Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ariel Dawn
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 20:40:00 -
[1]
Comparing with no bonuses, fitting mods, etc.
Mega Pulse Laser II - Scorch L - 45km Optimal/10km Falloff - 44 DPS 800mm Repeating Artillery II - Barrage L - 6km Optimal/30km Falloff - 40 DPS Neutron Blaster Cannon II - Null L - 11km Optimal/16km Falloff - 52 DPS
Heavy Pulse Laser II - Scorch M - 23km Optimal/5km Falloff - 33 DPS 425mm Autocannon II - Barrage M - 3km Optimal/15km Falloff - 30 DPS Heavy Neutron Blaster II - Null L - 5.6km Optimal/7.8km Falloff - 39 DPS
Scorch's supreme range advantage seems to be a carryover of the days when lasers had to deal with higher base armor EM resists, however when CCP nerfed EM resists significantly, they didn't rebalance some of the minor discrepancies such as Scorch. Additionally, a few Amarr ships have very synergistic bonuses that make Scorch incredibly powerful (extra range), since travel time to get within range is practically non-existant for Amarr ships.
Not really sure what % of an optimal change would be required to re-balance scorch, but as it stands right now it seems a bit ridiculous.
|
Dizeezer Velar
Caldari League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 20:47:00 -
[2]
No, not time.
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 20:49:00 -
[3]
Scorch is balanced, be less ****.
|
Ariel Dawn
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 20:55:00 -
[4]
I don't see how having ~30% more optimal alone compared to the optimal+falloff combined of ACs or Blasters is particularly balanced. Everything else seems to be in order asides from some issues with AC damage (which is being addressed in Dominion I think).
It's usually a good idea to champion minor tweaks instead of waiting for the eventual horde of whiners/complainers that completely over-nerf aspects of the game.
|
Axebreaker Jones
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 20:56:00 -
[5]
ye the problem here is obviously the AC's having less dps at shorter range, but that will be changed in dominion.
For close range guns, lasers have least dps and least tracking, but most range. OFC it wins at longer ranges
|
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 21:27:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 16/11/2009 21:31:46 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 16/11/2009 21:31:24 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 16/11/2009 21:30:14 The Scorch problem is the range increase it has over ANMF compared to the range increase Barrage has over EMP and Null has over CNAM.
Let's look at numbers, shall we: HPL II (AN MF): 7.5km + 5km (12.5km total) 425MM II (RF EMP): 1.5km + 10km (11.5km total) Heavy Neutron Blaster II (CN AM): 2.3km+6.3km (8.6km total) Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (CN Terror): 20.3km
HPL II (Scorch): 23km + 5km (28km total) => 124% range increase 425MM II (Barrage): 3km+15km (18km total) => 56% range increase Heavy Neutron Blaster II (Null): 5.6km+7.8km (13.4km total) => 55,8% range increase Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (Terror Javelin): 30.4km total => 49.8% range increase
So obviously both ACs, blasters and HAMs (3 short range weapon systems) have a long range ammo option which provides them with a roughly 50% boost over short range high damage ammo. Lasers get a munition which gives a 124% range boost over short range high damage ammo. THAT is the broken part of Scorch.
Lasers being the longest ranged isn't the problem; they do that with ANMF with very good DPS to boot. The part where you on top of the longest ranged turret, stick a ammo which gives the largest percentual range increase over other turrets and their short range ammos is the problematic part.
Btw, don't mix this up with AC issues. Did you see both blasters and HAMs getting 50% increase over shortrange ammo as well as ACs?
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 21:42:00 -
[7]
Scorch is fine, and lets face it, thats really all amarr got (and teh curse). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
ropnes
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 21:55:00 -
[8]
Dead horse is dead
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1190448
|
DONJUAN v
Tarnak inc. The Kadeshi
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 22:01:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Sidus Isaacs Scorch is fine, and lets face it, thats really all amarr got (and teh curse).
wrong
they got the best command ships (damnation vs eos...) great snipers bs geddon is a npcer heaven (no ammo and a big drone bay) very nice hacs (sac and zealot) compared to the munnin deimos and eagle...
nah man scorch aint the only thing they got , sorry
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 22:20:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Sidus Isaacs on 16/11/2009 22:21:03
Originally by: DONJUAN v
Originally by: Sidus Isaacs Scorch is fine, and lets face it, thats really all amarr got (and teh curse).
wrong
they got the best command ships (damnation vs eos...) great snipers bs geddon is a npcer heaven (no ammo and a big drone bay) very nice hacs (sac and zealot) compared to the munnin deimos and eagle...
nah man scorch aint the only thing they got , sorry
Meh, damnation is only a boosting ship, and their laser BS is only goot in missions with scorch, but missions never was a good becnhmark anyways, nor is ratting :). Sac is mediocre at best, and Zealot is more beam ship, so I will give you that one.
But the main reason I ever fly Amarr ships are scorch. Other then that the other races got better options imo. Going in close? I use AC or Blasters, aiming for range? Scorch or missiles. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
|
Khaarvoor
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 22:34:00 -
[11]
Quote: Let's look at numbers, shall we: HPL II (AN MF): 7.5km + 5km (12.5km total) 425MM II (RF EMP): 1.5km + 10km (11.5km total) Heavy Neutron Blaster II (CN AM): 2.3km+6.3km (8.6km total) Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (CN Terror): 20.3km HPL II (Scorch): 23km + 5km (28km total) => 124% range increase 425MM II (Barrage): 3km+15km (18km total) => 56% range increase Heavy Neutron Blaster II (Null): 5.6km+7.8km (13.4km total) => 55,8% range increase Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (Terror Javelin): 30.4km total => 49.8% range increase
You're making the mistake of counting falloff only once, let's take a look at ammo options while taking "optimal + 2x falloff" as possible engagement range:
HPL II (AN MF): 7.5km + 2x5km (17.5km total) 425MM II (RF EMP): 1.5km + 10km (21.5km total) Heavy Neutron Blaster II (CN AM): 2.3km+6.3km (14.9km total) Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (CN Terror): 20.3km
HPL II (Scorch): 23km + 5km (33km total) => 88% range increase 425MM II (Barrage): 3km+15km (33km total) => 53% range increase (84% with the current sisi patch increasing top tier AC falloff by 20%) Heavy Neutron Blaster II (Null): 5.6km+7.8km (21.2km total) => 42% range increase (needs help somehow, this i agree on) Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (Terror Javelin): 30.4km total => 49.8% range increase (missiles are hard to compare to guns under this aspect, as there is no falloff, i personally would not call javelin HAMs flawed in their current state.)
I took over your range values and rounded the percentages a bit, but overall inaccuracy should be less then 0.5%.
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 22:41:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Khaarvoor
Quote: Let's look at numbers, shall we: HPL II (AN MF): 7.5km + 5km (12.5km total) 425MM II (RF EMP): 1.5km + 10km (11.5km total) Heavy Neutron Blaster II (CN AM): 2.3km+6.3km (8.6km total) Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (CN Terror): 20.3km HPL II (Scorch): 23km + 5km (28km total) => 124% range increase 425MM II (Barrage): 3km+15km (18km total) => 56% range increase Heavy Neutron Blaster II (Null): 5.6km+7.8km (13.4km total) => 55,8% range increase Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (Terror Javelin): 30.4km total => 49.8% range increase
You're making the mistake of counting falloff only once, let's take a look at ammo options while taking "optimal + 2x falloff" as possible engagement range:
HPL II (AN MF): 7.5km + 2x5km (17.5km total) 425MM II (RF EMP): 1.5km + 10km (21.5km total) Heavy Neutron Blaster II (CN AM): 2.3km+6.3km (14.9km total) Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (CN Terror): 20.3km
HPL II (Scorch): 23km + 5km (33km total) => 88% range increase 425MM II (Barrage): 3km+15km (33km total) => 53% range increase (84% with the current sisi patch increasing top tier AC falloff by 20%) Heavy Neutron Blaster II (Null): 5.6km+7.8km (21.2km total) => 42% range increase (needs help somehow, this i agree on) Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (Terror Javelin): 30.4km total => 49.8% range increase (missiles are hard to compare to guns under this aspect, as there is no falloff, i personally would not call javelin HAMs flawed in their current state.)
I took over your range values and rounded the percentages a bit, but overall inaccuracy should be less then 0.5%.
The main reason to hate Javs is that they kill your speed. And when you need range, you often need speed as well. So its mostly anti vaga missile for me :P --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html |
arbiter reformed
Minmatar Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 22:42:00 -
[13]
Edited by: arbiter reformed on 16/11/2009 22:44:15 nerf torps 1kdps at 60km is op
Originally by: Sidus Isaacs sac is mediocre at best
you high? 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 |
Ariel Dawn
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 22:44:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Khaarvoor
You're making the mistake of counting falloff only once, let's take a look at ammo options while taking "optimal +
Most people don't count 0 DPS (@ 2x falloff) as being 'within range'. Heck, being at optimal+falloff itself is pretty terrible DPS-wise.
|
Khaarvoor
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 22:54:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Ariel Dawn
Most people don't count 0 DPS (@ 2x falloff) as being 'within range'. Heck, being at optimal+falloff itself is pretty terrible DPS-wise.
I'm sorry for the wording, "upto optimal + 2x falloff" would have made more sense. ACs start dropping in dps quite fast (short optimal), keep reasonable amounts for a considerable range after that though. Lasers keep at high dps for quite a while but drop down like a brick afterwards. Funny enough, at very high ranges, ACs outdamage lasers, same for very close ranges (due to tracking, which is getting ignored completlely in this thread). The only problem i see with this setup is CCPs appearent disregard for damage reduction within falloff (don't take that out on scorch though, seeing that weapon rebalancing and supercap changes are done, or atleast justified, by the same guy, we might end up with scorch giving an explosion velocity bonus ><)
|
Thingymawotzit
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 22:57:00 -
[16]
Scorch is fine. I have t2 large lasers as well as blasters and tbh most of the time i will still use blasters of lasers in pvp simply because they have a better dmg output.
When dealing in BS fights (not sniper fa660try) Range is rarely an issue as all the bs will be in a group for rr
|
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 23:03:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 16/11/2009 23:03:06
Originally by: Khaarvoor
You're making the mistake of counting falloff only once, let's take a look at ammo options while taking "optimal + 2x falloff" as possible engagement range:
Well, sure, but even at optimal+falloff your DPS is only 37.5%, making it very bad for shooting anything of same size. Your realistic effective range vs same sized targets is 0.5x falloff+optimal (where you do 71% DPS), but let's take reasonable "range" as optimal+falloff since being able to shoot at even slightly beyond optimal+falloff can be indeed useful (when, eg, firing on smaller hulls and such).
Sure the problem is how to evaluate falloff vs optimal (which is why I prefer using optimal+falloff; the advantage of being able to fire at, say, optimal+1.9x falloff and do some miniscule DPS is easily offset by rapid DPS drops after 0.5x falloff).
However, STILL, using your evaluation:
Originally by: Khaarvoor
HPL II (AN MF): 7.5km + 2x5km (17.5km total) 425MM II (RF EMP): 1.5km + 10km (21.5km total) Heavy Neutron Blaster II (CN AM): 2.3km+6.3km (14.9km total) Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (CN Terror): 20.3km
HPL II (Scorch): 23km + 5km (33km total) => 88% range increase 425MM II (Barrage): 3km+15km (33km total) => 53% range increase (84% with the current sisi patch increasing top tier AC falloff by 20%)
Mistake spotted, since it's 1.5+12x2 vs 3+18x2, or 25.5 vs 39, or a 53% increase. Since range is boosted for close range ammo too, you see.
Originally by: Khaarvoor
Heavy Neutron Blaster II (Null): 5.6km+7.8km (21.2km total) => 42% range increase (needs help somehow, this i agree on) Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (Terror Javelin): 30.4km total => 49.8% range increase (missiles are hard to compare to guns under this aspect, as there is no falloff, i personally would not call javelin HAMs flawed in their current state.)
So even with a (fairly unreasonable) consideration of range as being optimal+2xfalloff, you end up with Scorch providing a 88% boost vs others providing 53-54% boost, or providing a 66% larger range increase ;P
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 23:12:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Cpt Branko The Scorch problem is the range increase it has over ANMF compared to the range increase Barrage has over EMP and Null has over CNAM.
The problem here is you're ignoring everything but range instead of comparing the ships as a whole. Sure, barrage gives less of a range increase than scorch, but Minmatar ships are much faster than Amarr ships, so the Minmatar ship has a greater chance of being at its desired range. If Minmatar ships didn't have weaker guns than Amarr, why would anyone fly Amarr?
Or why don't we compare the range LOST by using high-damage ammo? Using your definitions of "maximum range", ACs only lose 36% of their range (6.5 km) by swapping to RF EMP for higher damage, while pulses lose 55% of their range (15.5 km) by swapping to ANMF. -----------
|
Doctor Mabuse
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 23:24:00 -
[19]
Statistics are like bikinis; what they reveal is interesting, what they conceal is even more interesting ------------------------------------
Who's trip-trapping on my bridge? |
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 23:25:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Seriously Bored on 16/11/2009 23:26:22
Originally by: Khaarvoor
You're making the mistake of counting falloff only once, let's take a look at ammo options while taking "optimal + 2x falloff" as possible engagement range:
You're making a mistake by counting anything above 0.5x Falloff as a possible engagement range.
You do ~79% of your DPS at Optimal + 0.5x Falloff. You do ~39% of your DPS at Optimal + 1x Falloff. You do ~15% of your DPS at Optimal + 1.5x Falloff. You do ~3% of your DPS at Optimal + 2x Falloff.
2x Falloff IS NOT a possible engagement range. Anywhere beyond 0.5x Falloff, and you start doing laughable damage very, very fast.
|
|
Ariel Dawn
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 23:31:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: Cpt Branko The Scorch problem is the range increase it has over ANMF compared to the range increase Barrage has over EMP and Null has over CNAM.
The problem here is you're ignoring everything but range instead of comparing the ships as a whole. Sure, barrage gives less of a range increase than scorch, but Minmatar ships are much faster than Amarr ships, so the Minmatar ship has a greater chance of being at its desired range. If Minmatar ships didn't have weaker guns than Amarr, why would anyone fly Amarr?
Or why don't we compare the range LOST by using high-damage ammo? Using your definitions of "maximum range", ACs only lose 36% of their range (6.5 km) by swapping to RF EMP for higher damage, while pulses lose 55% of their range (15.5 km) by swapping to ANMF.
You do realize that the massive range loss from switching from long-range laser ammo to high-damage laser ammo is precicely because of the fact that the long-range laser ammo Scorch is has such a ridiculous range, right?
Also regarding speed differences: Armageddon: 131m/s Typhoon: 163m/s
Truly, Minmatar are speed demons. Keep in mind that if the engagement range is anything past what a blaster/AC ship wants, the laser ship will be taking big chunks out of the other ship while it's approaching while taking no return fire.
If you want to 'look at ships as a whole', an Armageddon (Tier 1) out DPSes and out EHPs a Megathron or Tempest (Tier 2) at up to 3 times (vs blaster) to 2 times (vs AC) the range. Effective engagement distance of the Geddon is massive.
Originally by: Khaarvoor
Lasers keep at high dps for quite a while but drop down like a brick afterwards. Funny enough, at very high ranges, ACs outdamage lasers, same for very close ranges (due to tracking, which is getting ignored completlely in this thread).
I think you're confusing lasers with autocannons. Lasers keep high damage up to 45km and then drop. Autocannons keep decent damage up to ~20km, then drop dramatically. An autocannon @ 45km is doing about 15% DPS while the laser is still doing 100%. If I missed something, then feel free to explain.
Tracking doesn't really come into play with proper piloting against similar sized ships. Laser based ships when flown well can take advantage of their significant range on approaches to put serious damage on smaller hulls. A Zealot can 2-shot an interceptor at 45km for example with pulses when flying against their transversal. Blasters/ACs won't even touch those ranges.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 23:38:00 -
[22]
indeed take a look at scorch, could use an added 5 explosive damage or something.
boost amarr!!!
|
Neuronai
|
Posted - 2009.11.16 23:40:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Neuronai on 16/11/2009 23:41:21 Statistics aside my feeling is this:
Most PvP (not all, most) is gang/fleet combat. Lasers with Scorch are probably the best close ranged weapon to use in these types of engagements due to their ability to hit **** with decent damage instantaneously and with far greater range than other close ranged weapon types. It's why Amarr are FOTM imo.
Am I talking ****? Probably, but at a glance it seems all a bit too easy for Scorch users.
|
Forge Lag
Jita Lag Preservation Fund
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 00:55:00 -
[24]
Legion is best T3.
Large ACs are awesome.
Carry on, nice numbers, add some pretty pictures too.
|
Jana Tanaka
Caldari Tanaka Industries Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 01:04:00 -
[25]
Yay another: "Lets compare weaponsystems without looking at the underlying platforms thread".
Contentless. Pointless.
|
Ariel Dawn
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 01:27:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Jana Tanaka Yay another: "Lets compare weaponsystems without looking at the underlying platforms thread".
Contentless. Pointless.
Don't kid yourself. I assume that the average EVE player has a grain of intelligence and can figure these obvious things out on their own. You want examples?
Armageddon /w 7 MP II - Scorch - 412 DPS Megathron /w 7 NBC II - Null - 451 DPS Tempest /w 6 650mm AC II (800s won't fit in a normal setup) - Barrage - 378 DPS
How about this?
Apoc /w 8 MP II - Scorch - 353 DPS - 62km OPTIMAL RANGE
I've left out Heat Sinks, Mag Stabs, Gyros in these comparisions, which is probably doing you a favor considering Amarr tend to have additional lowslots compared to Gallente/Minmatar.
Might as well (Plate/RR setups):
Armageddon - 2 HS - Scorch /w 7 MP II - 606 DPS 45km/10km Megathron - 1 HS - Null /w 7 NBC II - 554 DPS 11km/16km Tempest - 1 Gyro - Barrage /w 6 800mm AC II - 488 DPS 6km/30km
Also (same ships, close range ammo):
Armageddon - AN Multifreq - 760 DPS Megathron - CN Antimatter - 695 DPS Tempest - RF EMP - 561 DPS
There, happy? You sure you want to include lasers while fitted onto their ships? And don't whine that the Armageddon has an extra damage mod; guess what, thats what the ship lets you do! I should probably not tell you that it also has more EHP despite being Tier 1, right?
|
Diomidis
Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 01:30:00 -
[27]
As mentioned before, Amarr laser boats are one-trick ponies: they mainly do dps at range + plate tank.
Just like ranged ewar is the "Caldari thing" and out-ewar other stuff, the Amarr BS fleet is devastating when talking equal numbers, when not requiring actual tackle / range dictation out of the BS fleet itself etc.
It's just that the way ppl play these days that make Amarr seem unbalanced: RR BS fleets are FOTM, and Amarr has the best Armor RR capable BSs and Logistics.
Scimitar supported Drake and CS/BC gangs are also FOTM and quite hard to counter also. I don't see any "nerf well coordinated roams" threads around...
I also don't see many Falcons around, despite the fact that those things do still pwn, and are a nice counter to RR...yes, I know that those are not un-touchable now, you have to get your hands dirty a bit to be effective - or you could bring some Rooks along...
Nah, all the Caldari / Falcon alts are now cross training for Amarr...
I strongly believe that the FOTM trend is what's been "braking" EVE...
if NOS is the FOTM, everybody goes NOS - EVERYBODY - till it was nerfed - for a good reason... EVERYBODY abused the nano-mechanics and nano capable ships - till it was nerfed, for a valid reason apparently...
And when nano was nerfed, crazy ranged ECM boats were FOTM, cause almost nothing could touch them...easy-win button once more etc...guess what...that was nerfed - but not until it was abused quite for some time...
Lasers are just "the next in line" ranged weapon...those will be cross trained for and abused.
Well, by the time EVERYBODY flies Amarr BSs and uses scorch etc, it will be nerfed re-balanced...
After that we will abuse something like Nano-ravens with Fury Cruise and TDs or something...we will find something to take advantage of others - simply cause winning is more fun than losing - right? And we just want to be SURE of winning.
We comfortably forget the fact that, in this sandbox, we share a way greater responsibility than we want to admit. Join the Biggest Greek Corp! www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
Cibo Seidensha
Amarr Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 01:40:00 -
[28]
7 MP II wont fit on a normal Geddon either. You need cap boosters, MWD, plates... So use Dual Heavys. :P
|
Ulwithy Arillious
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 02:08:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Ulwithy Arillious on 17/11/2009 02:08:37 Amarr are very straight-forward. When you fight them, you generally know what you're up against. That said, if Amarr are FotM for RR BS fights, would fitting your RR BS with EM/Thermal resists be a good idea?
|
steveid
Helljumpers
|
Posted - 2009.11.17 02:35:00 -
[30]
why does everyone think that all the races guns, ships and capabilities should be exactly matching. Its ****ing stupid.
Inappropriate signature removed. Zymurgist |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |