|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 21:32:00 -
[1]
I just want to say that I'm very excited by the prospect of using a Muninn and not having Astro laugh at me.
Arty thrasher w/o any changes will be OP. I have a 1389 alpha on my thrasher right now. I'll also say that my arty jaguar after Dominion is going to be sick. 1700m/s while having a signature radius of 34m. 898 alpha BEFORE any boost mentioned here.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 21:48:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
There is nothing particularly OP about having 2083 alpha vs 1389 alpha on a Thrasher, much less on the Jaguar which is really only going to alpha strike a Ibis. A Rifter with only a Damage Control I has 2291 EHP. Unfitted Malediction is 2497. In fact, you will take longer to kill both of these ships now - 50% longer to be precise.
My thrasher almost always two volleys any interceptor silly enough to approach. I most cases I can get it into low armor or even structure in one volley. I don't fit a point on my thrasher b/c with only two volleys I usually don't give them a "run" option. On two occassions I've instapopped an interceptor. Chalk it up to the tracking or crits to explain it. With a new alpha that high I can almost guarantee one shot one kill.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 00:00:00 -
[3]
TBH the Nozh post was pretty hard to understand. I'm scratching my head.
It's vague if the ammo base changes will scale to size. Mid-range ammo tracking improvement is also vague. Which ammos? I'm reading a 10% to 20% improvement. Is this correct?
The tracking enhancer - is a third benefit being added in addition to optimal and tracking or will it be a separate module consisting of tracking and falloff? The same question for the tracking computer. The alpha part is the only part that's really clear.
When will it be on Sissi for us to test?
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 02:41:00 -
[4]
The Tracking Computers have the falloff bonus written into their description on Sissi. I didn't see a script for falloff or an effect from an unscripted module however. I don't think it's working quite yet.
Why mess with tracking computers and tracking enhancers though? It seems like you're doing alot of work just to help Minmatar. A different approach would be to have falloff modifiers for individual ammo itself. Carbonized Lead for example could get a 60% boost to optimal and a 30% boost to falloff. As long as Barrage keeps it's 50% advantage. This would squeeze some extra range out of artillery too.
I like the alpha change. It adds flavor. The tracking on mid-range ammo adds some damage on the back end.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 17:43:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 30/09/2009 13:54:54 From testing on SISI: - Medium & small arties / ACs are both very nice now. I have not tested larges to be honest.
- TEs/TCs are great as they are on SISI, and suddenly the triple-falloff isn't the only option for out of webrange firing, while still being useful and enabling for more diverse setups with their own advantages/disadvantages.
It's perhaps my favourite change for both artillery and ACs - TEs/TCs are no longer modules which mainly boost Amarr ships and railguns.
- Ammo changes are lovely, and ammos are really nice as they are.
I like EMP being top dog damage-wise, since fusion taking the top makes Hail redundant and reduces the 'choosing damage type' advantage, even though it would serve Minmatar better for generic firing on T1 armour tanks (which, tbh, is not needed).
- Clip changes are great.
Agree. The falloff is not yet in the TE and TC to my eyes though.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.10.27 22:22:00 -
[6]
I like the changes so far. I'm very interested in seeing what the specific stats are on Sissi. The ammo has been redone to brutal and efficient simplicity. The one thing I saw that I didn't like so much is that the medium range ammo - Depleted Uranium and Titanium Sabot - are very similar. I'd prefer if one medium range ammo type was clearly EM/Therm in nature. The 20% tracking bonus is very interesting.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 00:17:00 -
[7]
Astro is going to **** himself. The TE/TC improvements will help out the other races as well. Do Hybrids need a look after this?
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.10.29 23:59:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: AstroPhobic Minmatar should be the solo ship of choice.
Well, then sub-BS ships need zero boosts since they are solo ships of choice. Apart from having the best solo frig, best solo cruiser, BC which is at least tied with the drake for best solo BC, best solo HAC, second best solo lolAF, well... really, what?
You talk about solo, but really, Minmatar really hold the advantages for soloing in the sub-BS realm. Some other ships are comparable/on par, and there's nothing wrong with that either; but whatever sub-BS shipclass you look at, Minmatar have the advantage for solo work (well with BCs it's more tied between Drake/Hurricane for solo).
I agree w/ Cpt. that this might be too much of a buff. It's as if the devs went from trying to tweak it to capitulating and going all in. If ALL of the hardcore Minmatar crowd is satisfied then you probably overdid it.
The 150s, 220s, and 650s are the middle of the road AC and the most popular. Keep their stats the same. Nerf the lower tier and buff the top one. Don't buff everything! I also feel that the double bonus on the falloff for mods is overkill - especially with the AC tiers getting buffed.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 16:25:00 -
[9]
Originally by: To mare Edited by: To mare on 03/11/2009 15:49:34 seriously CCP 10% per tier is nothing. and considering its to falloff this boost its pretty laughable.
edit numbers 30km to 33km on dual 650 with barrage 30km to 36km on 800mm with barrage this is not a boost this is just random crap to make minamtar people stfu for a while.
Add that to the TE/TC falloff boost and it becomes a bit better. Everything is in degrees. Seriously - I was worried when everyone was "this is perfect." and noone was screaming for more. Now that more people think it isn't enough - balance is restored to the force.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 15:37:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Mioelnir Quick attribute comparisons for the new projectile weapons as they are on Sisi right now with current TQ stats:
stuff
Thanks for the graphs. I like the tracking on the lower tiers. The falloff increase is rather miniscule. Ammo changes are huge IMHO. Difficult to see the end result with so many changes.
|
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 00:10:00 -
[11]
I'm putting in my vote for greater difference in falloff amoung the AC tiers. Artillery tiers falloff could take a look at too. I'd rather have that then the 30% TE boost. The 15% TE/TC falloff with the original AC tiers was enough.
15% of the opimal of 1900m and 15% of the falloff of 19km is not exactly the same. TE should not become mandatory on close range AC boats. It's a nice option to have.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 01:50:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Gamrikis Edited by: Gamrikis on 09/11/2009 00:59:50 MY my Branko, You have done a complete 180. First you complain that the changes were to great with absolutely no input on what would be a good change. Do you know why you could not give a good counter offer? It is because you had no testing of the initial purposed change, we all never got that chance. The initial changes would have been a way better way to start this test and get a feel for what would have been good.
Now you are whining after you got your pre-nerfed change that you cried so hard for. Here is what you should do next time a change is purposed that looks half decent. Shut your hole! Yup it is just that simple. Let it hit the server and test it out then make an informative decision that we can all appreciate.
The new changes are not good we know this. There was a post to get rid of the rate of fire bonus for a damage bonus and I stand beside this. Imagine a fleet battle with 200+ people all slugging it out and this rouge bunch of tempest keeps warping in and out ever 22 seconds taking hard hitting shots. It will add an element that we can all grow to love and fear.
To be fair the falloff per tier went from ridiculously OP to miniscule. I agree that the tiers should have a greater variance in falloff - not what was originally proposed. The TE I think should be tested.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.11.29 15:54:00 -
[13]
IÆm going to make a few quick points. Dominion is going to be a game changer. There are some very obvious changes that are going being heatedly discussed in this thread. Then there are other more subtle points that havenÆt been discussed as much.
Most RRBS are omnitanked. They typically have at least two EANM, a DC, x number of 1600 plates, and three trimarks. Why? Two reasons. One is to give enough time if primaried for others to lock and start repping. The other more important reason is to survive a doomsday. That area of effect weapon is going away in Dominion. It frees up your setup somewhat. You can fudge your total armor HP somewhat and swap some of those trimarks, plates, or an EANM for an EM or Thermal resistance mod/rig. If the game is truly Amarr Online and you donÆt have to worry about a DD anymore û this makes sense.
Another point is that in current fleet fights, the Tempest couldnÆt hit at the required range at all. Now to repeat what has been said earlier in this thread û theyÆve arrived. Perhaps last, but at least they can join the party with the extra falloff given by TC/TE. Tremor got an indirect boost with Dominion. Shooting at extreme range is not the MinmatarÆs cup of tea û but they at least have the option now.
I have been in multiple fleet fights where we were outnumbered, often by quite a bit. The FC would get us a warp in point. WeÆd warp in, align out, lock a target, shoot a salvo, and warp out. This is classic guerilla warfare and this type of combat is what Minmatar should be about. Amarr DPS of 400 at 230km doesnÆt matter if we donÆt give them the time needed to take advantage of it. 75% alpha boost. Even with the long range ammo that will be felt. Alpha is back baby! Risk vs. Reward on how close you want that warp in point to be and what type of ammo you want to use.
Some other quick points: Ammo purity is here. This topic appeared on ôboost projectileö threads for quite some time. Ammo clips have in some cases doubled. The mid range ammo is not just for artillery. 650mm plus a tracking computer plus the ammo tracking bonus makes most cruisers and battlecruisers very unhappy. Lastly thereÆs a subtle tracking bonus for the smaller tiers and a falloff by tiers that will be most heavily felt in the ôlarge projectileö category where it is needed. All in all I like these changes. I wish the falloff by tier had been applied to artillery too, but IÆm excited.
|
|
|
|