Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 18:38:00 -
[91]
The problem is that a lot of ppl consider "close range" to be 4.5km when the truth is that close range starts at around 13-14km as that is where standard webs take effect and its well within point range and as such blasters should at least match or out damage with its various ammos every other system within that range the closer to 0 you get.
So neutron blasters on a mega:
With iron matches the dmg of MF with a 14km optimal.
Then:
With tungson 3% more dmg than MF with a 13km optimal. With iridium 6% more dmg than MF with a 11km optimal. With lead 9% more dmg than MF with a 9km optimal. With thorium 12% more dmg than MF with a 7.9km optimal. With urainium 15% more dmg than MF with a 6.8km optimal. With plutonium 18% more dmg than MF with a 5.6km optimal.
And at the lowest range AM out damaging MF by 21% at 4.5km optimal.
Blaster falloff would need to be reduced or adjusted and these figures may need to be altered slightly as they are just rough but at least they will give ppl with a clue the basic idea of a fix that would make blasters the best close range weapon system again instead of pulse ruling long and short range.
Obviously simular adjusdtments could be done to medium and small blasters with med and small MF fitted pulse as the guides.
|
wallenbergaren
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 19:33:00 -
[92]
Oneiros should get some kind of bonus to make it appealing Like a higher sensor strength or something
|
lecrotta
Minmatar lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 19:36:00 -
[93]
Edited by: lecrotta on 05/11/2009 19:35:57
Originally by: wallenbergaren Oneiros should get some kind of bonus to make it appealing Like a higher sensor strength or something
It did but have good bonuses they gimped the crap out of tracking links a year or two ago.
|
demonfurbie
Minmatar Covert-Nexus
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 20:29:00 -
[94]
its not gal ships over all they are fine its blasters/rails/damps that have the issues
blasters do not have a huge range like lasers or long fall off like projectiles but they do have the drawbacks of both of those wep systems (cap use and reload/ammo use)
granted blasters do have higher damage but with the webs being less effective at slowing ships down and scrams turning off mwds a blaster ship has issues getting into range and holding a target to were it can hit it for any dmg
rails have similar issues on gal ships but on cal ships they are nice due to the range bonuses that cal get instead of dmg bonuses and the fact that cal use mid slots to tank and there rail ships get a res bonus so even less needed there for they can use more low slots for dmg mods and at least 1 more mid for tracking there fore they can do the same dmg as gal ships at a much further range (rohk v hype/mega sniper fit)
damps really got hit by scripting nerf but over all its damp ships that need a looking at.
drone ships are over all fine they just need a bit of tweaking (1 less high slot on the myrm 25m3 more bandwidth)
the log ship/eos needs more work over all just dont know how
|
Eseay
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 20:38:00 -
[95]
amarr ships arn't what they used to be either. stop whining and adapt.
|
Precisionist
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 20:44:00 -
[96]
Originally by: demonfurbie its not gal ships over all they are fine its blasters/rails/damps that have the issues
blasters do not have a huge range like lasers or long fall off like projectiles but they do have the drawbacks of both of those wep systems (cap use and reload/ammo use)
granted blasters do have higher damage but with the webs being less effective at slowing ships down and scrams turning off mwds a blaster ship has issues getting into range and holding a target to were it can hit it for any dmg
rails have similar issues on gal ships but on cal ships they are nice due to the range bonuses that cal get instead of dmg bonuses and the fact that cal use mid slots to tank and there rail ships get a res bonus so even less needed there for they can use more low slots for dmg mods and at least 1 more mid for tracking there fore they can do the same dmg as gal ships at a much further range (rohk v hype/mega sniper fit)
damps really got hit by scripting nerf but over all its damp ships that need a looking at.
drone ships are over all fine they just need a bit of tweaking (1 less high slot on the myrm 25m3 more bandwidth)
the log ship/eos needs more work over all just dont know how
Pretty much what this guy said, I think he missed deimos having a extra high and a shortage of med or low tho.
But this is pot on, CCP due something or give us AC bonus's.
FIX the Underpowered mods and make it good at something. All about balance, one thing that ruins gameplay is lack of balance, well atm gallente is OUT of whack and does not compare to other races Overall.
|
Kopaczek1
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 20:54:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Eseay stop whining and adapt.
You mean train amarr?
|
Aalu Aullard
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 21:32:00 -
[98]
Deimos... If it had 4 mids, people would start fitting shield tank and rails, and its not what the ship is supposed to do.
How about:
Ions Small nos
Mwd Scram Web
Nano DCU Eanm Energized reactive Magstab 800mm RT
Collision Burst
ECM Vespas
I have no access to eft atm, so cant check the stats. But i think it was doing nicely around 2400m/s with overloaded mwd. Overloaded faction web for 15km+ web range to close in, scram to finally shutdown the targets movement. My mains skills put the dps around 450 and 30k ehp... Tank is still bit thin and needs to be careful what to engage. But im certain that this fit works better than the sluggish 1600mm RT + trimarks.
If Deimos is changed, then maybe the CPU/PG needs slight adjustment. Maybe bit more basespeed. If i remember correctly, Deimos has same speed as Sacriledge.
|
EFT Worrier
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 22:57:00 -
[99]
Originally by: demonfurbie its not gal ships over all they are fine its blasters/rails/damps that have the issues
|
Stuart Price
Caldari The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 00:44:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Aalu Aullard Deimos... If it had 4 mids, people would start fitting shield tank and rails, and its not what the ship is supposed to do.
How about:
Ions Small nos
Mwd Scram Web
Nano DCU Eanm Energized reactive Magstab 800mm RT
Collision Burst
ECM Vespas
I have no access to eft atm, so cant check the stats. But i think it was doing nicely around 2400m/s with overloaded mwd. Overloaded faction web for 15km+ web range to close in, scram to finally shutdown the targets movement. My mains skills put the dps around 450 and 30k ehp... Tank is still bit thin and needs to be careful what to engage. But im certain that this fit works better than the sluggish 1600mm RT + trimarks.
If Deimos is changed, then maybe the CPU/PG needs slight adjustment. Maybe bit more basespeed. If i remember correctly, Deimos has same speed as Sacriledge.
Actually, the biggest problem facing the Deimos is neuts. This means a cap booster is virtually a must to keep your face-melting dps running, meaning on a 3 medslot fitting you lose the web.
Now this is partially compensated by the falloff bonus allowing you to shoot Null out to web range, preventing an opponent web-kiting you completely, but the lack of agility and the presence of plates (because active tanking is a viable option right?) makes getting into any kind of effective range difficult.
For me, the solution is to power-buff its agility, to allow it to better manoeuvre in its intended range. the fourth mid to keep the web would be awesome as well though, even if it does lead to shield buffers.
Then again, we're probably not intended to shield tank the Zealot or Brutix and yet plenty of us do... Putting the 'irate' into 'Pirate' |
|
Izure
No Salvation War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 15:13:00 -
[101]
I agree with most people in this thread, that it is not just gallente but blasters,damps,rails, and well the deimos is missing a slot or it is in the wrong place, mrym needs 100 band, and eos needqs 125 band.
|
Mr Ignitious
Helljumpers
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 15:59:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Izure I agree with most people in this thread, that it is not just gallente but blasters,damps,rails, and well the deimos is missing a slot or it is in the wrong place, mrym needs 100 band, and eos needqs 125 band.
Why do you think the eos needs 125 mbit? It doesn't make sense in comparison to ANY of the other fleet commands. The only issue with the eos is that there is no reason to use info warfare links over any other.
Right now the eos gives a bonus to ewar boats in a fleet, but you won't get any decent fleet that is mainly made up of ewar, therefore a tanking bonus would benefit the whole fleet more so.
Aside from this though, I like the idea of ammo damage increase. I like this for a couple reasons, the first one because it reminds me of bellums thread in GD talking about how tough it is for a solo/small gang to chew through buffer tanked ships before help arrives. In addition it helps redefine the recently watered down distinction of the blaster role, lots of damage at a high cost (no range to speak of, and high cap use). Further because it's an ammo change it would carry over to rails as well really helping boost their current laughable damage. The sad part is though it's unlikely we'll see any damage increases that drastic (but it sure as hell would be fun).
I wonder if a change to hybrid T2 ammo could not help accomplish this goal? Like lower the tracking penalty of null and increase it's damage and range a little bit. And for void get rid of any tracking penalty at all because a tracking penalty on such a close range weapon is silly, but also increase it's damage out put by 15-20%.
I read the forums assuming there are no trolls, only really stupid people.
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?
|
The'Best Hellfury
Incura
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 17:55:00 -
[103]
The number of people in this thread who expect to be able to solo in a fleet command ship is astounding ALEKSEYEV KARRDE FOR CSM |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 18:06:00 -
[104]
Originally by: The'Best Hellfury The number of people in this thread who expect to be able to solo in a fleet command ship is astounding
Its a nice option to be able to do so, as training it on a alt and sitting it in or on the edge of a POS or in a safe position dishing out bonuses to the gang your main is on is a rather weak role imho.
|
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 18:40:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: The'Best Hellfury The number of people in this thread who expect to be able to solo in a fleet command ship is astounding
Its a nice option to be able to do so, as training it on a alt and sitting it in or on the edge of a POS or in a safe position dishing out bonuses to the gang your main is on is a rather weak role imho.
So what will you do with the Vulture? Give it siege launchers? Tachyon Damnations? 1400mm Claymores?
Even more importantly, what will you then do to the field CSs? Citadel Nighthawks — now that would be something… ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 18:52:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: The'Best Hellfury The number of people in this thread who expect to be able to solo in a fleet command ship is astounding
Its a nice option to be able to do so, as training it on a alt and sitting it in or on the edge of a POS or in a safe position dishing out bonuses to the gang your main is on is a rather weak role imho.
So what will you do with the Vulture? Give it siege launchers? Tachyon Damnations? 1400mm Claymores?
Even more importantly, what will you then do to the field CSs? Citadel Nighthawks ù now that would be somethingà
Id try to add content to a discussion instead of just trolling it with sarcastic comments.
|
Mr Ignitious
Helljumpers
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 19:04:00 -
[107]
merin was actually quite right... Plus, I think you just do it wrong. The fleets I fly with have the fleet cs right there with them. A damnation on the field gets on km's and is a TERRIBLE choice of primary by the enemy. Claymore in a nano hac gang keeps up just fine and again, if they shoot it (assuming you have scimis) is another lolprimary. It works a lot better than parking them on a pos.
I read the forums assuming there are no trolls, only really stupid people.
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?
|
AnKahn
Caldari The Giant Squid Corp.
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 19:27:00 -
[108]
You could boost blasters by increasing de-aggression times by 10 sec.
Not a whole lot of tracking or range issues when someone is spamming the dock button.
This is not a sarcastic suggestion.
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 19:30:00 -
[109]
Originally by: AnKahn You could boost blasters by increasing de-aggression times by 10 sec.
Not a whole lot of tracking or range issues when someone is spamming the dock button.
This is not a sarcastic suggestion.
Im sure their are hundreds of drake pilots sitting outside stations with a passive tank fitted who think your are a god right now.......
|
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 19:37:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Murina Id try to add content to a discussion instead of just trolling it with sarcastic comments.
I did. You just didn't like the addition, which is your problem. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki |
|
Borasatar
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 20:02:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Mr Ignitious
Originally by: Diomidis
Originally by: Precisionist true gallente commands ( well really the EOS ) is horrid.
Wha? The Gallente Fleet Command Ship is doomed to be a low-dps /high-tanking fleet booster? "Not packing punch as field command ships but providing bonuses to a well rounded fleet?"
That's BS!
Unacceptable!
The Eos IS horrid, but not because it sucks at killing things but because its LINKS suck COMPLETE butt. You won't find a scenario where boosting non-tackle ewar is more useful than boosting tank or mobility.
We used an Eos boosting a couple weeks ago and were glad we had it (it helped out a bit). It just wasn't against other ships ;)
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 20:41:00 -
[112]
Edited by: Murina on 06/11/2009 20:45:17
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Murina Id try to add content to a discussion instead of just trolling it with sarcastic comments.
I did. You just didn't like the addition, which is your problem.
Suggesting BS sized weapons on command ships with a sarcastic comment attached is nothing but troll, go away.
Anyway...
Maybe upgrading the fleet command ships so they also get simular logistic bonuses simular to the logistic ships but perhaps not so strong would make them a better gang pvp support ship.
|
Rastigan
Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 23:05:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Rastigan on 06/11/2009 23:05:25
Originally by: The'Best Hellfury The number of people in this thread who expect to be able to solo in a fleet command ship is astounding
Its a T2 Battlecruiser, it should be usefull in some reasonable way... And no one thinks that it should be a solopwnmobile, even pre-nerf the solo Eos was still subpar to the Dominix.. The baddest Field Command ship will get beaten much more often than not by a tier 1 Battleship, and often a tier 3 BC(except the Myrmidon)...
|
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 23:49:00 -
[114]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 06/11/2009 23:49:34
Originally by: The Djego
If you fix web range pvp with blaster ships, there is not much left to fix actually. You could still go for a damage boost, but this is less important in my opinion than the ability to bring the DPS you got on the target and also it was like this before QR already. What changes is that the blaster ship can claim back his role, and since amarr suck in this role(beside Harbinger and the drone ships) it is not a huge issue that blasters are a bit worse off than lasers(like it was before QR for solo/small gang).
To the more speed argument, I think this isn't really needed, since kitting is a intended drawback(also a lot more of a problem in the nano age). If you have the superior power in web range, you need to work to get there. It also gives lots of ships reasons to engage you and every good fight does have some sort of kitting in the beginning what forces the blaster pilot to put some effort in it to reach web range.
The problem is that there is a lot of ships were even up close you don't really have that much of a edge. In the sub-BS world, at least. I don't remember the last time I actually bothered to reload to Barrage and actually kite a blasterboat, instead of just loading Hail M and showing him who's king within HIS optimal range (or alternatively, RF EMP for the paperthin shieldtanks).
The DPS edge just isn't noticeable enough, and the fitting cost of neutrons is simply far too large. Everything else, and you cease to have any sort of DPS advantage over anything.
That said, I don't solo in BS where you do have actual non-horrible ships.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Tippia
Raddick Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 23:51:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Murina Suggesting BS sized weapons on command ships with a sarcastic comment attached is nothing but troll, go away.
People are suggesting that the Eos should be able to field BS-sized weapons — I'm drawing that suggestion to its conclusion. The fact that you see that as a troll provides adequate explanation for why giving the Eos more drones is a bad idea.
Originally by: Rastigan Its a T2 Battlecruiser, it should be usefull in some reasonable way...
It is: it can field three command modules. If there is a problem with the Fleet Command ships, it's more with those modules (and in some cases the ship's tank) than with the ship's firepower, because firepower lies so far beyond its role that it's silly.
Quote: The baddest Field Command ship will get beaten much more often than not by a tier 1 Battleship, and often a tier 3 BC(except the Myrmidon)...
…and Fleet Command ships should be even less of a powerhouse than those, so again: there's really no rationale behind giving the Eos more drone capability than the ship(s) that are above them in terms of being able to project force. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki |
The'Best Hellfury
Incura
|
Posted - 2009.11.06 23:51:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Murina Suggesting BS sized weapons on command ships with a sarcastic comment attached is nothing but troll, go away.
So what would you call 5x heavy drones? ALEKSEYEV KARRDE FOR CSM |
Jack Icegaard
The Omega Project
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 00:24:00 -
[117]
From where comes the notion that heavy drones are BS sized weapons? Sure, i can see the supposed pattern: light drones are frigate sized, medium are cruiser sized etc., but i don't think that this categorization serve any real purpose.
To me, there is nothing battleship-sized about sentry's or heavy drones.
|
Neuronai
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 01:29:00 -
[118]
Originally by: demonfurbie its not gal ships over all they are fine its blasters/rails/damps that have the issues
blasters do not have a huge range like lasers or long fall off like projectiles but they do have the drawbacks of both of those wep systems (cap use and reload/ammo use)
granted blasters do have higher damage but with the webs being less effective at slowing ships down and scrams turning off mwds a blaster ship has issues getting into range and holding a target to were it can hit it for any dmg
rails have similar issues on gal ships but on cal ships they are nice due to the range bonuses that cal get instead of dmg bonuses and the fact that cal use mid slots to tank and there rail ships get a res bonus so even less needed there for they can use more low slots for dmg mods and at least 1 more mid for tracking there fore they can do the same dmg as gal ships at a much further range (rohk v hype/mega sniper fit)
damps really got hit by scripting nerf but over all its damp ships that need a looking at.
drone ships are over all fine they just need a bit of tweaking (1 less high slot on the myrm 25m3 more bandwidth)
the log ship/eos needs more work over all just dont know how
I think the blaster problem is less to do with not being able to get in range (I don't usually have trouble applying my blaster damage) but rather that the DPS isn't worth the distance you have to close...I mean you don't get much more DPS out of blasters than you do pulse lasers, yet pulse lasers get ludicrous range with scorch. In fleet battles blasters are pretty much pointless.
|
Rastigan
Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 03:37:00 -
[119]
Originally by: The'Best Hellfury
So what would you call 5x heavy drones?
just +100 more dps to an Eos over its 75m3 drone setup... or for most Eos pilots the ability to field 5 heavy utility drones.
Heavy Drones arent exactly a battleship exclusive, all you need is 25m3 bandwidth.
|
The'Best Hellfury
Incura
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 04:32:00 -
[120]
Edited by: The''Best Hellfury on 07/11/2009 04:32:46
Originally by: Rastigan
Originally by: The'Best Hellfury
So what would you call 5x heavy drones?
just +100 more dps to an Eos over its 75m3 drone setup... or for most Eos pilots the ability to field 5 heavy utility drones.
Heavy Drones arent exactly a battleship exclusive, all you need is 25m3 bandwidth.
100+ DPS to a ship that already does 400+ with no damage mods
No other Fleet Command ship comes close to those numbers.
Edit: To clarify, I agree that some Gallente Ships need reworking and blasters as a whole are FUBAR in their current state, but the Eos is a terrible example. ALEKSEYEV KARRDE FOR CSM |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |