ago, having skilled for every other race before it).
Conversely it may be easy to underestimate its value not only if you are an exclusive laser user but also if you are not, so I would be interested in knowing that besides speaking as a hypothetical Hurricane pilot, do you also use lasers?
Of course, the incredible range of scorch is an essential part of what makes it useful. Instant switch wouldn't be nearly as useful on autocannons (it would be rather useful on blasters, though). ----------------------
|
Kaileen Starsong
Amarr Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 14:03:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Jin Entres
You say it's overrated. I say it's underrated. It's mentioned or acknowledged as an advantage but rarely afforded much consideration beyond that. That is my experience with these discussions, anyway. I think it deserves to be recognised as more than just one more item on a list of minor advantages; it's not huge but it is distinct and can be quite significant. I have only come to appreciate its value after adding lasers and Amarr to my arsenal (some year ago, having skilled for every other race before it).
Conversely it may be easy to underestimate its value not only if you are an exclusive laser user but also if you are not, so I would be interested in knowing that besides speaking as a hypothetical Hurricane pilot, do you also use lasers?
Yeah, I do. In fact I can(and have, though mostly in past tense now) use all weapon systems, so comparing is not some extraordinary task.
It's very handy bonus to have, as it offers versatility. Now, the fun thing is that it's most pronounced with Large lasers, which actually compensates very low mobility quite nicely(alas, to an extent where you can afford not using prop-mod in low-sec for example). Plus with BS size the speed of fight itself is noticeable slower, so you get to use the advantage for notably longer.
For BCs it's much less so. Yeah, you could think of case where it's handy and gives you nice advantage(I.e. you're Harb, you're uncloaking, Hurricane is 20km away), but it could turn other way where it gives nothing(I.e. Hurricane is uncloaking -> you have to react, you have to launch drones/target/switch ammo if needed, etc). The tempo of the fight is also higher, and diverting your attention to ammo switching to get 2 more seconds of firing might not benefit you much, if at all.
Don't get me wrong, insta-switch IS an advantage and it can be used as such. Just like often looked down at variable damage types on projectiles - you could be in Hurricane warping onto, say, Astarte, you load Hail and land at 5km... then you have dead Astarte(or same with RF EMP/PP and Abso for example). Or you could just as well land 15km away and get popped :) Granted, not nearly as forgiving as insta-switch, but gives even more of an advantage if applied correctly.
|
Kevin Finnerty
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 14:22:00 -
[178]
It's clear that pulses are well imba. For me, I'd be happy with a large increase in hybrid damage, so you'd still get the massive range issues but arhghmyfacewhathaveyuarghuusplat.
|
Sebastien LaForge
Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 17:01:00 -
[179]
Edited by: Sebastien LaForge on 21/09/2009 17:02:39
Originally by: Kevin Finnerty It's clear that pulses are well imba. For me, I'd be happy with a large increase in hybrid damage, so you'd still get the massive range issues but arhghmyfacewhathaveyuarghuusplat.
This. What bugs me is that for a race that has the highest damage, lowest range guns, that they need to be practically point blank to use them and aren't particularly fast. They're also completely inflexible in their range. Along with the web nerf and MWD shut off from scram, it's really hard to keep the range close enough to bbq what you're shooting at. The hell am I supposed to do when minmatar are faster than me and flexible enough in their range to shoot me with the hardest hitting ammo outside of my optimal+falloff and kite my at the same time?
Unless it's a frig I'm flying, I don't really bother with blasters since they track worse, have ****tier range, require silly amounts of PG and CPU requirements against HAMs and projectiles, and take a lot of cap.
I rarely see blaster ships win because with the fitting costs and mods to attempt too stay in optimal, they become these inflexible glass cannons. Either give me more range or a bigger boost to damage so I'm not at such a stupid disadvantage.
tl;dr I'm using blasters wrong. :P
|
Caleb Fury
|
Posted - 2009.09.21 17:59:00 -
[180]
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.
|
|
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:
̣ Fittings: 605 CPU, 16275 powergrid ̣ Dronebay increased by 50m3, bandwidth unchanged ̣ 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] |