| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Altaireus
   |
Posted - 2004.12.21 16:55:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Altaireus on 21/12/2004 16:55:56
650mm II and 720mm II have worse tracking stats on sisi than on tranquility 
|
Altaireus
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 16:55:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Altaireus on 21/12/2004 16:55:56
650mm II and 720mm II have worse tracking stats on sisi than on tranquility
|
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 16:56:00 -
[63]
 Originally by: jukriamrr
Originally by: Dred 'Morte
it would have been better if you had given 15% more dmg to autocannons and 20% more tracking to artillerys
yes, maybe that would be a VERY nice solution. 
...how about 20% more tracking + 5% more RoF to AC's coupled with a 100% increase on ammo clip, and 15% more damage and 7.5% more tracking to artys?
AC's nowadays chew too much ammo, making reloading very comon with them. An increase on the ammout of ammo that they can load would be very nice.
-------------------
Quote:
Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
|
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 16:56:00 -
[64]
Originally by: jukriamrr
Originally by: Dred 'Morte
it would have been better if you had given 15% more dmg to autocannons and 20% more tracking to artillerys
yes, maybe that would be a VERY nice solution.
...how about 20% more tracking + 5% more RoF to AC's coupled with a 100% increase on ammo clip, and 15% more damage and 7.5% more tracking to artys?
AC's nowadays chew too much ammo, making reloading very comon with them. An increase on the ammout of ammo that they can load would be very nice.
-------------------
Quote:
Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
|
Hakera
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 16:58:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Hakera on 21/12/2004 17:04:32
Originally by: Grimpak
Originally by: jukriamrr
Originally by: Dred 'Morte
it would have been better if you had given 15% more dmg to autocannons and 20% more tracking to artillerys
yes, maybe that would be a VERY nice solution.
...how about 20% more tracking + 5% more RoF to AC's coupled with a 100% increase on ammo clip, and 15% more damage and 7.5% more tracking to artys?
AC's nowadays chew too much ammo, making reloading very comon with them. An increase on the ammout of ammo that they can load would be very nice.
that needs to be part & parcel of the HP increase, ships cant simple carry enough ammo to kill other ships so all ammo volumes must decrease my half (that includes cap charges)
a 50% magazine increase would be cool across the board.
Dumbledore - Eve-I.com |
Hakera
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 16:58:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Hakera on 21/12/2004 17:04:32
Originally by: Grimpak
Originally by: jukriamrr
Originally by: Dred 'Morte
it would have been better if you had given 15% more dmg to autocannons and 20% more tracking to artillerys
yes, maybe that would be a VERY nice solution.
...how about 20% more tracking + 5% more RoF to AC's coupled with a 100% increase on ammo clip, and 15% more damage and 7.5% more tracking to artys?
AC's nowadays chew too much ammo, making reloading very comon with them. An increase on the ammout of ammo that they can load would be very nice.
that needs to be part & parcel of the HP increase, ships cant simple carry enough ammo to kill other ships so all ammo volumes must decrease my half (that includes cap charges)
a 50% magazine increase would be cool across the board.
Dumbledore - Eve-I.com |
jukriamrr
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 16:58:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Grimpak
...how about 20% more tracking + 5% more RoF to AC's coupled with a 100% increase on ammo clip, and 15% more damage and 7.5% more tracking to artys?
AC's nowadays chew too much ammo, making reloading very comon with them. An increase on the ammout of ammo that they can load would be very nice.
Anything so that I can pilot my tempest again, man, anything ... 
|
jukriamrr
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 16:58:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Grimpak
...how about 20% more tracking + 5% more RoF to AC's coupled with a 100% increase on ammo clip, and 15% more damage and 7.5% more tracking to artys?
AC's nowadays chew too much ammo, making reloading very comon with them. An increase on the ammout of ammo that they can load would be very nice.
Anything so that I can pilot my tempest again, man, anything ...
|
JoCool
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:00:00 -
[69]
Edited by: JoCool on 21/12/2004 17:04:53
N1 JackHammer
About the people complaining about the howitzer tracking - hitting stuff is no problem at all with them, and was not before, without tracking mods. The damage increase makes it a much more potent weapon in good hands
|
JoCool
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:00:00 -
[70]
Edited by: JoCool on 21/12/2004 17:04:53
N1 JackHammer
About the people complaining about the howitzer tracking - hitting stuff is no problem at all with them, and was not before, without tracking mods. The damage increase makes it a much more potent weapon in good hands
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:13:00 -
[71]
Originally by: DarkMatters
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:50:50
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:50:09
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:49:26
Originally by: Ultrabug
Edited by: Ultrabug on 21/12/2004 16:33:36
Edited by: Ultrabug on 21/12/2004 16:32:18
Originally by: Khaldorn Murino
How about, testing these stats. Then switching it and giving autocannons the damage increase and the big guns the tracking increase. Because, and it may be only me here, i think that would be more beneficial.
As the issue with the projectiles was that they cant hit a barn door. But any positive nerf is something eh? Just a suggestion.
I agree, 1400 suffer more of the tracking and RoF than damage imo ! Inverted stats would make more sense to me but wouldn't be enough.
Lasers get all the benefits : tracking + RoF + NO AMMO CHANGING TIME. How can you imagine such little changes will balance that ? Why doing more damage if you can't get a hit ??? Rolling Eyes
lasers went from rubbish ( all amarr ships fitting hybrids) to good with a single 5% per ship lvl decrease in cap use. this was because other turrets types simply out damaged lasers for the use of less cap leaving no point in fitting them.
the changes suggested are between 15%-20% of diffrent attributes, would it not be better to fully test these increase before nerfing lasers?
you forget the tracking changes
and i think chrystales got beafed upped
Wanna fly with me?
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:13:00 -
[72]
Originally by: DarkMatters
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:50:50
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:50:09
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:49:26
Originally by: Ultrabug
Edited by: Ultrabug on 21/12/2004 16:33:36
Edited by: Ultrabug on 21/12/2004 16:32:18
Originally by: Khaldorn Murino
How about, testing these stats. Then switching it and giving autocannons the damage increase and the big guns the tracking increase. Because, and it may be only me here, i think that would be more beneficial.
As the issue with the projectiles was that they cant hit a barn door. But any positive nerf is something eh? Just a suggestion.
I agree, 1400 suffer more of the tracking and RoF than damage imo ! Inverted stats would make more sense to me but wouldn't be enough.
Lasers get all the benefits : tracking + RoF + NO AMMO CHANGING TIME. How can you imagine such little changes will balance that ? Why doing more damage if you can't get a hit ??? Rolling Eyes
lasers went from rubbish ( all amarr ships fitting hybrids) to good with a single 5% per ship lvl decrease in cap use. this was because other turrets types simply out damaged lasers for the use of less cap leaving no point in fitting them.
the changes suggested are between 15%-20% of diffrent attributes, would it not be better to fully test these increase before nerfing lasers?
you forget the tracking changes
and i think chrystales got beafed upped
Wanna fly with me?
|
Hygelac
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:14:00 -
[73]
I can't wait to get home and test shooting things! Fantastic stuff.
|
Hygelac
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:14:00 -
[74]
I can't wait to get home and test shooting things! Fantastic stuff.
|
Hast
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:22:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Nafri
you forget the tracking changes
and i think chrystales got beafed upped
yes, crystals got upped in dmg if I can remember correctly
|
Hast
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:22:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Nafri
you forget the tracking changes
and i think chrystales got beafed upped
yes, crystals got upped in dmg if I can remember correctly
|
Arthur Guinness
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:28:00 -
[77]
Autocannons could do with more ammo.... seeing as blaster got lower rof but more ammo capacity. |
Arthur Guinness
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:28:00 -
[78]
Autocannons could do with more ammo.... seeing as blaster got lower rof but more ammo capacity. |
DarkMatters
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:32:00 -
[79]
checks patch notes....
1548 patch
i stand corrected
|
DarkMatters
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:32:00 -
[80]
checks patch notes....
1548 patch
i stand corrected
|
Ultrabug
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:36:00 -
[81]
Originally by: DarkMatters
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:50:50
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:50:09
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:49:26
Originally by: Ultrabug
Edited by: Ultrabug on 21/12/2004 16:33:36
Edited by: Ultrabug on 21/12/2004 16:32:18
Originally by: Khaldorn Murino
How about, testing these stats. Then switching it and giving autocannons the damage increase and the big guns the tracking increase. Because, and it may be only me here, i think that would be more beneficial.
As the issue with the projectiles was that they cant hit a barn door. But any positive nerf is something eh? Just a suggestion.
I agree, 1400 suffer more of the tracking and RoF than damage imo ! Inverted stats would make more sense to me but wouldn't be enough.
Lasers get all the benefits : tracking + RoF + NO AMMO CHANGING TIME. How can you imagine such little changes will balance that ? Why doing more damage if you can't get a hit ??? Rolling Eyes
lasers went from rubbish ( all amarr ships fitting hybrids) to good with a single 5% per ship lvl decrease in cap use. this was because other turrets types simply out damaged lasers for the use of less cap leaving no point in fitting them.
the changes suggested are between 15%-20% of diffrent attributes, would it not be better to fully test these increase before nerfing lasers?
And what about Amarr ship the only ships getting 10% bonuses ?...
Crystals has been changed btw proj don't statistically no longer have the best dmg output at optimal ! |
Ultrabug
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:36:00 -
[82]
Originally by: DarkMatters
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:50:50
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:50:09
Edited by: DarkMatters on 21/12/2004 16:49:26
Originally by: Ultrabug
Edited by: Ultrabug on 21/12/2004 16:33:36
Edited by: Ultrabug on 21/12/2004 16:32:18
Originally by: Khaldorn Murino
How about, testing these stats. Then switching it and giving autocannons the damage increase and the big guns the tracking increase. Because, and it may be only me here, i think that would be more beneficial.
As the issue with the projectiles was that they cant hit a barn door. But any positive nerf is something eh? Just a suggestion.
I agree, 1400 suffer more of the tracking and RoF than damage imo ! Inverted stats would make more sense to me but wouldn't be enough.
Lasers get all the benefits : tracking + RoF + NO AMMO CHANGING TIME. How can you imagine such little changes will balance that ? Why doing more damage if you can't get a hit ??? Rolling Eyes
lasers went from rubbish ( all amarr ships fitting hybrids) to good with a single 5% per ship lvl decrease in cap use. this was because other turrets types simply out damaged lasers for the use of less cap leaving no point in fitting them.
the changes suggested are between 15%-20% of diffrent attributes, would it not be better to fully test these increase before nerfing lasers?
And what about Amarr ship the only ships getting 10% bonuses ?...
Crystals has been changed btw proj don't statistically no longer have the best dmg output at optimal ! |
Sochin
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:38:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Eris Discordia
Please reply constructively
Rofl, you post this one post AFTER talking about how hypnotic flashing UI lights look when stoned?
Nemo me impune lacessit
|
Sochin
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:38:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Eris Discordia
Please reply constructively
Rofl, you post this one post AFTER talking about how hypnotic flashing UI lights look when stoned?
Nemo me impune lacessit
|
Thorne Semperti
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:50:00 -
[85]
My initial response to this was is looks like it should be other way round, with ac's getting the damage and arty's the tracking. But, at least it is a start, and for that I definately cannot whinge :P
|
Thorne Semperti
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:50:00 -
[86]
My initial response to this was is looks like it should be other way round, with ac's getting the damage and arty's the tracking. But, at least it is a start, and for that I definately cannot whinge :P
|
dabster
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:53:00 -
[87]
wtb tempest on sisi again \_ _/
___________________________
Chicks dig Brutor's |
dabster
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 17:53:00 -
[88]
wtb tempest on sisi again \__/
___________________________
Chicks dig Brutor's |
Helplessandlost
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 18:07:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Sochin
Originally by: Eris Discordia
Please reply constructively
Rofl, you post this one post AFTER talking about how hypnotic flashing UI lights look when stoned?
Sounds constructive too me
Check us out
|
Helplessandlost
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 18:07:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Sochin
Originally by: Eris Discordia
Please reply constructively
Rofl, you post this one post AFTER talking about how hypnotic flashing UI lights look when stoned?
Sounds constructive too me
Check us out
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |