EVE Search - CCP, while you're at it, don't fix blasters...

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP, while you're at it, don't fix blasters...

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ralnik Mutineers	Posted - 2010.09.22 00:10:00 - [1] I was noticing some of the things on the agenda like finally fixing Rockets and the nice dual screen drag option and the pretty new Avatars. I figured Blasters are likely on the list somewhere.. Well, I just wanted to say what ever you don't please do not "fix" blasters. Yes that's right, don't fix blasters fix Gallente ships instead. Most people claim Blasters are broken, because they can't do damage at range like Lasers & Auto Cannons. They are wrong and we don't need just another FoTM turret hitting targets at 30km.. Blasters are high damage short rage weapons, yet they do actually work as intended despite what people love to say. The problem is Most Gallente Blaster ships are just too slow to make use of them effectively. Some of the best frigs in the game are Gallente Blaster ships, (pre-Dramial of course). Yet even with Blasters fitted, they work exceptionally well at what they do because they are fast enough to make use of their short range high damage weapons. Gallente cruisers and up, on the other hand, can't make use of those short range weapons in the same way, due to the ships being a bit too sluggish for the current PVP environment. Gallente ships simply need a speed & agility buff and that will go a very long way in fixing Blasters problems. Meaning please before you give in to the many forum whines about fixing Blasters.. Think about their intended purpose and the ships they are fitted on then think about what actually needs fixed.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2010.09.22 00:32:00 - [2] I think they should boost blaster dps to whatever blasters + 3x magstab II dps is, then make the damage mod of choice for gallente TEs, or go 3x mag stabs for loldps that's the fast/easy solution that came to my head, the other involved some complicated mix of the tracking and missile formula, up close you should almost always hit them, but don't want to make it so blasters wtfpwn frigs/cruisers.
colera deldios Gallente Entity.	Posted - 2010.09.22 00:47:00 - [3] DPS is irrelevant if you cant apply it. My simples fix: Give blasters the same falloff as autos. Yes they still have more dps, but they are still cap dependant and still don't track as well as autos.
Neesa Corrinne Stimulus Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2010.09.22 01:04:00 - [4] Armor Tanking + Blasters = FAIL The whole problem with Gallente ships is that they are stuck in a never ending cycle of fail. Let me explain: 1) Most blaster ships are armor tanking ships, either because of how many low slots they have or simply because they have a bonus to armor tanking. 2) Blasters are short range and need to close distance quickly in order to be effective. 3) Armor tanking mods slow your ship down by either reducing top speed or lowering agility. So basically you need to close the distance quickly, but you can't close the distance quickly because your armor mods are slowing you down, therefore by the time you are able to apply your damage you are hopelessly out DPS'd. Amarr don't suffer from this problem because their weapons have much better optimal ranges, so being slow doesn't effect them as much in a committed fight.
Astroka	Posted - 2010.09.22 01:05:00 - [5] Originally by: Ralnik Most people claim Blasters are broken, because they can't do damage at range like Lasers & Auto Cannons. They are wrong and we don't need just another FoTM turret hitting targets at 30km. The number one complaint is that they lack enough tracking to effectively apply their DPS and their insanely close range, particularly on battleships, because large blasters can barely hit anything at point-blank range...NOT that they are too short range. Range is fine, they mostly simply need to track faster. ====================================== "Rawr" means "I love you" in dinosaur! ======================================
m3talc0re X Caldari AFK Empire	Posted - 2010.09.22 01:11:00 - [6] Blaster need a little bit more range, not much and they need better tracking. Making Gallente ships faster would be stupid, unless you want to make Caldari ships faster while you're at it. Seeing as they're supposed to be long range and need to get into a long range -_-
Ryhss Caldari Ominous Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2010.09.22 01:13:00 - [7] I agree with the OP.
Resunas	Posted - 2010.09.22 02:09:00 - [8] Blasters are just more dependent on eWAR, but they do a great ammount of dmg. If you can web and paint your target (assuming BC or smaller),its alot of hurt. However, I don't believe gallente ships need an aglity/speed bonus; just use proper teamwork.
Taser Monkey Against All Asteroids	Posted - 2010.09.22 02:22:00 - [9] Blasters are pretty worthless and the only blasters that aren't entire useless are large Ions and Neutrons. It's ridiculous that autocannons and lazers can hit at 30km, which blasters can barely hit at 10. If blasters were never meant to hit at such range then why the hell can autocannons and not use any cap and what about lazers then, and their ridiculous range? Lazers are really overpowered, havint the best range as well as tracking. Nothing wrong with that, right? However, CCP don't care. They might considering thinking about it after the release of Incarna, though, but that's doubtful because this is CCP we're talking about so just train lazers and ignore blasters. It's something I've had to do with great regret and I really don't like lazers.
Lady Spank Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2010.09.22 02:35:00 - [10] If you are too dumb to know how to fly blaster ships maybe you should try something easier, like unsubscribing. ~_~

Hecatonis Amarr	Posted - 2010.09.22 04:06:00 - [11] i admit, i have never been in a big fight, but why dont you just hold back your blaster ships for a bit and jump to zero on a fig or another fast moving ship that CAN close the distance? even if the frig gets popped wile the blasters are in jump, the ships still make it there. that seems like an effective stratagry to me. and yes the hard counter to this would be to distroy the frigs, but its a long lock for a BS on a fast moving frig. __________________________________________________ stop acting like tw*ts and use your brain
Vladimiru Gallente Nanite Industries Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.09.22 07:14:00 - [12] Originally by: Hecatonis i admit, i have never been in a big fight, but why dont you just hold back your blaster ships for a bit and jump to zero on a fig or another fast moving ship that CAN close the distance? even if the frig gets popped wile the blasters are in jump, the ships still make it there. that seems like an effective stratagry to me. and yes the hard counter to this would be to distroy the frigs, but its a long lock for a BS on a fast moving frig. omg r u t3771nG m3 dat 1 h4z 2 uz3 t34mw0rK & 5tr4t3gy 2 fLi a 13L4st3R sh1p?
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.09.22 07:34:00 - [13] I remember as a Caldari pilot back in 2006 being told that "Caldari are fine, just get someone to tackle for you!" And yet I resist the temptation to say that "med/heavy blasterboats are fine, just get someone to web and TP for you!" Am I not noble? Anyway, as I've said before, the long term fix is to make hybrids qualitatively different to Projectiles or Lasers, not just "Blasters = ACs but betterer" Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.09.22 08:57:00 - [14] Originally by: Malcanis Anyway, as I've said before, the long term fix is to make hybrids qualitatively different to Projectiles or Lasers, not just "Blasters = ACs but betterer" àso, give them even shorter range, but make sure they can track like a mantis even at that range and give blaster ships bonuses that let them get to that range more easily? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Zagdul Gallente Shadowed Command Fatal Ascension	Posted - 2010.09.22 09:28:00 - [15] Edited by: Zagdul on 22/09/2010 09:28:44 Posting in favor of the OP! 1. Give Gallente better speed (bonuses where plating doesn't effect mass or something..)More speed/agility overall. 2. Most important.. improve blaster tracking maybe gallente ships can have a bonus to blaster tracking. 3. More consistent damage against targets.
Rach'Na	Posted - 2010.09.22 09:33:00 - [16] 1.hit mwd to target 2.web paint, scram 3.Shoot 4.Boom?
Kidain Gallente Rule of Five	Posted - 2010.09.22 09:39:00 - [17] Edited by: Kidain on 22/09/2010 09:39:50 To be honest I see Blasters as the Shotgun of the EVE world. Now anyone who knows about shooting will tell you they use a Shotgun (and I am NOT talking Sawn Off where is applies even more) not for their accuracy but for their spread. Basically general direction will do with a shotgun cause of the spread of pellets means a hit. Taking this annalogy why not make it that under optimal Blasters need... NO tracking. Taking out a Frigate would be like sprinting up to a dwarf with a shotgun at close range and missing. Would that happen? nope. ANd it would make Gallente Cruiser and above usefull. On a second note they do need to sort out Rails. Simple as that they are terrible. -------------------------------------- In an infinite universe, the one thing sentient life cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion. - Douglas Adams
Kidain Gallente Rule of Five	Posted - 2010.09.22 09:41:00 - [18] Originally by: Rach'Na 1.hit mwd to target 2.web paint, scram 3.Shoot 4.Boom? 1. Hit MWD. 2. What they can run as well?? 3. Boom!! Oh wait that was me... -------------------------------------- In an infinite universe, the one thing sentient life cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion. - Douglas Adams
Zagdul Gallente Shadowed Command Fatal Ascension	Posted - 2010.09.22 09:57:00 - [19] Originally by: Kidain Originally by: Rach'Na 1.hit mwd to target 2.web paint, scram 3.Shoot 4.Boom? 1. Hit MWD. 2. What they can run as well?? 3. Boom!! Oh wait that was me... They can run faster and shoot farther as well as track better. IMO, Demios should have either an agility boost or a web range boost. There's a reason Zealot/Sacrilege/Vaga/Muninn are feared... Deimos/Ishtar meh... Lets not even go into how much fun it is trying to chase down ships in a mega/hyp. Then when you get into range, trying to track them.
Ralnik Mutineers	Posted - 2010.09.22 09:58:00 - [20] Originally by: colera deldios DPS is irrelevant if you cant apply it. My simples fix: Give blasters the same falloff as autos. Yes they still have more dps, but they are still cap dependant and still don't track as well as autos. This is exactly what doesn't need to happen. We don't need 3 racial turrets all balanced with the same range abilities. If that happens the variety you get will be little more than choosing a color for your ship. Blasters have always been short range high damage guns.. As someone else said, kinda like a shotgun. They just need a bit of speed and agility on ship side rather than a buff to the guns themselves. Personally, I have no complaints about tracking with blasters. Using a Web & Scram with Blasters, is just like using Target Painters with missiles, they pretty much go hand and hand. Use webs and you have no issues with tracking. The biggest problem is to get the needed speed out of a Blasters boat you have to shield tank it which then typically takes away the mid slot needed for your web(s). A simple agility/speed boost but nothing over board would go a very long way to fixing Gallente Cruisers,BCs,BS ect..ect..

Ophelia Ursus	Posted - 2010.09.22 10:52:00 - [21] Buffing blasterships' base speed and agility won't make people armor tank them, it'll just mean shield/speed setups become that much more effective. A better solution would be to remove the speed penalties from armor resist and repair rigs, making active tanked setups as quick and nimble as the current shield fits (whose speed and agility is about where it should be). For additional bonus points, change the build requirements of armor resist rigs so they don't use armor plates and become cheap like their shield counterparts. Signature removed.
Hun Jakuza Roving Guns Inc.	Posted - 2010.09.22 11:06:00 - [22] Edited by: Hun Jakuza on 22/09/2010 11:10:01 Originally by: Rach'Na 1.hit mwd to target 2.web paint, scram 3.Shoot 4.Boom? Please try after speed and web nerf. 20km offrange and when you can mwding in webrange, your ship is in deep armor and you cant hit 10 hp damage on the enemy target. And i dont talk about, what happen when enemy using tracking disruptor with optimal range disruption script, and you cant shot to 8km with long range null ammo with large blasters.
ArmyOfMe Pastry Productions Inc.	Posted - 2010.09.22 11:08:00 - [23] give gallente ships a web strength bonus
A Bombs	Posted - 2010.09.22 11:54:00 - [24] wow at amount of anti-buff blaster people in this thread, especially from those ppl who are minmatars. Why am i not suprised that OP plays minmatar yea, lets all fly minmatar ships so there is no need to fix anything
Templar Dane Amarrian Retribution	Posted - 2010.09.22 12:05:00 - [25] Originally by: Rach'Na 1. hit mwd to target 2. watch as FOTD(decade) ship kites you 3. FOTD ship switches to barrage 4. you die slowly Fixed that for you.
Don Pellegrino Pod Liberation Authority	Posted - 2010.09.22 12:07:00 - [26] Small blasters are perfect, but I agree that medium and to a lesser extent large blasters, need some serious help. The 10-20% higher dps than other weapons is cancelled by the mediocre tracking and the inability to choose damage type. On top of that, the fight is already almost over once the blaster ship gets into range. I think that gallente ships need a way to close range faster and a bit more tracking OR a significant dps increase (to compensate for the time wasted chasing ships) and a bit more tracking.
Eternum Praetorian PWNED Factor Elite	Posted - 2010.09.22 12:11:00 - [27] Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 22/09/2010 12:13:40 Well I see you fools complaining don't really fly Blasterships much. More tracking or a minor agility buff would be nice, beyond that they are fine. I think people see their short range in EFT and go like "WTF I Won't Fly That!?" or they try it once with half a**'d skills, do it wrong, and die a stupid flaming death. Then they post here... an people think they have a clue.
Whelan Jr	Posted - 2010.09.22 12:59:00 - [28] ECM drones. Long range and hopefully keeping you unlocked until within your blaster optimal.
A Bombs	Posted - 2010.09.22 13:02:00 - [29] Edited by: A Bombs on 22/09/2010 13:02:53 Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 22/09/2010 12:13:40 Well I see you fools complaining don't really fly Blasterships much. More tracking or a minor agility buff would be nice, beyond that they are fine. I think people see their short range in EFT and go like "WTF I Won't Fly That!?" or they try it once with half a'd skills, do it wrong, and die a stupid flaming death. Then they post here... an people think they have a clue. says someone flys minmatar ships only with a **ty KB
Ralnik Mutineers	Posted - 2010.09.22 21:07:00 - [30] Originally by: A Bombs wow at amount of anti-buff blaster people in this thread, especially from those ppl who are minmatars. Why am i not suprised that OP plays minmatar yea, lets all fly minmatar ships so there is no need to fix anything Are you really that dumb to think people don't have alts? I typically just post on the forms with this "Minmatar" alt, but my main is spec'd in all weapon systems including Blasters. In fact I likely have more kills in a Vexor & Myrmidoms on my main, than what this toon has in total.

Lost Greybeard	Posted - 2010.09.22 21:14:00 - [31] Alternately, give the larger blaster ships: (a) Bonuses to webbers, let them go old-school and get someone down to like 10-20% speed with a couple webs when they ship type is fully trained. or (b) Bonuses to target dampeners so that people have to come very close to lock and engage. Since the cruiser+ blaster boats are tankish boats, that fits with the whole 'brick' thing they have going on. --- If you outlaw tautologies, only outlaws will have tautologies. ~Anonymous
Ruhige Schmerz Valhalla Naval Corp IMPERIAL LEGI0N	Posted - 2010.09.22 21:19:00 - [32] Agree, blasters are mostly fine, just fix the ships. Tracking bonuses would be fine. Love my failblarpy regardless.
Ralnik Mutineers	Posted - 2010.09.22 21:22:00 - [33] Edited by: Ralnik on 22/09/2010 21:22:26 Originally by: Lost Greybeard Alternately, give the larger blaster ships: (a) Bonuses to webbers, let them go old-school and get someone down to like 10-20% speed with a couple webs when they ship type is fully trained. or (b) Bonuses to target dampeners so that people have to come very close to lock and engage. Since the cruiser+ blaster boats are tankish boats, that fits with the whole 'brick' thing they have going on. Yea I though about the web bonus as well, but then figured it would require far too much changing as each ship is only allotted a specific amount of bonuses. Take a Myrm for example, I sure as hell wouldn't want to give up the Drone damage & Armor repping bonus in exchange for web bonus. It would change the ship far too much. On the other hand fiddling with agility and top speed numbers, wouldn't change the ships current designs.
Merdaneth Amarr Sovereign Hospitaller Order of Saint Katherine	Posted - 2010.09.22 22:34:00 - [34] People that compare blasters to lasers always forget one essential thing: scorch. Remove scorch crystals, and the 'lasers can do OMG damage at range' debate is instantly over. Nobody would complain about a microwave doing half the damage of scorch at less range. Scorch is the singular item that makes lasers powerful at range, nothing else. If you take Scorch out of the equation, then there is no balance upset. Autocannons however have a lot of things going for them besides range. Selectable damage types, easy fittings, good tracking etc. If you give Null a range bonus of 50% (instead of 25%) and falloff bonus of x2 (instead of x1.25), then the problem would be instantly fixed. Well, not actually fixed. I believe CCP dropped the ball by creating advanced ammo types that allow all short range guns except blasters to project decent damage at relatively long range. I would feel more in favor for reducing the range/damage potential of long range ammo for short range guns to bring blasters back. Currently there is barely any role for small and medium sized beam lasers (scorch fitted short range lasers are far superior). Giving Null much better range will sort of kill the small and medium railguns. Medium and small artillery is now only holding its own due to superior alpha. Gallente ships don't need to be 'fixed', the dynamic of short range weapons needs to be fixed. Currently laser and AC ships don't need to be in the Gallente's ships blaster danger zone to still inflict a decent amount of damage, that is the core problem. ____ The Illusion of Freedom \| The Truth about Slavery
Soon Shin	Posted - 2010.09.22 22:42:00 - [35] Make Blaster Ships shield tanked rather than Armor tanked. Exchange Armor Hit points for Shield Hit points, Low Slots for more Mid slots so that they can tank, mwd, and tackle. Remove the armor repair bonus for stronger web, more shield hit points/resists, or speed/agility bonus. Gallente Drone Boats should however remain Armor tanked as Drone Boats used mid and high slots for drone upgrades. This would solve a lot of the blaster problems. Like how Minmatar are both armor and shield, the same should work go for Gallente. Caldari and Amarr should be the hardcore armor or shield tankers.
London Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.22 22:52:00 - [36] I find it ridiculous that after pages of threads about Hybrids/Blasters/Gallente, it wasn't even on the damn CSM list. Just look at how many times "hybrids" come up in the balancing thread. Yet Rockets got near the top? what gives???
Cambarus Dead poets society The Laughing Men	Posted - 2010.09.22 23:05:00 - [37] An armageddon ODs a megathron at about 7-8km. A megathron ODs a geddon by a whopping ~9% within its optimal (4.5km) using close range ammo (a gallente ship using null will not OD a geddon at any range) A geddon outranges the megathron by ~300% Compared to a 9% increase in damage from the mega. See? Blasters are fine
Umega Solis Mensa	Posted - 2010.09.23 00:27:00 - [38] Gallente ships are fine. They have pretty generous and healthy mid slot layouts to fit fit painters, dual-webs/props options while maintaining a solid tank. Web bonus to gallente ships sets everything back a couple of years, or have people forgotten. Simply change the fitting requirements on hybrid turrets. Also adjust the ammo. Completely remove range +/- to the ammo and change it to varying increases of RoF. Give the option for either alpha, or dps depending on ammo used. This alone, altho subtle would provide diversity and signifcant improvement without jumping the O/P line. Can't have it all.. making hybrids a new fotm couple'd with drones is asking for trouble. Making them the fastest with the best drones is really asking for trouble. Making them the fastest with uber webs, improved hybrids, and the best drones is completely ****ed up, illogical thinking that only spoiled childern conjure up, the Cartman syndrome. ---------------------------------------- -Treat the EVE Market like you're a pimp and it is your 'employee'.. freely fondle it as you wish and make it pay you for it-
Eternum Praetorian PWNED Factor Elite	Posted - 2010.09.23 02:57:00 - [39] Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 23/09/2010 03:06:13 Originally by: A Bombs Edited by: A Bombs on 22/09/2010 13:02:53 Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 22/09/2010 12:13:40 Well I see you fools complaining don't really fly Blasterships much. More tracking or a minor agility buff would be nice, beyond that they are fine. I think people see their short range in EFT and go like "WTF I Won't Fly That!?" or they try it once with half a'd skills, do it wrong, and die a stupid flaming death. Then they post here... an people think they have a clue. says someone flys minmatar ships only with a ty KB Blob monkey attempts Zing... If only I could get mindless KB stats like you by sitting there and hitting the primary for an hour. Also... You should not believe what Battleclinic tells you, it is a ** site at best.
CHAOS100 The Ankou Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.09.23 04:44:00 - [40] For the deimos/thorax change the stupid mwd cap bonus to an mwd speed bonus. If the deimos could move at the same speed as a vaga it would be a lot more powerful without other changes. In fact it would probably be feared, as opposed to laughed at. As someone stated before, the taranis is one of the best intys because it has the ability to get in range to do its damage. Now give the other blaster ships the same thing and it would be fine. Oh and give the ishtar more cpu ffs. --------------

Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.23 08:30:00 - [41] If you load antimatter into a medium blaster, it is going to have about 2km optimal. To the ppl argueing about warping on the target at 0: If you warp to zero to an object, you have a good chance coming out of the warp at 2km. Even if you can get into blaster range there is no way they can track a not stationary target perfectly. Right now the only ammo type which works somewhat in blasters is the null, which gives even less tracking, and way less range than thoose of any other weapon, for just a bit more theoretical damage output. Both the blaster boats and the guns themselves needs to be fixed, the fact that they are inferior to every other weapon in every way except damage makes them unable to take advantage of the superior damage. + The deimos is probably the worst hac ever.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.09.23 09:04:00 - [42] Originally by: Ralnik Edited by: Ralnik on 22/09/2010 21:22:26 Originally by: Lost Greybeard Alternately, give the larger blaster ships: (a) Bonuses to webbers, let them go old-school and get someone down to like 10-20% speed with a couple webs when they ship type is fully trained. or (b) Bonuses to target dampeners so that people have to come very close to lock and engage. Since the cruiser+ blaster boats are tankish boats, that fits with the whole 'brick' thing they have going on. Yea I though about the web bonus as well, but then figured it would require far too much changing as each ship is only allotted a specific amount of bonuses. Take a Myrm for example, I sure as hell wouldn't want to give up the Drone damage & Armor repping bonus in exchange for web bonus. It would change the ship far too much. On the other hand fiddling with agility and top speed numbers, wouldn't change the ships current designs. I'd ditch the Myrm's armour rep bonus in a second to get a web bonus. Oh god please gimme gimme! Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Bomberlocks Minmatar CTRL-Q	Posted - 2010.09.23 09:09:00 - [43] I think they should provide an iWin button so that even bad pilots can win a few fights.
Captain Merkin Minmatar Debitum Naturae BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2010.09.23 09:32:00 - [44] Originally by: Zagdul Originally by: Kidain Originally by: Rach'Na 1.hit mwd to target 2.web paint, scram 3.Shoot 4.Boom? 1. Hit MWD. 2. What they can run as well?? 3. Boom!! Oh wait that was me... They can run faster and shoot farther as well as track better. IMO, Demios should have either an agility boost or a web range boost. There's a reason Zealot/Sacrilege/Vaga/Muninn are feared... Deimos/Ishtar meh... Lets not even go into how much fun it is trying to chase down ships in a mega/hyp. Then when you get into range, trying to track them. Deimos and Ishtar are both quite highly feared from my experience, the ishtar is one of the best hac out there for its raw potential as a wild card and tank little bugger. The Deimos' dps is staggering for a ship that size. Deimos however is paper but with support I would say (along with blaster eagle) is a damn nice ship.. but its seems designed to be solo friendly yet unable to fill this role easily. Proving natural selection and Charles Darwin wrong since 1981. The Kamikaze pilot
chatgris Quantum Cats Syndicate	Posted - 2010.09.23 09:36:00 - [45] Originally by: Captain Merkin Deimos and Ishtar are both quite highly feared from my experience, the ishtar is one of the best hac out there for its raw potential as a wild card and tank little bugger. At this point... I wondered if you were trolling, but I reserved my judgement. Originally by: Captain Merkin The Deimos' dps is staggering for a ship that size. Deimos however is paper but with support I would say (along with blaster eagle) is a damn nice ship.. but its seems designed to be solo friendly yet unable to fill this role easily. Eagle? Alright, you must be trolling :)
Ralnik Mutineers	Posted - 2010.09.23 09:54:00 - [46] Originally by: Malcanis I'd ditch the Myrm's armour rep bonus in a second to get a web bonus. Oh god please gimme gimme! I'd never trade the repping bonus on the Myrm for a web bonus. The repping bonus is what makes that ship one of the best solo BC's in the game aside from it being a brick that can't get out of it's own way.
Eternum Praetorian PWNED Factor Elite	Posted - 2010.09.23 11:07:00 - [47] Originally by: CHAOS100 For the deimos/thorax change the stupid mwd cap bonus to an mwd speed bonus. If the deimos could move at the same speed as a vaga it would be a lot more powerful without other changes. In fact it would probably be feared, as opposed to laughed at I for one support this change--as I visualize a wing of expensive paper thing HAC's closing to 1,000M, Yes, I giggle to myself like a little schoolgirl
LittleTerror	Posted - 2010.09.23 11:28:00 - [48] People are just god damn stupid.
Derrick'DelBoy'Tr0tter	Posted - 2010.09.23 11:32:00 - [49] Originally by: Lady Spank If you are too dumb to know how to fly blaster ships maybe you should try something easier, like unsubscribing. Will someone do eve a favor and put this serial forum troll out of its misery ?
Astald Ohtar New Eden Regimental Navy Rebel Alliance of New Eden	Posted - 2010.09.23 11:53:00 - [50] Originally by: Merdaneth If you give Null a range bonus of 50% (instead of 25%) and falloff bonus of x2 (instead of x1.25), then the problem would be instantly fixed. this ! Amarr ship pretty much sux without scroch But if you fix the blasters they will be over powered again, people seems to forget that gallente ships have a larger drone bay !

Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2010.09.23 11:54:00 - [51] Originally by: Malcanis I remember as a Caldari pilot back in 2006 being told that "Caldari are fine, just get someone to tackle for you!" And yet I resist the temptation to say that "med/heavy blasterboats are fine, just get someone to web and TP for you!" Am I not noble? Anyway, as I've said before, the long term fix is to make hybrids qualitatively different to Projectiles or Lasers, not just "Blasters = ACs but betterer" There is a "slight" difference between 'Caldari ships are fine' and 'Blaster boats have issues', don't you think? The blasterboat problem involve some Caldari ship too, BTW.
Skippermonkey Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2010.09.23 12:22:00 - [52] Originally by: Venkul Mul The blasterboat problem involve some Caldari ship too, BTW. This would be much easier if we went back in time and seperated Blasters and Railguns by getting rid of the 'Hybrid' gun. Originally by: CCP Capslock OH GOD THE TESTING
yani dumyat Minmatar Black Storm Cartel The Orca Syndicate	Posted - 2010.09.23 12:43:00 - [53] Edited by: yani dumyat on 23/09/2010 12:43:43 Originally by: Astroka ====================================== "Rawr" means "I love you" in dinosaur! ====================================== Thank you, that made my day. Back on topic, um, blasters and suckage and stuff. _______ Trolls and Tribulations A story of eve, trolls, world domination and dogfighting against starlings in a tiny dramiel.
knobber Jobbler Executive Intervention Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.09.23 12:58:00 - [54] +1 for a hybrid fix. Better tracking, lower requirements on certain rails, some additional blaster range. Either that or nerf projectiles and lasers. For the naysayers, drop EFT and actually try some hybrid ships out in combat.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.23 17:53:00 - [55] Originally by: Astald Ohtar Originally by: Merdaneth If you give Null a range bonus of 50% (instead of 25%) and falloff bonus of x2 (instead of x1.25), then the problem would be instantly fixed. this ! Amarr ship pretty much sux without scroch But if you fix the blasters they will be over powered again, people seems to forget that gallente ships have a larger drone bay ! How fixing something supposed to make it overpovered? Also, not all gallente ships have a larger dronebay, or more bandwidth than their counterparts (which is kinda bad since gallente supposed to be the droner race aswell). Hyperion for example.
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.09.23 18:37:00 - [56] boost dps to a meaningfully large amount to counteract the base range, increase tracking to erase any issues. All you have to do, an exploratory 15-25% boost with some tracking is all ccp neesd to do, and it wont break ** ----------------- Friends Forever**
Baron Wikkheiser Bonny Buccaneers	Posted - 2010.09.23 19:36:00 - [57] Originally by: Astald Ohtar Originally by: Merdaneth If you give Null a range bonus of 50% (instead of 25%) and falloff bonus of x2 (instead of x1.25), then the problem would be instantly fixed. this ! Amarr ship pretty much sux without scroch But if you fix the blasters they will be over powered again, people seems to forget that gallente ships have a larger drone bay ! You probably should stop posting !
London Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.23 22:00:00 - [58] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg boost dps to a meaningfully large amount to counteract the base range, increase tracking to erase any issues. All you have to do, an exploratory 15-25% boost with some tracking is all ccp neesd to do, and it wont break ** This would be a fantastic start. Also give Blasters more than the 8% or so DPS advantage given their massively puny range, and fix the huge hole in the tracking formula where objects transversal is **edly high in relation to you when your forced that close. Seriously CCP, this ** has been going on for years now.
Eben Rochelle Gallente RPS holdings	Posted - 2010.09.23 22:06:00 - [59] Originally by: Rach'Na 1.hit mwd to target 2.web paint, scram 3.Shoot 4.Boom? please DIAF
Eben Rochelle Gallente RPS holdings	Posted - 2010.09.23 22:08:00 - [60] Originally by: CHAOS100 For the deimos/thorax change the stupid mwd cap bonus to an mwd speed bonus. If the deimos could move at the same speed as a vaga it would be a lot more powerful without other changes. In fact it would probably be feared, as opposed to laughed at. As someone stated before, the taranis is one of the best intys because it has the ability to get in range to do its damage. Now give the other blaster ships the same thing and it would be fine. Oh and give the ishtar more cpu ffs. QFT

Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.09.23 22:19:00 - [61] Originally by: Ralnik I figured Blasters are likely on the list somewhere.. I want to believe.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.09.23 22:36:00 - [62] Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 23/09/2010 22:39:04 Has it even been a year yet since ACs were made better than blasters? Blasters had plenty of time at the top before then, and they're far from broken now. I think in the cycle of buffs Missiles or Lasers are next anyway, so you should look forward to whining for many more years about this. I sure look forward to watching you. My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.09.23 22:54:00 - [63] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 23/09/2010 22:39:04 Has it even been a year yet since ACs were made better than blasters? Blasters had plenty of time at the top before then, and they're far from broken now. I think in the cycle of buffs Missiles or Lasers are next anyway, so you should look forward to whining for many more years about this. I sure look forward to watching you. Blasters were only on top at launch before tracking nerfs and everyone figured out pulse with all heat syncs in low were actually better.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.09.23 23:14:00 - [64] Originally by: Crias Taylor Blasters were only on top at launch before tracking nerfs and everyone figured out pulse with all heat syncs in low were actually better. I never really kept close track of things that far back, so i'll have to take your word for it. But one thing i do know is that Projectile spent pretty much the entire history of the game as the worst, so they deserve this time to shine. Even if it means hybrids taking a back seat. My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Loki Nahat Skyforger Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2010.09.23 23:23:00 - [65] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: Crias Taylor Blasters were only on top at launch before tracking nerfs and everyone figured out pulse with all heat syncs in low were actually better. I never really kept close track of things that far back, so i'll have to take your word for it. But one thing i do know is that Projectile spent pretty much the entire history of the game as the worst, so they deserve this time to shine. Even if it means hybrids taking a back seat. Hybrids do need a buff, the least we could settle for would be an improvement to the tracking discrepancy at short ranges. At the most hopeful, a damage boost that creates them to be the short range weapon system they are intended to be. Basically I don't mind MWDing (yes it's now a verb) and loosing precious time getting into optimal, as long as it's worth it. Currently and for a lot of recent history it's just been more efficient to fit lasers.
Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.09.23 23:46:00 - [66] Edited by: Crias Taylor on 23/09/2010 23:47:39 Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: Crias Taylor Blasters were only on top at launch before tracking nerfs and everyone figured out pulse with all heat syncs in low were actually better. I never really kept close track of things that far back, so i'll have to take your word for it. But one thing i do know is that Projectile spent pretty much the entire history of the game as the worst, so they deserve this time to shine. Even if it means hybrids taking a back seat. Hardly. Blasters have been in hell for almost a decade now. Where as there was a year if not longer where fleets were almost all tempest with a race to see who can alpha more people faster. Then came the nerf you had to feel for a few years. Well, assuming someone actually jumped through the gates to fight instead of staring down eacother on the opposite sides cause 50+ people in system was sure to blackscreen. (The more things change the more they stay the same :v )
Travarica	Posted - 2010.09.24 07:19:00 - [67] Please fix the blasters, it shouldn't be to much of work, plenty good ideas in this very thread (and some bad ones, too )
Smelly Bait	Posted - 2010.09.24 07:58:00 - [68] Edited by: Smelly Bait on 24/09/2010 07:59:05 CCP isnt fixing blaster for the next 16 months since people whine harder at fail rockets. CCP dont give anything about pvp modifications. Rockets are only used on frigats so people can run epeic arc's and fw missions better. This fix is another great sighn how faill ccp is in improving their pvp content
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.24 14:35:00 - [69] Edited by: NightmareX on 24/09/2010 14:40:39 Anyone who expect Blaster to be like in the old days where you could pretty much kill any BS'es in no time with a Blaster Mega to be like that today is just making fools of them self. We are in 2010 now, not in the old days when a Neutron Mega was pretty much insta whooping any other BS'es ass. A Neutron Mega fitted with 1x MFS II is actually doing around 1-2% more DPS in Neutrons optimal over a Mega Pulse fitted Geddon with 2x Heat Sink II's in Neutron's optimal range. If the Mega have 2x MFS II's fitted then the Neutron Mega will do around 9-11% more DPS than the 2x HS II fitted Pulse Geddon in the Neutrons optimal range. Blasters works fine today. But even when they works fine, i'm still in for a 5% DPS and 10% tracking boost on them, either by giving some Gallente ships more damage and tracking bonus or just give the Blasters it self that boost. Giving Blasters to much DPS boost now will just make the Vindicator insanly overpowered. Yes i own a Vindicator now and i use it daily, so i know how that ship is now.
Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.09.24 15:03:00 - [70] I forgive you for not understanding the crucial differences between pulse lasers and blasters. You see when one sits on the undock of Jita 4-4 all day already in range of slow moving industrials and freighters foolish enough to go there with a war dec I could see why you think they are ok.

DaPyro	Posted - 2010.09.24 15:06:00 - [71] btw bring back double MWD ravens while your at it ? hahaha similar request tbh
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.24 15:39:00 - [72] Edited by: NightmareX on 24/09/2010 15:40:37 Originally by: Crias Taylor I forgive you for not understanding the crucial differences between pulse lasers and blasters. You see when one sits on the undock of Jita 4-4 all day already in range of slow moving industrials and freighters foolish enough to go there with a war dec I could see why you think they are ok. If that was directed to me, then no, i fully understand how Blasters works. I don't really care if i sit in Jita and kill war targets. Because if you don't know ****s about how Blasters and how the tracking and damage and so on is working on them, you will cry like a baby for a boost all day long on Blasters, because you don't have the brain to use Blasters, and will think they are useless. I fully understand how Blasters works in and out. And i know 100% how to use my ships with Blasters fitted. Once you can use those ships in a good way , you are in 95% of the cases fine.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2010.09.24 15:47:00 - [73] This shouldnt be any kind of cycle at all..even it out ffs.Why should any race have it better than the other?Just like missiles..I have to throw up everytime I see a raven.Everyone and their mother flies one because they are supposed to be mission gods,which I disagree on.A megathron is better for the simple fact that you pop frigs with two tracking comps.Do that in a raven.In most missions I dont even pull out the drones. Only catch is you have to have guns maxed out to get this effect..and the raven is a no brainer.
Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.09.24 17:23:00 - [74] How to make blasters work. Step 1 war dec Corp/alliance Step 2 sit on Jita 4-4 undock Step 3 wait Step 4 lock undocking badger I already in blaster range Step 5 Make post
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.24 17:42:00 - [75] Edited by: NightmareX on 24/09/2010 17:42:15 Originally by: Crias Taylor How to make blasters work. Step 1 war dec Corp/alliance Step 2 sit on Jita 4-4 undock Step 3 wait Step 4 lock undocking badger I already in blaster range Step 5 Make post Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation Try to be more stupier than you already are please.
Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.09.24 17:52:00 - [76] Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 24/09/2010 17:42:15 Originally by: Crias Taylor How to make blasters work. Step 1 war dec Corp/alliance Step 2 sit on Jita 4-4 undock Step 3 wait Step 4 lock undocking badger I already in blaster range Step 5 Make post Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation Try to be more stupier than you already are please. :eng101:
Scrapyard Attendant Minmatar Insurance Fraud LTD	Posted - 2010.09.24 17:53:00 - [77] Im sorry, but ive never encountered problems such as not being able to actually get in range with the things, even in the battleships..
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.24 18:39:00 - [78] Originally by: Crias Taylor Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 24/09/2010 17:42:15 Originally by: Crias Taylor How to make blasters work. Step 1 war dec Corp/alliance Step 2 sit on Jita 4-4 undock Step 3 wait Step 4 lock undocking badger I already in blaster range Step 5 Make post Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation Try to be more stupier than you already are please. :eng101: Nice comeback pal.
sea'er Gallente Immensea Reborn	Posted - 2010.09.24 18:41:00 - [79] Newb perspective: I dont see how blasters are of any use without major supporting skills across the board in gunnery (probably skills in other categories as well - im new enough that im not familiar with all the skills yet), plus some attribute enhancing modules (tracking computer which again requires skilling to level 4), plus some webbing modules, plus I need to pretend the orbit button doesnt exist. How can I possibly output more damage with railguns on a destroyer skilled to level 2 vs a thorax equipped with blasters and cruisers skilled to level 4? Even using the Keep At Range to keep transversal as low as possible (and making myself a sitting duck as well) if my target moves an inch the damage output drops by half. From my POV its insane a thorax equipped with projectile weapons works 50x better than using gallente weapons, I dont need to spend half my time carefully managing my caps and lord help me if the enemy is using neuts/knaves. I fit railguns/blasters on a cruiser without extremely specific support module setups I go boom. I fit projectiles with complete failfits they go boom. I think if Min turrets required caps and Gallente turrents didnt it would go a long way to balancing it out, as those caps would be freed up to active tank. When the vast majority of incoming hostile fire in lowsec reads Autocannon or Howitzer, coupled with never having it coming up as Blaster or Railgun I think thats saying something. I wonder if pirates/hostiles shake their head or laugh their ass off when the damage notifier comes up hybrid on their end. I know nothing of Amarr weaponry, so I cant comment how it compares and balances to hybrid/projectile __________________________ I sea'er but I dont believ'er
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2010.09.24 19:00:00 - [80] Originally by: sea'er I think if Min turrets required caps and Gallente turrents didnt it would go a long way to balancing it out, Newb or not thats a really good idea.Not sure if it was already posted above or not. But it would allow for more cap to mwd to the enemy.That would be pretty much all that blasters need.Dps is fine.Although thinking of the skills you need to use them,they could get 5% or so. Maxed gunnery skills Very good navigation skills All cap skills All fitting skills cuz neutrons are a pain to fit Very good armor skills etc without these you dont need to get into a blaster ship

London Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.24 19:24:00 - [81] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: sea'er I think if Min turrets required caps and Gallente turrents didnt it would go a long way to balancing it out, Newb or not thats a really good idea.Not sure if it was already posted above or not. But it would allow for more cap to mwd to the enemy.That would be pretty much all that blasters need.Dps is fine.Although thinking of the skills you need to use them,they could get 5% or so. Maxed gunnery skills Very good navigation skills All cap skills All fitting skills cuz neutrons are a pain to fit Very good armor skills etc without these you dont need to get into a blaster ship This is actually an excellent idea since many Gallente ships also have an active repair bonus. Trying to power high cap usage guns while using a MWD to get into point-blank range on ships that aren't even the fastest AND potentially run an active armor tank is brutal. After saying that, the current game doesn't really favor active tanks outside of 1v1 or really small gang situations anyways. :/ Still, even if it were to aid in the fact that blaster boats need to use a MWD like nobody else, that would be a step in the right direction.
Ralnik Mutineers	Posted - 2010.09.24 20:58:00 - [82] Originally by: Loki Nahat Hybrids do need a buff, the least we could settle for would be an improvement to the tracking discrepancy at short ranges. At the most hopeful, a damage boost that creates them to be the short range weapon system they are intended to be. Basically I don't mind MWDing (yes it's now a verb) and loosing precious time getting into optimal, as long as it's worth it. Currently and for a lot of recent history it's just been more efficient to fit lasers. I'm not 100% convinced that Blasters need a tracking buff, however if in theory CCP gave a buff to Gallente blaster ship's speed and agility tracking might be a bigger issue. Personally right now I think Blasters and Missiles are kind of the same in their need for specific EW mods to get the best damage out put. With missiles it's pretty common knowledge that you need to use a Target Painter and with Blasters it should be common knowledge that they require the usage of webs & scam to get the most of out them. If your target is webbed blasters will track just fine in most cases assuming you aren't trying to hit a AB fig with large blasters..
Skunk Gracklaw Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.09.24 21:13:00 - [83] Originally by: NightmareX Try to be more stupier than you already are please.
Jane Vherokior Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2010.09.24 21:19:00 - [84] tl;dr Two prong solution: 1) don't fly Gallente in combat, and 2) don't fly Gallente in combat. No need to thank me.
Barakkus Caelestis Iudicium	Posted - 2010.09.24 21:52:00 - [85] I thought Gallente were supposed to be more drone focused than guns.
Ralnik Mutineers	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:14:00 - [86] Originally by: Barakkus I thought Gallente were supposed to be more drone focused than guns. Only a few ships.. Like the Vexor,Ishtar,Myrm & Dommi get bonus to drones the rest tend to depend on Blasters and drones as secondary DPS.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:18:00 - [87] Originally by: Barakkus I thought Gallente were supposed to be more drone focused than guns. Hyperion cant even send out 5 heavies..and its tracking sucks.Fail boat and not the only one gallente has.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:27:00 - [88] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: Barakkus I thought Gallente were supposed to be more drone focused than guns. Hyperion cant even send out 5 heavies..and its tracking sucks.Fail boat and not the only one gallente has. No T1 battleship can field 5 heavies except a Domi, which happens to be Gallente. In addition, i can work miracles with a Hyperion when it comes to tanking. My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Barakkus Caelestis Iudicium	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:29:00 - [89] Maybe they should buff drones on Gallente ships then instead of guns.
London Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:30:00 - [90] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: HeIIfire11 No T1 battleship can field 5 heavies except a Domi, which happens to be Gallente. Actually, Megathron can.. but it just has the room for it and no bonuses... while the Domi and Ishtar can field waves of different sizes.

Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:30:00 - [91] Originally by: Barakkus I thought Gallente were supposed to be more drone focused than guns. Over missiles.
Crias Taylor GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:33:00 - [92] Originally by: Barakkus Maybe they should buff drones on Gallente ships then instead of guns. The only thing they could ever do to make drones better (and they aren't bad) is if they followed in warp so that drone boat could join fight and not left bulletless in a fight cause of a warp.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:33:00 - [93] Originally by: London Actually, Megathron can.. but it just has the room for it and no bonuses... while the Domi and Ishtar can field waves of different sizes. The hyperion can fit 5 heavies too..but only has enough bandwidth to send out three.The mega can send out all 5.I guess the Hype is limited because it has 8 gun slots.
London Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:37:00 - [94] Originally by: HeIIfire11 Originally by: London Actually, Megathron can.. but it just has the room for it and no bonuses... while the Domi and Ishtar can field waves of different sizes. The hyperion can fit 5 heavies too..but only has enough bandwidth to send out three.The mega can send out all 5.I guess the Hype is limited because it has 8 gun slots. Correction again, I believe it can send out 4.
HeIIfire11	Posted - 2010.09.24 22:47:00 - [95] Originally by: London Correction again, I believe it can send out 4. Come to think of it you might be right..Im not sure because I dont like to fly it
Barakkus Caelestis Iudicium	Posted - 2010.09.24 23:01:00 - [96] Originally by: Crias Taylor Originally by: Barakkus Maybe they should buff drones on Gallente ships then instead of guns. The only thing they could ever do to make drones better (and they aren't bad) is if they followed in warp so that drone boat could join fight and not left bulletless in a fight cause of a warp. Or a reconnect/recall button like probes have, and make drones warp to you and dock.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.25 00:12:00 - [97] Edited by: Grimpak on 25/09/2010 00:13:13 tbh I would prefer a straight 20% increase in damage for med and large blasters, with just a tiny nudge on the tracking, while the rails could use a 10% increase in both dmg and tracking. that said, such massive boost to damage on the blasters would probably make things dicey on the falloff front, but that could be fixed too. I don't mind them putting OMFG damage, if that damage is restricted to a 10-15km radius from the ship. however I am expecting that the blaster "fix" will be nerfing both AC's and pulses to kingdom come and back, as its usual of CCP. also, about the drone thing, both the typhoon and the armageddon can use a full flight of 5 heavies. the typhoon even has quite the space for spares btw, since it has the 2nd largest drone bay. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Zverofaust Gallente Locus Industries	Posted - 2010.09.25 04:49:00 - [98] Gallente don't need a straight up speed/agility buff. Instead of having a "FOTM turret" you'd have a "FOTM nanoship", what's the difference? A couple of different approaches would improve Gallente performance: - Better Drone controls would help Gallente pilots micromanage drones more effectively, with quick "Engage Target" and "Return to Drone Bay" buttons on the Overview screen. Also making drones harder to kill would be awesome. It's really **ty than any ***** can easily kill off Gallente droneboats primary weapons on a whim. That'd be like having the ability to individually target and destroy enemy turrets. - Better Armor Resists. Gallente comes off as being more technologically advanced than most with its sleek ship designs and blaster technology; give their ships higher resists than others, which will allow them to fit smaller plates, freeing up PG, speed and agility while still maintaining adequate PVP competetiveness. - More utility/high slots. Gallente ships really lack utility slots, unlike most of their counterparts which can have many. - Railguns need better short-range tracking. - Blasters do need more range. I mean come on, the longest-range blaster ammo type is shorter than the shortest-range autocannon ammo type. This is madness. ___________________________________________ The Hero of Kamela The Terror of Tararan The Executioner of Ezzara
Xunlao Blackthorne	Posted - 2010.09.25 06:27:00 - [99] Please give Blasters more range!
Portmanteau CTRL-Q	Posted - 2010.09.25 06:37:00 - [100] Edited by: Portmanteau on 25/09/2010 06:40:42 The real problem with blasters is this... As the highest DPS/shortest optimal and falloff weapons in game they fall into an unfortunate situation of extremes. If you mount them on ships fast enough to comtrol range and apply their DPS they pwn everything, if you mount them on ship unable to control range and apply DPS (situation we have now) they don't PWN very much at all. How the F*** do CCP alter that balance ? It seems like buffing gallente means flicking a switch from lol underpowered to lol overpowered with no middle ground, if that buff involves enabling gal ships to control range that is. EDIT, agree with zvero that the buff needs to be more subtle to avoid lolOPness and not put the fear of god into CCP about doing it, because if we're honest CCP would be insane to make gallente boats capable of range control

Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.25 09:26:00 - [101] Originally by: Zverofaust - Blasters do need more range. I mean come on, the longest-range blaster ammo type is shorter than the shortest-range autocannon ammo type. This is madness. no they don't actually. they need to have drawbacks to make up for their extreme damage. their problem lies in the fact that the damage they pump out doesn't nullify their drawbacks of having such a low range. I mean, pulses do just a tiny ammount less of damage, yet they have nearly 3x more the optimal of blasters. AC's also have falloff of god knows how much % more than the blasters, making them having a much, much wider operability range. and I won't even talk about torps since a torp raven > blasterthron, in every way. but giving them blasters more range wouldn't be the smartest thing to do. best way would be to pretty much make blasters the weapon of choice for engaging to ranges up to 15km, by massively boosting their damage (20% +, and a lil' nudge on the tracking), and at the same time reducing their operability range, so they get nigh useless at ranges beyond overheated webs/scrams. in addition, a complete rework on every sort of active tanks, the massive penalties of plates vs extenders (too much mass added, 25% or even 40% less mass added on the plates would be better) AND a rework on armor rigs (honestly, only rig that could have the speed penalty would be the trimark). as for speed/agility. I wouldn't say a straight boost on that, but perhaps decrease the gallente blaster-ships mass by a bit and also increasing agility, while maintaining their current speed would be better. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
London Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.25 20:50:00 - [102] Originally by: Grimpak their problem lies in the fact that the damage they pump out doesn't nullify their drawbacks of having such a low range. I mean, pulses do just a tiny ammount less of damage, yet they have nearly 3x more the optimal of blasters. AC's also have falloff of god knows how much % more than the blasters, making them having a much, much wider operability range. and I won't even talk about torps since a torp raven > blasterthron, in every way. Pretty much nailed it.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.09.25 20:55:00 - [103] Originally by: Grimpak I won't even talk about torps since a torp raven > blasterthron, in every way. Blasterthron looks sexierà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Opertone Caldari Metalworks Majesta Empire	Posted - 2010.09.25 20:59:00 - [104] my suggestion is... give HYBRID rail guns the DPS of the Ammar BS. Moar DPS to the rail guns, cause nwo they are lol... and neither gallente nor caldari can use it
Pytria Le'Danness	Posted - 2010.09.27 11:16:00 - [105] To all those who say "Blasters are fine" a short story from my Faction Warfare times. We had a bunker vulnerable and I fitted a Megathron with Blasters and Void (Yeah, Void, I build a metric ton of that ammo when invention came out and I suffered from a reading deficiency :P ). I figured "might as well use that ammo up to shorten the time spent shooting at a stationary target". I sat at optimal and was blasting away until I started moving towards the communal ammo can. Suddenly a lot of my shots started missing. Remember, I was shooting at a stationary target, and was moving at a neglegible velocity - yet tracking problems set in. I have to admit that I haven't really PvPed in ages, but that incident clearly shows that something is wrong there - either the guns themselves, the T2 ammo or (my favorite) the way tracking is calculated have a serious issue. I really wanted to fire my gunners (or fire AT my gunners) for not being able to lead a stationary target.
Eternum Praetorian PWNED Factor Elite	Posted - 2010.09.27 12:28:00 - [106] Originally by: Grimpak I won't even talk about torps since a torp raven > blasterthron, in every way Dude.. just. Dude...
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.27 12:51:00 - [107] Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Originally by: Grimpak I won't even talk about torps since a torp raven > blasterthron, in every way Dude.. just. Dude... ok ok... I exagerated. megathron is sexier than the raven. on the rest tho, torp ravens fill up the lows with dmg mods, a tank in the mids and do over 900dps from torps alone. More if you put rage torps in the equation. in more realistic fits (3 dmg mods), the raven will have 850dps at up to 30km, while the megathron will deal 40dps more, at only 4.5km range (neutrons + faction AM) and you will only have 4 lowslots + rigslots for tank. raven has 5 medslots (discounting obligatory mwd) + 2 lowslots (DCU + pdu for extra shields) plus the rigslots to give out tank, and it has 2 utility slots on top of it. mobility-wise the raven is slower, yet that is quite easily countered by the fact that a) faction/stock torps hit up to 30km range, and b) you swap for javs and you all of the sudden can deal 670dps up to 45km range. even more if you add missile speed rigs, AND the bonus where you can pick your damage. bthrons can only deal drone damage at those ranges. conclusion: torp ravens, like pulse geddons (I won't even say anything about pulse apocs90km pulses?), and AC tempests/maelstroms, have a freakishly huge operability range (300%+), where they just deal marginally less damage than blaster ships (like 10-15% less damage). In my view, this situation of being outreached by pretty much every weapon is not the problem. problem is, for the range the blasters have, they should do more damage. and by more, I really DO mean lots more. 20% more at the very least. I don't mind b-throns and b-hypes being only operable in point blank ranges (up to 20km max), if by tradeoff you get agile ships that can deal upwards of 1500dps with ease. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Ogogov	Posted - 2010.09.27 14:45:00 - [108] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Originally by: Grimpak I won't even talk about torps since a torp raven > blasterthron, in every way I don't mind b-throns and b-hypes being only operable in point blank ranges (up to 20km max), if by tradeoff you get agile ships that can deal upwards of 1500dps with ease. Pretty much this. Blasters need a clear advantage in short range combat and no, the pathetic 5-15% extra damage (assuming they can even track the target which is unfortunately unlikely) is simply not worth the sacrifices made to range. Fix them or make it easy and take them out of the damned game.
Redoubti Amarr Evil Dead L.L.C.	Posted - 2010.09.27 15:58:00 - [109] If this about fixing hybrids or about fixing Gallente? If you are not careful any changes to hybrids will have peeps crying nerf the Moa, Rokh, and eagle.
Aloe Cloveris The Greater Goon	Posted - 2010.09.27 16:03:00 - [110] Ugh. I've already dumped around a million SP into ***-city large blasters. Gave up halfway between IV and V when I realized just how rubbish they are on a ship that takes a month to turn and an additional couple weeks to accelerate towards the target. If I DO manage to get into range, hey look! I'm capped out but fortunately that doesn't matter, because the primary exploded 90 seconds ago under fire from my non-Gallentean brosefs. Oh right. We're the 'drone race'. We have one hull in each ship category that would qualify as a bonused (or otherwise, see: Ishkur [no damage or hp bonuses, but you do get up to two flights of drones (like a Sentinel!), which means you're not entirely ***ed and useless if you d/c or have to warp out) drone boat, otherwise we have similar bandwidth, dronebay m3, and abandonable-in-space drone dps as every other race in each of their respective ship classes. Hare-brained suggestion: Hefty reduction of mass/agility penalties on armor rigs & plates per level; optimals/falloff on blasters now a fixed range; ammo types now affect tracking (like Minmatar long-range ammo does) and ROF. Antimatter = high-alpha, slow cycles, base tracking, heavier cap draw Iron = vastly improved tracking, zippy ROF, weak alpha/dps, lighter cap draw I dunno. Fix it. Somehow. I don't care. Literally anything* would an improvement. I'll be over here cross-training to Amarr and Minmatar while you sort that out. * Yeah, no. I know. Sentinel hardly stacks up to an Ishkur. Hurr.

Terianna Eri Amarr Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn	Posted - 2010.09.27 16:27:00 - [111] Originally by: Professor Tarantula No T1 battleship can field 5 heavies except a Domi, which happens to be Gallente. Armageddon was here? ________________ Originally by: CCP Incognito PS the "time to P*nis" is the shortest time recorded in human history. :)
Ocih Amarr The Program Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.09.27 16:47:00 - [112] To the OP: The problem is, you spec a Gallente ship for speed so it can use blasters right and everyone will fit rails, kite you at 30 km anyway. Just doing it with enough speed that you cant hit back. Kind of like Minmatar are now?
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.27 17:05:00 - [113] Originally by: Redoubti If this about fixing hybrids or about fixing Gallente? If you are not careful any changes to hybrids will have peeps crying nerf the Moa, Rokh, and eagle. rail fix is simple: no more than 5% (or even 10%) more damage, and equal increase in tracking. they just need to deal good damage, not omfgwtf damage; and tracking wise, they only need to be below lasers. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Eternum Praetorian PWNED Factor Elite	Posted - 2010.09.27 17:20:00 - [114] Originally by: Grimpak ok ok... I exagerated. megathron is sexier than the raven. on the rest tho, torp ravens fill up the lows with dmg mods, a tank in the mids and do over 900dps from torps alone. More if you put rage torps in the equation. in more realistic fits (3 dmg mods), the raven will have 850dps at up to 30km, while the megathron will deal 40dps more, at only 4.5km range (neutrons + faction AM) and you will only have 4 lowslots + rigslots for tank. raven has 5 medslots (discounting obligatory mwd) + 2 lowslots (DCU + pdu for extra shields) plus the rigslots to give out tank, and it has 2 utility slots on top of it. mobility-wise the raven is slower, yet that is quite easily countered by the fact that a) faction/stock torps hit up to 30km range, and b) you swap for javs and you all of the sudden can deal 670dps up to 45km range. even more if you add missile speed rigs, AND the bonus where you can pick your damage. bthrons can only deal drone damage at those ranges. conclusion: torp ravens, like pulse geddons (I won't even say anything about pulse apocs90km pulses?), and AC tempests/maelstroms, have a freakishly huge operability range (300%+), where they just deal marginally less damage than blaster ships (like 10-15% less damage). In my view, this situation of being outreached by pretty much every weapon is not the problem. Our Corporate-wide fleet builds for Megathron's do 950 DPS at 6,400 Optimal and 16,000 Fall off (123K EHP-3200 Volley Damage) so that is 22KM Effective range. Tracking For Megathron: .07 Tracking For Armageddon: .04 with navy Multi-frequency crystals. So the tracking is actually better. You people are just doing it wrong because you make an assumption and listen to the parrots on these forums. And no, I am not going to be baited into post this fit. I want as many fail fitted Fleet Megathron's flying around as possible. If you can't figure it out, it's your problem not a problem of the Race.
Anti Kondor Minmatar Enterprise Estonia Session Changes	Posted - 2010.09.27 17:28:00 - [115] Just a quick question, some people have sugested using sensor daps on blaster boats to force the enemy closer, but how many sensor damps would you actually need on an enemy for that to work? Can't check myself in EHQ since I am at work. The idea itself is interesting, but I dont really see it as a workable solution. ---------- Try not to take life too seriously, no one gets out alive anyway.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.27 17:54:00 - [116] Originally by: Anti Kondor Just a quick question, some people have sugested using sensor daps on blaster boats to force the enemy closer, but how many sensor damps would you actually need on an enemy for that to work? Can't check myself in EHQ since I am at work. The idea itself is interesting, but I dont really see it as a workable solution. So the enemy is just going to wait for you to get into optimal? And dampeners wont keep it from warping off.
Anti Kondor Minmatar Enterprise Estonia Session Changes	Posted - 2010.09.27 18:00:00 - [117] Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Originally by: Anti Kondor Just a quick question, some people have sugested using sensor daps on blaster boats to force the enemy closer, but how many sensor damps would you actually need on an enemy for that to work? Can't check myself in EHQ since I am at work. The idea itself is interesting, but I dont really see it as a workable solution. So the enemy is just going to wait for you to get into optimal? And dampeners wont keep it from warping off. You don't say. I was not sugesting replacing a point with sensor damps, but rather asking if instead of using, say, webs you use sensor damps with the range damping script to force the enemy into your engagement envelope where the longer optimal of lazors or the longer falloff of projectiles is a moot point. They have to either disengage or walk into your jaws, so to speak. I further mentioned that this idea does not seem workable to me and will now elaborate on that: it does not seem workable because of the ammount of damps you need to force a ship into such short range, especially on battleship sized vessels, but I am unable to check that myself because I can not install anything on this work computer and I will not be leaving here for another 11 hours. ---------- Try not to take life too seriously, no one gets out alive anyway.
Night Epoch Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive	Posted - 2010.09.27 18:07:00 - [118] Confirming the Deimos is utterly worthless. What a LOLboat. I'd solo one in a mining Ibis.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.27 18:34:00 - [119] Edited by: Grimpak on 27/09/2010 18:36:29 Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Our Corporate-wide fleet builds for Megathron's do 950 DPS at 6,400 Optimal and 16,000 Fall off (123K EHP-3200 Volley Damage) so that is 22KM Effective range. Tracking For Megathron: .07 Tracking For Armageddon: .04 with navy Multi-frequency crystals. So the tracking is actually better. You people are just doing it wrong because you make an assumption and listen to the parrots on these forums. And no, I am not going to be baited into post this fit. I want as many fail fitted Fleet Megathron's flying around as possible. If you can't figure it out, it's your problem not a problem of the Race. wait what? a) you can only achieve such numbers by using drones, and a reduced number of MFS, coupled with TE's. however, I did not said that the numbers I posted are without drones. Even still, an effective range of 22km where you deal like 300 or so dps at that range + drones means you're doing something in the 600dps range. and that means using ogres that are, infact, quite slow (even with 'zerkers we're looking at too long of a drone travel time). ravens on the other hand (3 dmg mods), deal 850dps from torps up to 30km. no falloff to hinder damage calcs. add drones and all of the sudden you have a bit over 1000dps done. It has, however, to account to drone travel, and even then, the raven is either as agile and fast as your plated trimarked megathron, or actually faster and more nimble. b) the way tracking works, having said tracking at scorch optimals (45km and above) means you can actually hit frigates without any kind of aid. b-thron's can't do that with null or any other kind of ammo. they need to have their target sitting perfectly still at optimal, or triple-webbed and with a scram on him. c) not listening to forum parrots, but number checking and 7 years in this game tells me that the facts are these: tiny damage advantage of blasters does not compensate the fact that pretty much every other SR gun ingame (at the very least on the medium and large sizes) outperforms them considerably, coupled with the fact that, bar the taranis, blaster-oriented ships are as agile as a sea cow on dry land, disparities of active tank vs passive tank, AND gruesome penalties from both passive armor tank mods and rigs. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.09.27 18:53:00 - [120] Yeah, basically CCP assigned the shortest-ranged turret to an armor-tanking race whose ship speeds are average at best. Oh yeah, and those turrets drain the capacitor in addition to using ammunition. Being the "drone specialist" race only compensates for these ridiculous shortcomings to a certain degree, and even then only on certain ships. If the Myrmidon hadn't been nerfed, Gallente would still be a fairly sexy race. But it was, so... yeah.

Eternum Praetorian PWNED Factor Elite	Posted - 2010.09.27 19:08:00 - [121] Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 27/09/2010 19:09:03 Allow me to present this question. What do you think the typical BS range is between two RR gangs in Empire/Low Sec? Because it surely is not 30KM.
Contactman	Posted - 2010.09.27 19:32:00 - [122] Caldari pilot checking in to confirm that hybrid problems are not exclusive to Gallente. The best suggestion so far IMHO is the shotgun approach. No need for tracking while in optimal, and perhaps a little better damage. That's an assault shotgun. Following that train of thought, because rails are bad as well. Lower RoF on rails and no damage resistance against rails in optimal. That's a sniper. Lastly. No falloff on hybrid weapons... You're either in range or not. Just random thoughts inspired by a random newbies thoughts.
Mrtan Caldari Volt Investments	Posted - 2010.09.27 19:47:00 - [123] A shield tanked blaster rokh, is pure awesomeness, does more damage then a megathron, tanks better, its rigs dont cost less then 3 mill. Especially if u lose it on gates/stations in empire.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.27 19:59:00 - [124] Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 27/09/2010 19:09:03 Allow me to present this question. What do you think the typical BS range is between two RR gangs in Empire/Low Sec? Because it surely is not 30KM. FW gangs? --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.27 22:08:00 - [125] It would be nice to have any sort of reply from ccp if they are planning any changes regarding blasters in the next expansion, so i could at least stop wasting my time with gallente and start crosstraining.
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.27 22:13:00 - [126] Edited by: NightmareX on 27/09/2010 22:21:18 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle It would be nice to have any sort of reply from ccp if they are planning any changes regarding blasters in the next expansion, so i could at least stop wasting my time with gallente and start crosstraining. Sorry to disapoint you, but you can just start cross training right now if you can't play Gallente right. CCP said they was looking into Blasters earlier, and they probably did and didn't find anything that needs to be changed / fixed. So i doubt CCP will change anything with Blasters. But do they need to change something with the Blasters?. Yeah, actually they do, they need to increase the DPS by 5% and the tracking by 10%. Then the Blasters will be even better. But the most important thing is to get more tracking on Blasters. Blasters as they are today are totally fine. But adding 5% more DPS and 10% more tracking wont hurt.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.27 22:22:00 - [127] Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 27/09/2010 22:21:18 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle It would be nice to have any sort of reply from ccp if they are planning any changes regarding blasters in the next expansion, so i could at least stop wasting my time with gallente and start crosstraining. Sorry to disapoint you, but you can just start cross training right now if you can't play Gallente right. CCP said they was looking into Blasters earlier, and they probably did and didn't find anything that needs to be changed / fixed. So i doubt CCP will change anything with Blasters. But do they need to change something with the Blasters?. Yeah, actually they do, they need to increase the DPS by 5% and the tracking by 10%. Then the Blasters will be even better. But the most important thing is to get more tracking on Blasters. Blasters as they are today are totally fine. But adding 5% more DPS and 10% more tracking wont hurt. You clearly have no idea or experience how tracking works.
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.27 22:26:00 - [128] Edited by: NightmareX on 27/09/2010 22:26:53 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 27/09/2010 22:21:18 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle It would be nice to have any sort of reply from ccp if they are planning any changes regarding blasters in the next expansion, so i could at least stop wasting my time with gallente and start crosstraining. Sorry to disapoint you, but you can just start cross training right now if you can't play Gallente right. CCP said they was looking into Blasters earlier, and they probably did and didn't find anything that needs to be changed / fixed. So i doubt CCP will change anything with Blasters. But do they need to change something with the Blasters?. Yeah, actually they do, they need to increase the DPS by 5% and the tracking by 10%. Then the Blasters will be even better. But the most important thing is to get more tracking on Blasters. Blasters as they are today are totally fine. But adding 5% more DPS and 10% more tracking wont hurt. You clearly have no idea or experience how tracking works. If i tell you that i use a Vindicator with 90% webs with Neutrons every day. Then what does that tells you? I know EXACTLY how tracking works and i know exactly how good the tracking on Blasters are when you are very close to a targets in that ship. You will even have problems to hit a Cruiser orbiting you at 300-500m even in a Vindicator. That's the Blasters problem that it can't really track well at that range. But in fact, Blasters should really track pretty good at that range since Blasters already are a very close range weapon.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.27 22:39:00 - [129] Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 27/09/2010 22:32:32 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 27/09/2010 22:21:18 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle It would be nice to have any sort of reply from ccp if they are planning any changes regarding blasters in the next expansion, so i could at least stop wasting my time with gallente and start crosstraining. Sorry to disapoint you, but you can just start cross training right now if you can't play Gallente right. CCP said they was looking into Blasters earlier, and they probably did and didn't find anything that needs to be changed / fixed. So i doubt CCP will change anything with Blasters. But do they need to change something with the Blasters?. Yeah, actually they do, they need to increase the DPS by 5% and the tracking by 10%. Then the Blasters will be even better. But the most important thing is to get more tracking on Blasters. Blasters as they are today are totally fine. But adding 5% more DPS and 10% more tracking wont hurt. You clearly have no idea or experience how tracking works. If i tell you that i use a Vindicator with 90% webs with Neutrons every day. Then what does that tells you? I know EXACTLY how tracking works and i know exactly how good the tracking on Blasters are when you are very close to a targets in that ship. You will even have problems to hit a Cruiser orbiting you at 300-500m even in a Vindicator. That's the Blasters problem that it can't really track well at that range. But in fact, Blasters should really track pretty good at that range since Blasters already are a very close range weapon. If Blasters could have tracked better at 500m then most of us could have applied the DPS advantage Blasters have over Lasers and Projectile guns. Battleships are not supposed to hit cruisers at 500m. However, i do have problems hitting other cruisers with medium blasters at 5km. For blasters to actually work at their range, they would need at least twice the tracking they have now, not +10%.
London Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.27 22:51:00 - [130] Originally by: Hentes Zsemle It would be nice to have any sort of reply from ccp if they are planning any changes regarding blasters in the next expansion, so i could at least stop wasting my time... ^ This. Keep this thread on the front page until they do.

NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.27 23:01:00 - [131] Edited by: NightmareX on 27/09/2010 23:01:57 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Battleships are not supposed to hit cruisers at 500m. However, i do have problems hitting other cruisers with medium blasters at 5km. For blasters to actually work at their range, they would need at least twice the tracking they have now, not +10%. Ehhmmm, you know that we are talking about a Vindicator with 90% web right? A Vindicator with a Federation Navy Webber should hit Cruiser very easily. So that's why Blasters needs more tracking so they can hit targets like cruiser better at 500m or something like that. If you can control the range, then it shouldn't be a problem, since you can just move 2 km away from the targets and hit even cruisers VERY good with Blasters. It's just when you are very close like 300-500m that Blasters have big issues to hit things if they are moving.
Apo Lyptica	Posted - 2010.09.27 23:22:00 - [132] Originally by: A Bombs wow at amount of anti-buff blaster people in this thread, especially from those ppl who are minmatars. Why am i not suprised that OP plays minmatar yea, lets all fly minmatar ships so there is no need to fix anything http://reliables.eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=64828&view=ships_weapons look, 95% gallente, but now i fly minmitar, and ill tell you.... minmitar >>>>>> gallente... sleip is OP like a mofo, vaga does stupid amounts of dps while not being slow...
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.27 23:26:00 - [133] Originally by: Apo Lyptica Originally by: A Bombs wow at amount of anti-buff blaster people in this thread, especially from those ppl who are minmatars. Why am i not suprised that OP plays minmatar yea, lets all fly minmatar ships so there is no need to fix anything http://reliables.eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=64828&view=ships_weapons look, 95% gallente, but now i fly minmitar, and ill tell you.... minmitar >>>>>> gallente... sleip is OP like a mofo, vaga does stupid amounts of dps while not being slow... The Minmatar -> Gallente thing just depends on your play style. For my play style it's Gallente -> Minmatar by a HUUUUUGE margin. I actually have more kills in my Vindicator alone than you have kills in total lol.
Lexa HeIIfury	Posted - 2010.09.28 00:02:00 - [134] Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 27/09/2010 23:17:13 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Battleships are not supposed to hit cruisers at 500m. However, i do have problems hitting other cruisers with medium blasters at 5km. For blasters to actually work at their range, they would need at least twice the tracking they have now, not +10%. Ehhmmm, you know that we are talking about a Vindicator with 90% web right? A Vindicator with a Federation Navy Webber should hit Cruisers very easily. So that's why Blasters needs more tracking so they can hit targets like cruiser better at 500m or something like that. If you can control the range, then it shouldn't be a problem, since you can just move 2 km away from the targets and hit even cruisers VERY good with Blasters. It's just when you are very close like 300-500m that Blasters have big issues to hit things if they are moving. And this thing just get even worser if your in a normal Megathron with Blasters. EDIT: Giving Blasters twise the tracking will never happen. Do you know how ridiculous overpowered the Blasters is going to be then?. And specially on the Vindicator? Think before you speak though. So your suggested fix for blasters is for all Gallente pilots to camp station undocks in a Vindicator? -------------------------------------------------------------------
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.09.28 00:07:00 - [135] ITT: People saying, "You don't have the skills to use blasters properly. If you did, you wouldn't be complaining." I've been playing MMOs since the early 1990s ù in the days of text MUDs, before Ultima Online. I can tell you that this ancient argument has been around since the dawn of online gaming. It's the classic response blurted out by anyone who wants to seem 1337 when people complain about a class/skill/weapon/vehicle/pet/whatever. It's quite simple: All turret types should require uncommon skill to use uncommonly well. Blasters require uncommon skill just to be used normally, let alone uncommonly well. This should be fixed.
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.28 00:10:00 - [136] Originally by: Lexa HeIIfury Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 27/09/2010 23:17:13 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Battleships are not supposed to hit cruisers at 500m. However, i do have problems hitting other cruisers with medium blasters at 5km. For blasters to actually work at their range, they would need at least twice the tracking they have now, not +10%. Ehhmmm, you know that we are talking about a Vindicator with 90% web right? A Vindicator with a Federation Navy Webber should hit Cruisers very easily. So that's why Blasters needs more tracking so they can hit targets like cruiser better at 500m or something like that. If you can control the range, then it shouldn't be a problem, since you can just move 2 km away from the targets and hit even cruisers VERY good with Blasters. It's just when you are very close like 300-500m that Blasters have big issues to hit things if they are moving. And this thing just get even worser if your in a normal Megathron with Blasters. EDIT: Giving Blasters twise the tracking will never happen. Do you know how ridiculous overpowered the Blasters is going to be then?. And specially on the Vindicator? Think before you speak though. So your suggested fix for blasters is for all Gallente pilots to camp station undocks in a Vindicator? Camping Jita or not, our war targets are moving no matter what and we still need tracking to hit moving targets.
Lexa HeIIfury	Posted - 2010.09.28 00:14:00 - [137] Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Lexa HeIIfury So your suggested fix for blasters is for all Gallente pilots to camp station undocks in a Vindicator? Camping Jita or not, our war targets are moving no matter what and we still need tracking to hit moving targets. There's a pretty big difference between starting a fight (or gank) already 0-10km from your target, and general roaming pvp where you have to burn to your target, kill him, the burn to your next target, kill him, etc. -------------------------------------------------------------------
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.28 00:19:00 - [138] Edited by: NightmareX on 28/09/2010 00:24:00 Originally by: Lexa HeIIfury Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Lexa HeIIfury So your suggested fix for blasters is for all Gallente pilots to camp station undocks in a Vindicator? Camping Jita or not, our war targets are moving no matter what and we still need tracking to hit moving targets. There's a pretty big difference between starting a fight (or gank) already 0-10km from your target, and general roaming pvp where you have to burn to your target, kill him, the burn to your next target, kill him, etc. Ofc, but i'm not only sitting on Jita 4-4 to kill targets. We are around in the systems around Jita sometimes to. And we still need tracking to hit stuffs. But when i warps into some war targets in another system i will in 99% of the cases land on top of them or inside my optimal range on my Neutron Blasters. If they are on the other side of the gate, then fine, then i have to MWD to them. But that isn't a problem it self if they are tackled.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.28 07:53:00 - [139] Edited by: Hentes Zsemle on 28/09/2010 07:59:41 Originally by: NightmareX Edited by: NightmareX on 28/09/2010 00:24:00 Originally by: Lexa HeIIfury Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Lexa HeIIfury So your suggested fix for blasters is for all Gallente pilots to camp station undocks in a Vindicator? Camping Jita or not, our war targets are moving no matter what and we still need tracking to hit moving targets. There's a pretty big difference between starting a fight (or gank) already 0-10km from your target, and general roaming pvp where you have to burn to your target, kill him, the burn to your next target, kill him, etc. Ofc, but i'm not only sitting on Jita 4-4 to kill targets. We are around in the systems around Jita sometimes to. And we still need tracking to hit stuffs. But when i warps into some war targets in another system i will in 99% of the cases land on top of them or inside my optimal range on my Neutron Blasters. If they are on the other side of the gate, then fine, then i have to MWD to them. But that isn't a problem it self if they are tackled. Im happy that you like that vindicator so much, the fact is tho that its the worst pirate battleship in the game, becouse of the blasters. And FYI, to hit targets at the same transversal velocity at 40km and 20 km, you need to have double the angular velocity, which is tracking in eve terms. Oh and lets not forget the ridiculous targeting range on all serpentis ships which keeps them from being at least a half decent sniper.
Merdaneth Amarr Angel Wing.	Posted - 2010.09.28 08:18:00 - [140] Originally by: NightmareX A Vindicator with a Federation Navy Webber should hit Cruisers very easily. So that's why Blasters needs more tracking so they can hit targets like cruiser better at 500m or something like that. No, Battleships should not be able to reliably hit afterburner low-sig cruisers orbiting smartly within 500m. Similarly, cruisers should not be able to reliably hit afterburner fitted low-sig frigates orbiting at 500m. It is a good thing that battleship with blasters aren't 'click-approach, activate web, activate guns and wait until the target dies' ships. An low-sig AB cruiser between 1000m-5000m from a Vindicator will tend to get hit for full damage. ____ The Illusion of Freedom \| The Truth about Slavery

EFT Worrier	Posted - 2010.09.28 10:58:00 - [141] Edited by: EFT Worrier on 28/09/2010 11:03:38 Originally by: Grimpak Edited by: Grimpak on 27/09/2010 18:36:29 Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Our Corporate-wide fleet builds for Megathron's do 950 DPS at 6,400 Optimal and 16,000 Fall off (123K EHP-3200 Volley Damage) so that is 22KM Effective range. Tracking For Megathron: .07 Tracking For Armageddon: .04 with navy Multi-frequency crystals. So the tracking is actually better. You people are just doing it wrong because you make an assumption and listen to the parrots on these forums. And no, I am not going to be baited into post this fit. I want as many fail fitted Fleet Megathron's flying around as possible. If you can't figure it out, it's your problem not a problem of the Race. wait what? a) you can only achieve such numbers by using drones, and a reduced number of MFS, coupled with TE's. however, I did not said that the numbers I posted are without drones. Even still, an effective range of 22km where you deal like 300 or so dps at that range + drones means you're doing something in the 600dps range. and that means using ogres that are, infact, quite slow (even with 'zerkers we're looking at too long of a drone travel time). ravens on the other hand (3 dmg mods), deal 850dps from torps up to 30km. no falloff to hinder damage calcs. add drones and all of the sudden you have a bit over 1000dps done. It has, however, to account to drone travel, and even then, the raven is either as agile and fast as your plated trimarked megathron, or actually faster and more nimble. b) the way tracking works, having said tracking at scorch optimals (45km and above) means you can actually hit frigates without any kind of aid. b-thron's can't do that with null or any other kind of ammo. they need to have their target sitting perfectly still at optimal, or triple-webbed and with a scram on him. c) not listening to forum parrots, but number checking and 7 years in this game tells me that the facts are these: tiny damage advantage of blasters does not compensate the fact that pretty much every other SR gun ingame (at the very least on the medium and large sizes) outperforms them considerably, coupled with the fact that, bar the taranis, blaster-oriented ships are as agile as a sea cow on dry land, disparities of active tank vs passive tank, AND gruesome penalties from both passive armor tank mods and rigs. He also forgot to mention that his lolfit megas have a base velocity of 100m/sec and an align time of 1 minute due to 2+ 1600 RTs and 3x trimarks.... how much DPS do those megas apply while being roflkited at 40km by a gang of large pulses fitted with scorch? answer: none. IMO the solution to the current hybrid problem is a buff to Null, an across-the-board reduction in ship mass for blaster ships (so even though they will still be the slowest ships in EVE, they have a chance to catch faster targets with superior piloting), and a revision of blaster ship bonuses.
Wacktopia Bi-Tech Theory Focused Intentions	Posted - 2010.09.28 11:13:00 - [142] Blasters need some attention. Not a lot but they need something. The combination of high-damage and short range is a great idea but on the some of the slowest ships in the game, made slower by typical armor tanking by race, is a poor combination. At range autos, lasers and missiles do some damage where blasters do none at all. Unless your target has a tiny sig and is doing extreme traversal then pulses and autos (both 'short' range systems) will still hit, likewise missiles will apply some damage (esp precision). Even using Null ammo you will often have to shield tank and mutli-stack t.enh or give up mids for t.comps to get any kind of range. There are lots of ways to "fix" the disadvantage the above causes. Some ideas below - some good and some bad but meh :) 1) Improve blaster damage so when in range the risk pays off OR 2) Increase blaster optimal OR 3) Change or introduce ammo types such that low damage at range can be better achieved. OR 4) Change ship bonuses to achieve the above OR 5) Give blaster boats an advantage when overloading MWDs (lower heat damage; longer) OR 6) Give blaster boats a web range/str bonus
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.28 11:26:00 - [143] Originally by: Wacktopia Blasters need some attention. Not a lot but they need something. The combination of high-damage and short range is a great idea but on the some of the slowest ships in the game, made slower by typical armor tanking by race, is a poor combination. At range autos, lasers and missiles do some damage where blasters do none at all. Unless your target has a tiny sig and is doing extreme traversal then pulses and autos (both 'short' range systems) will still hit, likewise missiles will apply some damage (esp precision). Even using Null ammo you will often have to shield tank and mutli-stack t.enh or give up mids for t.comps to get any kind of range. There are lots of ways to "fix" the disadvantage the above causes. Some ideas below - some good and some bad but meh :) 1) Improve blaster damage so when in range the risk pays off OR 2) Increase blaster optimal OR 3) Change or introduce ammo types such that low damage at range can be better achieved. OR 4) Change ship bonuses to achieve the above OR 5) Give blaster boats an advantage when overloading MWDs (lower heat damage; longer) OR 6) Give blaster boats a web range/str bonus good ideas, but I still prefer the number 1, in addition to revamp both armor rigs and plates, and the way active tanking works. I mean, at the very least, the only armor rig that could give a speed nerf is the trimark, and even then it's too much, compared to what the shield rigs negatively do to your ship. as for plates vs extenders, the same applies, but this time is even worse. the plates can nerf agility, but their numbers are too high. at most, they should only add half of the mass they add today. but with all this you still could go active tank, but it is insuficient, compared to passive, too cap intensive (and in this case, making cap management in a blaster ship nothing less than a nightmare), and, overall, underpowered. this last bit wouldn't be a problem if blasterships managed to get in range at a timely manner, but even cap charges considered, you take quite a hit on your cap tank just atempting to approach a target (and most of the time, failing). --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.09.28 12:11:00 - [144] Quote: 3) Change or introduce ammo types If they tweaked blaster ammo slightly, it would completely fix the weapon system. Void ammo, +25% cap usage, 1/2 the tracking, and 1/2 the falloff for the same DPS as Navy Antimatter, SIGN ME UP!!! If void keeps its crippling penalties, it should do atleast 10% more DPS than it does now. Null could probably use some sort of tweak also, +25% optimal and +25% falloff on a weapon system that has mediocre optimal and falloff, does not compare to a +50% optimal boost of Scorch or a +50% falloff boost of Barrage.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.28 12:24:00 - [145] Edited by: Grimpak on 28/09/2010 12:27:40 Originally by: Rastigan Quote: 3) Change or introduce ammo types If they tweaked blaster ammo slightly, it would completely fix the weapon system. Void ammo, +25% cap usage, 1/2 the tracking, and 1/2 the falloff for the same DPS as Navy Antimatter, SIGN ME UP!!! If void keeps its crippling penalties, it should do atleast 10% more DPS than it does now. Null could probably use some sort of tweak also, +25% optimal and +25% falloff on a weapon system that has mediocre optimal and falloff, does not compare to a +50% optimal boost of Scorch or a +50% falloff boost of Barrage. good ideas, but it has two problems: first, that would restrict the boost to only T2 blasters, making all the other hybrid ammos and blaster weapons obsolete. second, it's not just hybrid T2 ammo that needs changes but every other T2 ammo that needs them. changing T2 blaster ammo, would also mean changing all the other ammo and that would probably mean going back to square one. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.28 17:17:00 - [146] bump CCP should at least have the guts to tell if they are looking into this until the next expansion (which means any change in the next ~9 months or more).
London Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.28 17:43:00 - [147] I'm really unimpressed with our CSM that out of that big, long laundry list, this was somehow excluded. There have been posts for months and months about hybrid weapon issues ever since Quantum Rise. Given that CCP dedicates and plans all their resources for any given work/project, and seeing how this somehow never made it on the list, I am worried that it won't be addressed since no one is working on it. What ever happened to 50/50 new content and fixing old content?
Weight What Gallente	Posted - 2010.09.28 18:29:00 - [148] Originally by: NightmareX If that was directed to me, then no, i fully understand how Blasters works. I don't really care if i sit in Jita and kill war targets.. It is true, your alliance is fantabulous at camping a station, but fails miserably at 1v1s. ----------------------------------------------- Pompous, currently trading as "Weight What".
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2010.09.28 19:39:00 - [149] Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 28/09/2010 19:40:26 Originally by: London What ever happened to 50/50 new content and fixing old content? Where have you been last few months ??? 90% of resources were being directed into incarna/dust. Also , blaster need fixing badly.
Ogogov	Posted - 2010.09.28 20:14:00 - [150] Originally by: London I'm really unimpressed with our CSM that out of that big, long laundry list, this was somehow excluded. There have been posts for months and months about hybrid weapon issues ever since Quantum Rise. Given that CCP dedicates and plans all their resources for any given work/project, and seeing how this somehow never made it on the list, I am worried that it won't be addressed since no one is working on it. What ever happened to 50/50 new content and fixing old content? This. I'm also extremely annoyed with the CSM for somehow skipping over the hybrids issue.

Templar Dane Amarrian Retribution	Posted - 2010.09.28 22:24:00 - [151] Originally by: NightmareX A Vindicator with a Federation Navy Webber should hit Cruisers very easily. So that's why Blasters needs more tracking so they can hit targets like cruiser better at 500m or something like that. Think before you speak though. A vindicator could hit a cruiser with a ***ing siege blaster if it could fit one. I watched a fail covert ops pilot tackle a paladin with tachyons* and instapopped because the paladin pilot knew what he was doing. I've seen blaster pilots of all ages swoop in and orbit smaller ships at 500m and then later complain about how they were missing.... Originally by: EFT Worrier how much DPS do those megas apply while being roflkited at 40km by a gang of large pulses fitted with scorch? answer: none. Gotta watch out for those nano armageddons with overloaded, loki-boosted domination warp disruptors. NERF NANO ARMAGEDDONS. How DARE another weapon system out-perform blasters at ANY range!
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2010.09.28 22:51:00 - [152] Originally by: Templar Dane Originally by: NightmareX A Vindicator with a Federation Navy Webber should hit Cruisers very easily. So that's why Blasters needs more tracking so they can hit targets like cruiser better at 500m or something like that. Think before you speak though. A vindicator could hit a cruiser with a ***ing siege blaster if it could fit one. I watched a fail covert ops pilot tackle a paladin with tachyons* and instapopped because the paladin pilot knew what he was doing. I've seen blaster pilots of all ages swoop in and orbit smaller ships at 500m and then later complain about how they were missing.... Originally by: EFT Worrier how much DPS do those megas apply while being roflkited at 40km by a gang of large pulses fitted with scorch? answer: none. Gotta watch out for those nano armageddons with overloaded, loki-boosted domination warp disruptors. NERF NANO ARMAGEDDONS. How DARE another weapon system out-perform blasters at ANY range! -1/10
Ocih Amarr The Program Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.09.28 23:09:00 - [153] Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Battleships are not supposed to hit cruisers at 500m. However, i do have problems hitting other cruisers with medium blasters at 5km. For blasters to actually work at their range, they would need at least twice the tracking they have now, not +10%. So why are they there? The point in short range weapons in any space based sci-fi was to repell small, fast moving ships like fighters. In EvE they cant track stationary targets. Translation: Junk.
Eric Policky	Posted - 2010.09.29 00:37:00 - [154] Originally by: Ocih Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Battleships are not supposed to hit cruisers at 500m. However, i do have problems hitting other cruisers with medium blasters at 5km. For blasters to actually work at their range, they would need at least twice the tracking they have now, not +10%. So why are they there? The point in short range weapons in any space based sci-fi was to repell small, fast moving ships like fighters. In EvE they cant track stationary targets. Translation: Junk. In your world, blasters should be the lowest damage weapon, with the highest tracking and ability to hit the smallest signature size. In EVE, they are short range, high damage, designed to get up close and wreak havoc. They should have the highest tracking, but high signature radius penalty (so they could track small fast targets but still not do damage to them, and don't turn on that MWD while in blaster range!). They should not be able to hit "downsize" targets (i.e. battleship shooting at cruiser) very well, and certainly not when orbiting at close range, but inside nominal orbiting a same size or larger target should be able to apply full damage to target. Not being a blaster-boat PVPer, I do not know if this is the case currently. But I do know I fully disagree with your assessment of how they should be.
Ocih Amarr The Program Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.09.29 00:40:00 - [155] Edited by: Ocih on 29/09/2010 00:41:51 I get it, they are the shotguns of EvE. They still dont work. If you want to defend broken blasters, feel free. I use lasers. - not a flame. just trying to stress that they dont really work for what they are supposed to do.
Eric Policky	Posted - 2010.09.29 00:44:00 - [156] Originally by: Ocih Edited by: Ocih on 29/09/2010 00:41:51 I get it, they are the shotguns of EvE. They still dont work. If you want to defend broken blasters, feel free. I use lasers. - not a flame. just trying to stress that they dont really work for what they are supposed to do. Think shotguns, but not loaded with bird shot. Loaded with slugs, so you hit hard but can't hit those small quick targets. Actually that's a decent idea for differentiating blaster ammo options. Have the "slug" type which can't hit small targets but does huge damage, designed to lay the hurt on equal size and larger targets. Then have a "birdshot" type which decreases damage, but can hit much smaller targets, designed to take take out ships a size lower than your ship, filling the role of the frigate buster. To counteract this flexibility, have blasters take longer than other weapon types to swap ammo, giving a sharp frig pilot the ability to get out of dodge when the blasterboat they are orbiting suddenly stops shooting.
Ocih Amarr The Program Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.09.29 00:59:00 - [157] They dont need to flip ammo. They have variants of blasters that could apply different effect. Ion has a multiplier, Electron has a refire but none adjust for miss factor. Back to the original frustration, the problem is Optimal. Blaster Optimal is impossible to establish. Amarr have similar problems and Lasers become useless because the ships are simply to slow. TBH I think the problem is core EvE. The ships have become way to specialized over all and everyone is looking for that broad range application ship. Blaster boats fail at it and they arent alone. Alot of ships do.
Eric Policky	Posted - 2010.09.29 01:15:00 - [158] Originally by: Ocih They dont need to flip ammo. They have variants of blasters that could apply different effect. Ion has a multiplier, Electron has a refire but none adjust for miss factor. Back to the original frustration, the problem is Optimal. Blaster Optimal is impossible to establish. Amarr have similar problems and Lasers become useless because the ships are simply to slow. TBH I think the problem is core EvE. The ships have become way to specialized over all and everyone is looking for that broad range application ship. Blaster boats fail at it and they arent alone. Alot of ships do. I don't understand. You advocate not swapping ammo to change damage profiles (which would allow a ship to be tactically flexible), but rather swapping guns (which means you specialize your ship in station, then are locked in once you enter space), then complain that the problem is that ships are too specialized.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.29 07:00:00 - [159] Originally by: Eric Policky Originally by: Ocih They dont need to flip ammo. They have variants of blasters that could apply different effect. Ion has a multiplier, Electron has a refire but none adjust for miss factor. Back to the original frustration, the problem is Optimal. Blaster Optimal is impossible to establish. Amarr have similar problems and Lasers become useless because the ships are simply to slow. TBH I think the problem is core EvE. The ships have become way to specialized over all and everyone is looking for that broad range application ship. Blaster boats fail at it and they arent alone. Alot of ships do. I don't understand. You advocate not swapping ammo to change damage profiles (which would allow a ship to be tactically flexible), but rather swapping guns (which means you specialize your ship in station, then are locked in once you enter space), then complain that the problem is that ships are too specialized. The fact that the ships are as specialized as they are now is not going to change, its a major rule in all mmos that if something isn't specialized in something, its sh*t.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.09.29 11:55:00 - [160] Apparently discussing a topic about Hybrid weapons makes the post invisible to CCP. This has already been on the wrong forum for a while and we havent gotten any response or even a move to the right subforum.

Manipulator General o.0	Posted - 2010.09.29 12:02:00 - [161] Originally by: Rastigan Apparently discussing a topic about Hybrid weapons makes the post invisible to CCP. This has already been on the wrong forum for a while and we havent gotten any response or even a move to the right subforum. That's easily remedied; just post an inappropriate image, or discuss moderation of blasters etc. That'll provoke a reply.
BIZZAROSTORMY	Posted - 2010.09.29 15:39:00 - [162] Originally by: Eric Policky Originally by: Ocih Edited by: Ocih on 29/09/2010 00:41:51 I get it, they are the shotguns of EvE. They still dont work. If you want to defend broken blasters, feel free. I use lasers. - not a flame. just trying to stress that they dont really work for what they are supposed to do. Think shotguns, but not loaded with bird shot. Loaded with slugs, so you hit hard but can't hit those small quick targets. Actually that's a decent idea for differentiating blaster ammo options. Have the "slug" type which can't hit small targets but does huge damage, designed to lay the hurt on equal size and larger targets. Then have a "birdshot" type which decreases damage, but can hit much smaller targets, designed to take take out ships a size lower than your ship, filling the role of the frigate buster. To counteract this flexibility, have blasters take longer than other weapon types to swap ammo, giving a sharp frig pilot the ability to get out of dodge when the blasterboat they are orbiting suddenly stops shooting. yeah and the TEN SECONDS it takes to load a different ammo type is true to life also. And since typical PVP engagements last up to several hours, waiting 10 seconds for your ammo to load is no drawback. PLus you can check your emails while you wait.
Sean Faust Gallente Point of No Return Waterboard	Posted - 2010.09.29 16:05:00 - [163] Originally by: Neesa Corrinne Armor Tanking + Blasters = FAIL The whole problem with Gallente ships is that they are stuck in a never ending cycle of fail. Let me explain: 1) Most blaster ships are armor tanking ships, either because of how many low slots they have or simply because they have a bonus to armor tanking. 2) Blasters are short range and need to close distance quickly in order to be effective. 3) Armor tanking mods slow your ship down by either reducing top speed or lowering agility. So basically you need to close the distance quickly, but you can't close the distance quickly because your armor mods are slowing you down, therefore by the time you are able to apply your damage you are hopelessly out DPS'd. Amarr don't suffer from this problem because their weapons have much better optimal ranges, so being slow doesn't effect them as much in a committed fight. This. The simplest and easiest solution is to reposition Gallente on the tanking spectrum, so that they, like the Minmatar, have some ships that were designed to be shield tanked and some that were designed to be armor tanked. Make their turret/blaster ships shield tankers, and keep their drone boats as armor tankers. The entire Gallente race was designed and balanced around solo PVP. Look at the way their ships blend strong armor tanks with good DPS and utility. It doesn't help them much in gangs but makes for a great solo ship. Unfortunately, solo PVP doesn't happen often enough in EVE to really account for it, except for on the frigate scale. They lack pointed roles. Anything you can bring to a gang in a Deimos, I can do better in a Zealot because I can sit my butt where it is while dealing WTFBBQ DPS without having to worry about trying to close distance. Blasters are fine as has been stated many times before. It's the ships that need to be fixed. Make them shield tankers and all will be well. A shield tanked Deimos with its mid and low slots reversed would be awesome.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.29 16:32:00 - [164] Originally by: Sean Faust A shield tanked Deimos with its mid and low slots reversed would be awesome. while your idea has merit (quite the merit actually), what you're implying is too much of a radical solution, basically shifting a whole race from armor tanking to shield tanking, since the gallente drone boats would want such thing too. that said, shifting to shield tanking would make people demand "MOAR MEDSLOTS!" cuz they would need at the very least 3 medslots for speed/tackle --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.29 19:39:00 - [165] Originally by: Sean Faust Originally by: Neesa Corrinne Armor Tanking + Blasters = FAIL The whole problem with Gallente ships is that they are stuck in a never ending cycle of fail. Let me explain: 1) Most blaster ships are armor tanking ships, either because of how many low slots they have or simply because they have a bonus to armor tanking. 2) Blasters are short range and need to close distance quickly in order to be effective. 3) Armor tanking mods slow your ship down by either reducing top speed or lowering agility. So basically you need to close the distance quickly, but you can't close the distance quickly because your armor mods are slowing you down, therefore by the time you are able to apply your damage you are hopelessly out DPS'd. Amarr don't suffer from this problem because their weapons have much better optimal ranges, so being slow doesn't effect them as much in a committed fight. This. The simplest and easiest solution is to reposition Gallente on the tanking spectrum, so that they, like the Minmatar, have some ships that were designed to be shield tanked and some that were designed to be armor tanked. Make their turret/blaster ships shield tankers, and keep their drone boats as armor tankers. The entire Gallente race was designed and balanced around solo PVP. Look at the way their ships blend strong armor tanks with good DPS and utility. It doesn't help them much in gangs but makes for a great solo ship. Unfortunately, solo PVP doesn't happen often enough in EVE to really account for it, except for on the frigate scale. They lack pointed roles. Anything you can bring to a gang in a Deimos, I can do better in a Zealot because I can sit my butt where it is while dealing WTFBBQ DPS without having to worry about trying to close distance. Blasters are fine as has been stated many times before. It's the ships that need to be fixed. Make them shield tankers and all will be well. A shield tanked Deimos with its mid and low slots reversed would be awesome. I'd like to point out that caldari have got shield tanked gunboats, and they suck aswell with blasters. Blasters are fine as has been stated many times before by ppl who haven't actually tried using them.
Cambarus Aliastra	Posted - 2010.09.29 20:28:00 - [166] Not sure I've posted here yet, so may as well: Megathron V Armageddon: Mega ODs the geddon by ~9% in optimal (which is 4.5km) assuming close range ammo on both. The geddon will OD the mega starting at about 7km, well within scram/web range (assuming similar fits) If the mega switches to null, it will never OD a geddon. They have nearly identical speed and ehp. The mega is useless past ~20km, and is already doing horrendous damage at that range. The geddon switches to scorch past 20km (assuming he didn't bother bringing other crystals), where his optimal goes out to 45 without bonuses or tracking mods. Repeat after me: "Blasters are fine."
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.29 21:00:00 - [167] Originally by: Cambarus Not sure I've posted here yet, so may as well: Megathron V Armageddon: Mega ODs the geddon by ~9% in optimal (which is 4.5km) assuming close range ammo on both. The geddon will OD the mega starting at about 7km, well within scram/web range (assuming similar fits) If the mega switches to null, it will never OD a geddon. They have nearly identical speed and ehp. The mega is useless past ~20km, and is already doing horrendous damage at that range. The geddon switches to scorch past 20km (assuming he didn't bother bringing other crystals), where his optimal goes out to 45 without bonuses or tracking mods. Repeat after me: "Blasters are fine." in all honesty, the problem is not the fact that the mega outdamages the geddon only at ranges up to 7km. the problem is that the mega outdamages the geddon up to 7km by an insignificant margin. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.29 21:05:00 - [168] Originally by: Cambarus ... I know it is not related directly but have you checked navy mega vs navy geddon? its so damn ridiculous... and i know it doesn't actually mean much but mega is a tier 2 BS.
Travarica	Posted - 2010.09.30 13:53:00 - [169] Page 3? I don't think so! FIX teh blasterz!!!
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.09.30 17:33:00 - [170] Originally by: Travarica Page 3? I don't think so! FIX teh blasterz!!! page 3 is bad mkay

NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.09.30 18:48:00 - [171] Originally by: Travarica FIX teh blasterz!!! Fix your Gallente / Blaster skills and the way you use Gallente ships instead. If you do that, then Blasters are awesome.
takedoom	Posted - 2010.09.30 18:57:00 - [172] I honestly don't think there is any problem with blasters to be honest. Good for station camping and warping on top of a target. Other than that yeah it sucks against smaller and/or ranged ships but that is just balance for you.
LittleTerror	Posted - 2010.09.30 19:02:00 - [173] Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Travarica FIX teh blasterz!!! Fix your Gallente / Blaster skills and the way you use Gallente ships instead. If you do that, then Blasters are awesome. QFT I fly both laser and blaster boats and I love them both for how different they are!
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.30 19:05:00 - [174] Originally by: NightmareX Originally by: Travarica FIX teh blasterz!!! Fix your Gallente / Blaster skills and the way you use vindicators instead If you do that, then Blasters are ok. fyp --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
takedoom	Posted - 2010.09.30 20:42:00 - [175] Originally by: takedoom I honestly don't think there is any problem with blasters to be honest. Good for station camping and warping on top of a target. Other than that yeah it sucks against smaller and/or ranged ships but that is just balance for you. the thing is, all the other short range weapons allow flexibility in range engagement. blaster ships don't have that luxury. you either land on top of the target or you die, and god forbids if your target actually kites you. also I don't call "balance" a weapon system that has a minor damage advantage as the only advantage over all the other short range weapons. I mean it would be ok if we were talking in 25% or more difference in damage, but the damage usually struggles to go up to 10% more than the other weapons. I don't have any problems killing people using blasters so I don't know why it needs to be buffed.
Twisted Mister	Posted - 2010.09.30 20:52:00 - [176] Edited by: Twisted Mister on 30/09/2010 20:53:28 the fact that you personally don't have problem killing with ppl with it doesn't change the fact that other weapons are way better than it in every way possible
takedoom	Posted - 2010.09.30 21:15:00 - [177] Originally by: Twisted Mister Edited by: Twisted Mister on 30/09/2010 20:53:28 the fact that you personally don't have problem killing with ppl with it doesn't change the fact that other weapons are way better than it in every way possible Blasters do more damage than any other turret types though. Your statement is not true. You just need to learn how to fit and fly Gallente ships. Pick your fights, you can't expect to win every fight just because you got blasters.
Twisted Mister	Posted - 2010.09.30 22:17:00 - [178] Edited by: Twisted Mister on 30/09/2010 22:18:36 Originally by: takedoom Originally by: Twisted Mister Edited by: Twisted Mister on 30/09/2010 20:53:28 the fact that you personally don't have problem killing with ppl with it doesn't change the fact that other weapons are way better than it in every way possible Blasters do more damage than any other turret types though. Your statement is not true. You just need to learn how to fit and fly Gallente ships. Pick your fights, you can't expect to win every fight just because you got blasters. Blasters do about 10% more damage than autocannons (if we talk about similarry fitted ships), while autocannons get much more than +10% tracking and roughly 2x or more the effective range of blasters. They have much lower fitting requirements, not consuming cap, and can change damage type. Seriously we (the ppl who tried to fly gallente blasterboats versus close range ships of other races) can just repeat theese all over and over. i'd rather not mention lasers.
takedoom	Posted - 2010.09.30 22:45:00 - [179] Originally by: Twisted Mister Edited by: Twisted Mister on 30/09/2010 22:18:36 Originally by: takedoom Originally by: Twisted Mister Edited by: Twisted Mister on 30/09/2010 20:53:28 the fact that you personally don't have problem killing with ppl with it doesn't change the fact that other weapons are way better than it in every way possible Blasters do more damage than any other turret types though. Your statement is not true. You just need to learn how to fit and fly Gallente ships. Pick your fights, you can't expect to win every fight just because you got blasters. Blasters do about 10% more damage than autocannons (if we talk about similarry fitted ships), while autocannons get much more than +10% tracking and roughly 2x or more the effective range of blasters. They have much lower fitting requirements, not consuming cap, and can change damage type. Seriously we (the ppl who tried to fly gallente blasterboats versus close range ships of other races) can just repeat theese all over and over. i'd rather not mention lasers. If only there was a module that could slow down other ships. That would compliment the blasters nicely.
Twisted Mister	Posted - 2010.09.30 23:21:00 - [180] Originally by: takedoom Originally by: Twisted Mister Edited by: Twisted Mister on 30/09/2010 22:18:36 Originally by: takedoom Originally by: Twisted Mister Edited by: Twisted Mister on 30/09/2010 20:53:28 the fact that you personally don't have problem killing with ppl with it doesn't change the fact that other weapons are way better than it in every way possible Blasters do more damage than any other turret types though. Your statement is not true. You just need to learn how to fit and fly Gallente ships. Pick your fights, you can't expect to win every fight just because you got blasters. Blasters do about 10% more damage than autocannons (if we talk about similarry fitted ships), while autocannons get much more than +10% tracking and roughly 2x or more the effective range of blasters. They have much lower fitting requirements, not consuming cap, and can change damage type. Seriously we (the ppl who tried to fly gallente blasterboats versus close range ships of other races) can just repeat theese all over and over. i'd rather not mention lasers. If only there was a module that could slow down other ships. That would compliment the blasters nicely. if only there wasn't a module needed for it, just like for other turrets

Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.09.30 23:26:00 - [181] Originally by: takedoom If only there was a module that could slow down other ships. That would compliment the blasters nicely. if only there was a module that could slow down other ships. That would compliment the autocannos/pulse lasers/torps nicely. your point being? also, to get the same effect AC's can do at short range, you actually need 2 webs with blasters. you see, back in the nano nerf CCP forgot to account that the web nerf would actually mean a 500% nerf on the ability for blasters to track anything in web ranges. thus why vindicator/vigilant/daredevil are above "ok" with blasters (read: web str bonus). all this still means that blasters have a only a single advantage over pretty much every other short range weapon out there, and even then, that said advantage (damage) doesn't cover the the fact that they are consistently outperformed by all said weapons. sure ok, blasters outdamage everything up to 7km, but the margin is so small that you're better off using other ships with other weapon systems, simply because your "omfg-4km-optimal-doom-spitter" is outmaneuvered and outkited by every other ship out there that will be able to project a tiny less amount of damage you can do for 3x more the range. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2010.10.01 00:16:00 - [182] Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 01/10/2010 00:19:12 Originally by: takedoom I don't have any problems killing people using blasters so I don't know why it needs to be buffed. LIAR !! You fly minmatar as well. ALL your loses are gallente and if you ever happen to kill people in blaster ship , those are lolfits or pve ships , that i could kill with rockets. Blaster are no good for any kind of decent fight. FIGHT != ganking defensless targets.
Kassa Daito Capital Construction Research Pioneer Alliance	Posted - 2010.10.01 01:52:00 - [183] Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2 Blaster are no good for any kind of decent fight. FIGHT != ganking defensless targets. I would like to point out that the Proteus is fine. It does so by having more lowslots than any other ship of its class (with a similar setup), more drones than other ships of its class, and ship bonuses for tackling, damage, tracking, and passive tanking so I don't think it's quite viable on T1 or T2 ships. However, it is an excellent example of what happens when Gallente get the perfect (AKA overpowered) blasterboat they have been whining about for so long. ** Disclaimer: Author sometimes spell checks but is not responsible for sins of commission, omission, emission, transmission, or submission. Flowers, bricks, or any other form of feedback appreciated
Whelan Jr	Posted - 2010.10.01 01:58:00 - [184] No problem then. Every Gallente player then just needs to train up to and afford a T3 strategic cruiser. Problem solved...simple as that.
NightmareX Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage	Posted - 2010.10.01 06:59:00 - [185] Originally by: Grimpak sure ok, blasters outdamage everything up to 7km, but the margin is so small that you're better off using other ships with other weapon systems, simply because your "omfg-4km-optimal-doom-spitter" is outmaneuvered and outkited by every other ship out there that will be able to project a tiny less amount of damage you can do for 3x more the range. Ehm, a Neutron Mega with 1 damage mod actually outdamages an Armageddon with Pulses and 2x damage mods by around 2-3% out to like 7 km. And i wouldn't call that for a small margin. If the Neutron Mega use 2x damage mods, it will do around 10% more DPS i think over the Pulse Geddon with 2x damage mods. This is after resists are taken into the picture. But like i have said earlier. It wouldn't hurt to let the Blasters hit stuffs better, or letting Blasters applying their damage advantage better by increasing the DPS by 5% and the tracking by 10%. If you can control the range on you Mega from the targets you are shooting, or if the targets doesn't goes and orbit you at 500m, then you should be fine and you should be able to apply good DPS to your targets.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.01 07:49:00 - [186] Originally by: Kassa Daito Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2 Blaster are no good for any kind of decent fight. FIGHT != ganking defensless targets. I would like to point out that the Proteus is fine. It does so by having more lowslots than any other ship of its class (with a similar setup), more drones than other ships of its class, and ship bonuses for tackling, damage, tracking, and passive tanking so I don't think it's quite viable on T1 or T2 ships. However, it is an excellent example of what happens when Gallente get the perfect (AKA overpowered) blasterboat they have been whining about for so long. The proteus is nice, only the tengu, legion and loki are better. nightmareX: 10% extra damage is insignificant, especially if paired with 1/3 the range. Still nothing from ccp...
Travarica	Posted - 2010.10.01 07:56:00 - [187] Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Originally by: Kassa Daito The proteus is nice, only the tengu, legion and loki are better. nightmareX: 10% extra damage is insignificant, especially if paired with 1/3 the range. Still nothing from ccp... QFT! 33% less range should approximatly equal 33% more damage, that sounds like balanced to me.. 10% more damage does not
takedoom	Posted - 2010.10.01 08:50:00 - [188] Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2 Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 01/10/2010 00:19:12 Originally by: takedoom I don't have any problems killing people using blasters so I don't know why it needs to be buffed. LIAR !! You fly minmatar as well. ALL your loses are gallente and if you ever happen to kill people in blaster ship , those are lolfits or pve ships , that i could kill with rockets. Blaster are no good for any kind of decent fight. FIGHT != ganking defensless targets. I got most Gallente losses because I fly Gallente most of the time. So I kill some mission runners and can flippers. I don't see why I should exclude them from my blasters. I fly Minmatar for the Hurricane and Vagabond because I don't like Gallente HAC and the Brutix. You obviously know what you are writing about from scrolling through like what 2 pages of battle clinic . You don't have any kills so why should anyone trust you know anything about blasters? The DPS from blasters is fine, no one would use them other wise if they were really that bad.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.01 09:10:00 - [189] Originally by: takedoom Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2 Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 01/10/2010 00:19:12 Originally by: takedoom I don't have any problems killing people using blasters so I don't know why it needs to be buffed. LIAR !! You fly minmatar as well. ALL your loses are gallente and if you ever happen to kill people in blaster ship , those are lolfits or pve ships , that i could kill with rockets. Blaster are no good for any kind of decent fight. FIGHT != ganking defensless targets. I got most Gallente losses because I fly Gallente most of the time. So I kill some mission runners and can flippers. I don't see why I should exclude them from my blasters. I fly Minmatar for the Hurricane and Vagabond because I don't like Gallente HAC and the Brutix. You obviously know what you are writing about from scrolling through like what 2 pages of battle clinic . You don't have any kills so why should anyone trust you know anything about blasters? The DPS from blasters is fine, no one would use them other wise if they were really that bad. While you are at it, check how many ppl are using pulses and ACs in comparison thx.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.10.01 09:44:00 - [190] Edited by: Grimpak on 01/10/2010 09:45:53 Originally by: NightmareX But like i have said earlier. It wouldn't hurt to let the Blasters hit stuffs better, or letting Blasters applying their damage advantage better by increasing the DPS by 5% and the tracking by 10%. I still prefer a more decisive approach: a) 20% more damage + ~5% more tracking (could be increased). For rebalancing sanity, make it so that blasters can apply said damage to ranges up to 15km at most and for battleships only. cruisers get to work probably up to the 10km mark or so. I don't mind them being totally point blank, as long as they have an argument strong enough (overwhelming damage) to remain point blank. b)plate's mass cut by 50% at most; reformulation of armor rigs so that they either have other penalties, or their speed penalties get reduced in a manner that they interfere with a ship's mobility, but not actually kill said mobility. c) the more blaster oriented ships get their mass shaved off a bit (5% or so), and at the same time, their agility gets also increased (5~10%). d) reformulation of active tanking vs passive tanking. atm while active tanking isn't really that bad, passive tanking is miles better. there should be a synergy between both types of tanking in a manner that one is not better than the other, but provides something the other can't. this way blaster ships are decisively the most damaging ships out there (unlike today, that are barely bigger threats), and can actually move around in the battlefield with much more ease than today, yet unlike pulses or autocannons, they still get their operability range limited to at the very most, disruptor range, while being to pummel down to dust every other ship of equal class in said ranges. as a bonus, we also get the armor rigs and active tank fixed I don't have any delusions about this suggestion tho that it will be very hard to balance out, but this way we could pretty much fix a great number of things in this game in a single swoop. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.

Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.01 09:56:00 - [191] I kinda liked when the federation navy armor plates were introduced. Not as much tank as the amarr version, but they are lighter. IMO thats the way to go towards rebalancing gallente.
Twisted Mister	Posted - 2010.10.01 22:02:00 - [192] up
Alyth Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2010.10.02 15:35:00 - [193] A plated, trimarked 'thron flies at 820(ish)m/s, needs to be inside of 12km if not using null (and thereby reducing its damage by ~20%), needs to use up half it's cap getting into range if it lands outside of 20km (if it is lucky enough not to get kited at that laughable speed that is, all the while taking fire from the enemy) and then has to deal with tracking issues on top of that all for a minimal increase in damage over pulse operating at 20km with none of those issues. Don't get me started on active tanking blasterboats. Fix the ships inability to operate at their intended ranges. End of.
London Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.10.03 06:25:00 - [194] We need to keep this on the front page.
Frug Omega Wing	Posted - 2010.10.03 06:35:00 - [195] Posting to say I agree with the OP and that he's one of the few people with a competent opinion in these forums. The weapons system is fine, the ships could use some minor tweaks. They need them pretty badly, but they don't need to be extreme. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Whisper/PrismX 4 emperor
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.03 08:25:00 - [196] Originally by: Frug Posting to say I agree with the OP and that he's one of the few people with a competent opinion in these forums. The weapons system is fine, the ships could use some minor tweaks. They need them pretty badly, but they don't need to be extreme. The ships which could use "minor tweaks" then are all gallente gunboats and half of the caldari ships, since they should be able to use blasters effectively aswell.
Frug Omega Wing	Posted - 2010.10.03 08:57:00 - [197] Edited by: Frug on 03/10/2010 09:02:40 Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Originally by: Frug Posting to say I agree with the OP and that he's one of the few people with a competent opinion in these forums. The weapons system is fine, the ships could use some minor tweaks. They need them pretty badly, but they don't need to be extreme. The ships which could use "minor tweaks" then are all gallente gunboats and half of the caldari ships, since they should be able to use blasters effectively aswell. Caldari have one battleship which uses blasters reasonably effectively (actually it's pretty good) and one hac that probably should use rails most of the time (or should never be flown most of the time because it kinda sucks). Feroxes don't count because for a lolship they're ok, can fit either blasters or autocannons or probably lasers and still be fun to fly. Blarpys are not bad (as far as AF's go). So no, I don't agree. And just a hint, if you think literally all gallente ships need help, or if you think gallente actually have a ton of ships that rely primarily on guns (domis? nope. ishtars? nope. Recons? nope. inties? they're inties and fine. Myrms? nope. Brutixes? I guess) then you're bad at this game or are just babbling. Also if you put "minor tweaks" in quotes because you think they need more than just minor tweaking to be competitive, you're bad at this game. The race looks right now, tbh, to be the least desirable race to fly, but it's nothing horrible. They just lack something with a nice oomph, which the mega (or hypes) are supposed to be. And diemosts could suck less. Tweak those two (or three) ships, probably by making both of them lighter, and the race is good to go. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Whisper/PrismX 4 emperor
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.03 10:35:00 - [198] Originally by: Frug And just a hint, if you think literally all gallente ships need help, or if you think gallente actually have a ton of ships that rely primarily on guns (domis? nope. ishtars? nope. Recons? nope. inties? they're inties and fine. Myrms? nope. Brutixes? I guess) then you're bad at this game or are just babbling. the ships that need said tweaks, in conjunction with said blaster fixes (granted it is mostly a fix for medium and large) is pretty much every turret wielding cruiser, BC and battleship from both caldari and gallente side, ferox aside that is. thorax has been in the shadow for some time, but it isn't that bad in truth, but could use some nudge. the rest however.... truth to be told, blasters actually suffer more in the medium size than large. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.10.03 10:37:00 - [199] The Taranis is the saving grace of blasters, really. Thankfully, Small Hybrid Turret and Small Blaster Specialization are relatively quick to train, though only the most hardcore will train SBS to Lv 5.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.03 11:25:00 - [200] Originally by: Hentes Zsemle Originally by: Frug Posting to say I agree with the OP and that he's one of the few people with a competent opinion in these forums. The weapons system is fine, the ships could use some minor tweaks. They need them pretty badly, but they don't need to be extreme. The ships which could use "minor tweaks" then are all gallente gunboats and half of the caldari ships, since they should be able to use blasters effectively aswell. read before posting kthx

Bibosikus Gallente SniggWaffe	Posted - 2010.10.03 12:42:00 - [201] Leave the ships and their bonuses alone. Leave hybrids' base specifications alone. IMHO the simplest way to deal with blasters is to change the ammo types and specs. Just for (eg.) medium blasters there are nearly 60 different ammo types. This is just silly. Especially given that the 6 faction ammo types have only 3 different specs. All they do is clutter up the market. Very, very few players have the inclination to feed their large neutron blasters with Dread Guristas Thorium L at 28k a round, ffs... I say, split all Hybrid charges into two groups, one each for rails and blasters. Reduce the charge types to maybe 5 each instead of 8, and adjust the specs to best suit the gun types. Retain the T2 ammo types as is, and buff them to make Specialization skills really worth training even up to lvl 5 - maybe give us a kin/therm AND an exp/em charge for T2's as well... "To pod one's alt while drinking port, is considered rather slapdash dear boy.."
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2010.10.03 13:20:00 - [202] Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 03/10/2010 13:21:21 Originally by: Bibosikus Leave the ships and their bonuses alone. No , why do you think plenty of people fly shield buffered hyperions and brutixes instead of active armor tanked ( and just waste ships bonus by dooing so ).
Bibosikus Gallente SniggWaffe	Posted - 2010.10.03 14:57:00 - [203] I was referring to ship bonuses in the context of the OP's post. Fiddling with them to buff blasters isn't the answer, is what I was saying - mostly because ship bonuses refer to "hybrids", not just blasters. And this post is specifically about blasters. Playing with rigs or mods isn't the answer. Cleaning up the stupid amount of hybrid charges and giving them clearly separated specs for different play styles and techniques seems to me to be the simplest and most effective way forward. It offers the opportunity for proper addressing of both types of hybrid gun (and let's face it - rails are just pathetic). "To pod one's alt while drinking port, is considered rather slapdash dear boy.."
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.04 07:25:00 - [204] The other weapons have this many kind of charges aswell. T2 ammo overhaul is long due to all weapon systems anyways (mind the shortrange variations), so that could work, but even then hybrids would need a little adjustment.
Jacob Flint	Posted - 2010.10.05 17:06:00 - [205] Let's bring it back up again! I'd really like to read some words by ccp about that issue...even if it's just something like "we heard you people!" or even better "we're working on it!"
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.07 06:26:00 - [206] bump
Hannibal Ord Minmatar Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.10.07 07:55:00 - [207] Make the blaster lineup of ships much faster and possibly more agile. Thorax, Diemos, Brutix, Astarte, Catalyst and Megathron. Make them quicker so they can close in range. For example, Thorax loses the stupid MWD cap bonus for MWD speed. Even if they aren't as agile, make them quick in a straight line to catch things. If I Brutix was almost as fast as a Hurricane, people would fear them. And not only that, it would not require much changes to blasters themselves.
Tiger's Spirit Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.07 08:15:00 - [208] Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 07/10/2010 08:24:17 Need Blaster fix ? Just one thing you need, nerf overpowered Scorch ammo for Amarrs, and the all gun systems will rebalanced. With Large Weapon Systems on BSs wich haven't range bonuses: "Null bonuses 25% to optimal, maybe the end result +3km bonus because shortest range from all guns + 25% useless falloff add + 3km. Sum: 26km Barrage 50%+ to falloff maybe the end result +12km bonus. Sum: 27km Scorch 50%+ to optimal maybe the end result +15km bonus Sum: 45km (optimal is the best, no crappy missed shooting)" Change Scorch bonus to 12,5% optimal and 37,5% falloff. The sum result will be: 37,5 optimal instead 45km because ridiculous now the Scorch range on a Abaddon. 45km+10km. Just check ships of the other faction, how underranged from Amarrs and give them 10 sec reload time such as other gun types.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.07 08:19:00 - [209] Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Need Blaster fix ? Just one thing you need, nerf overpowered Scorch ammo for Amarrs, and the weapon will rebalanced. "Null bonuses 25% to optimal, maybe the end result +3km bonus because shortest range from all guns + 25% useless falloff add + 3km. Sum: 26km Barrage 50%+ to falloff maybe the end result +12km bonus. Sum: 27km Scorch 50%+ to optimal maybe the end result +15km bonus Sum: 45km (optimal is the best, no crappy missed shooting)" Change Scorch bonus to 12,5% optimal and 37,5% falloff. The sum result will be: 37,5 optimal instead 45km because ridicuolus now the Scorch range on a Abaddon. 45km+10km. Just check ships of the other faction, how underranged from Amarrs. no. that only fixes T2 ammo, while we would still be sitting on the very same problems on all the other ammos, where you get just a tiny damage advantage by sacrificing too much. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Tiger's Spirit Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.07 08:37:00 - [210] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Need Blaster fix ? Just one thing you need, nerf overpowered Scorch ammo for Amarrs, and the weapon will rebalanced. "Null bonuses 25% to optimal, maybe the end result +3km bonus because shortest range from all guns + 25% useless falloff add + 3km. Sum: 26km Barrage 50%+ to falloff maybe the end result +12km bonus. Sum: 27km Scorch 50%+ to optimal maybe the end result +15km bonus Sum: 45km (optimal is the best, no crappy missed shooting)" Change Scorch bonus to 12,5% optimal and 37,5% falloff. The sum result will be: 37,5 optimal instead 45km because ridicuolus now the Scorch range on a Abaddon. 45km+10km. Just check ships of the other faction, how underranged from Amarrs. no. that only fixes T2 ammo, while we would still be sitting on the very same problems on all the other ammos, where you get just a tiny damage advantage by sacrificing too much. But yes... Because this is why underpowered the blaster int far range. When the battles going in short range the blaster the most puwerfull weapon from all gun system. Not need more optimal and falloff with short range ammos, just need change the other ships ridiculous range advance.

Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.07 08:54:00 - [211] Originally by: Tiger's Spirit When the battles going in short range the blaster the most puwerfull weapon from all gun system. by 5-10% the problem with blaster ships is not the other weapons per se the problem of blaster ships is, the fact that blasters are pretty much a point blank weapon, they require platforms that can keep a good mobility in the battlefield. this is achieved in the frigate class, but it's totally impossible to achieve when you scale up the ship size (cruiser and above), so no, the fact that other weapons can outreach you is not the problem. the problem is that for you to get in range you will burn out all your cap, half of your cap charges, lose half of your armor, and even then it's not guaranteed that you will be able to even catch the guy because you're so slow and fat due to highly penalized armor plates and armor rigs. decreasing the other weapon's range only makes this problem less bad, but even then, pulses and ac's are still better because they have a wider range envelope. also, if you nerf pulses, then we also need to nerf AC's because people would start to complain how "unfair" is to have 60km falloff large AC's, and then all hell would break loose. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Tiger's Spirit Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.07 09:38:00 - [212] Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 07/10/2010 09:44:57 Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Tiger's Spirit When the battles going in short range the blaster the most puwerfull weapon from all gun system. by 5-10% the problem with blaster ships is not the other weapons per se the problem of blaster ships is, the fact that blasters are pretty much a point blank weapon, they require platforms that can keep a good mobility in the battlefield. this is achieved in the frigate class, but it's totally impossible to achieve when you scale up the ship size (cruiser and above), so no, the fact that other weapons can outreach you is not the problem. the problem is that for you to get in range you will burn out all your cap, half of your cap charges, lose half of your armor, and even then it's not guaranteed that you will be able to even catch the guy because you're so slow and fat due to highly penalized armor plates and armor rigs. decreasing the other weapon's range only makes this problem less bad, but even then, pulses and ac's are still better because they have a wider range envelope. also, if you nerf pulses, then we also need to nerf AC's because people would start to complain how "unfair" is to have 60km falloff large AC's, and then all hell would break loose. Where got ACs +60km falloffs ? 800mm Acs on Tempest add 36km falloff with Barrage to 6km optimal with lvl5 skills. And what about Apoc with scorch to shot 70km from optimal ? This is not ridiculous ? 45km optimal + 10km falloff, on any other Amarr BS is fair ? I remember you Blaster range is 11+16 with null ammos. The lasors ranges better than +100% from Blaster. In short range damage the blaster better than lasor but just 10%. But.. that advance in short range instantly dissapear when you need to reload/change ammos. Yes all advance came from range against blasters, not blaster need fix the other overpowered gun system need revision like lasor with scorch.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.07 10:16:00 - [213] Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Where got ACs +60km falloffs ? 800mm Acs on Tempest add 36km falloff with Barrage to 6km optimal with lvl5 skills. And what about Apoc with scorch to shot 70km from optimal ? This is not ridiculous ? 45km optimal + 10km falloff, on any other Amarr BS is fair ? I remember you Blaster range is 11+16 with null ammos. The lasors ranges better than +100% from Blaster. In short range damage the blaster better than lasor but just 10%. But.. that advance in short range instantly dissapear when you need to reload/change ammos. Yes all advance came from range against blasters, not blaster need fix the other overpowered gun system need revision like lasor with scorch. TE's are more usual nowadays you know? it's not that hard to achieve said falloff ranges with AC's. heck, a cynabal/vagabond can hit 50km falloffs with 425's with ease (you need lvl5 HAC in the case of the vagabond however), nevermind a machariel. same thing goes to pulsepocs that can do 90km with TE's. granted it's a somewhat of specialist setup, but it works damn fine. now nerfing scorch would mean nerfing barrage. not because of reasoning but because of the masses screaming "MURDER!" because of AC's (short-med range weapon) having more range than pulses (medium range weapon) either way, even if they nerf both barrage and scorch, that means almost nothing for blasters since they would still be the underdogs. so they now have a 200% range disadvantage. it's still trading off 5-10% of damage for twice the range. so no, nerfing scorch or even barrage would be a deficient way of boosting blasters, akin to applying bandaids to a gunshot wound. more specifically, applying bandaids to a gunshot wound in the finger, while leaving the other wound near the aorta gushing out blood like there's no tomorrow. the way to fix blasters would be making them 1500dps monsters that only work at up to 15km (granted you won't be doing the hypothetical 1500dps at these ranges. more like they doing it at 2km optimal or even 4) in case of battleships, together with changes on the blaster platforms (better agility) and/or changing the way plates and rigs nerf your ship (better agility and/or speed). I must say that I really don't mind the state of things as far as pulses and AC's are atm, if blasters have an overwhelming damage advantage that is. 5-10% is not overwhelming. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Tiger's Spirit Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.07 11:17:00 - [214] Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 07/10/2010 11:21:08 Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Where got ACs +60km falloffs ? 800mm Acs on Tempest add 36km falloff with Barrage to 6km optimal with lvl5 skills. And what about Apoc with scorch to shot 70km from optimal ? This is not ridiculous ? 45km optimal + 10km falloff, on any other Amarr BS is fair ? I remember you Blaster range is 11+16 with null ammos. The lasors ranges better than +100% from Blaster. In short range damage the blaster better than lasor but just 10%. But.. that advance in short range instantly dissapear when you need to reload/change ammos. Yes all advance came from range against blasters, not blaster need fix the other overpowered gun system need revision like lasor with scorch. TE's are more usual nowadays you know? it's not that hard to achieve said falloff ranges with AC's..... Blabla. If other ship use TE their attribs will change too. Vagabond ? Cynabal ? Man those ship have falloff bonuses. Oh i see, you want to compare a main weapon attribute with a bonused weapon attribute. LOL. You dont wanna compare Vigilant or Vindicator damage in short range with same ships with this logic ? What will happen if you can scramble and web a Vaga with your Deimos ? This is a bad logic too, because other battle situations bring other result. So, dont pis.s me off with your idiotic logic. Just talk about the original attributes. The difference came from range. When the difference is bigger, the bonuses will more bigger, because not it doesn't matter, that 25% percent of 10km (2,5km bonus) or 25 percent of 30 km (7,5km bonus) The best damage came from optimal range, and lasors have better optimal ranges than other guns what shot from falloff. Not need extra overpowered blaster for long range too, not need antimatter which can shot to 30km range. Just need to change the other ship which has too overcalculated range damage.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.07 12:27:00 - [215] Edited by: Grimpak on 07/10/2010 12:28:41 Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Not need extra overpowered blaster for long range too, not need antimatter which can shot to 30km range. if you do that then also please change torps since they do nearly the same damage as blasters at 30km. what I'm saying with all my tirade that I have posted here is, I don't care if pulses outrange me. I don't care if autocannons outrange me. I don't care if torps outrange me. In fact, let them outrange me. what I care is that I get nigh on damage advantage for sacrificing range in ships that can't move faster than a seacow in a sea of molass. THAT is the problem. how to solve it? nerfing the other guns would mean squat since you also do the same marginally better damage for overwhelming sacrifices, and thus the problem still stands. so no, I'm not asking antimatter doing damage at 30 kilometres. that pretty much means that it's just yet another weapon that behaves like pulses or autocannons (and in this case, it would totally nullify autocannons as a viable weapon) I want antimatter to kill things dead three times in a row at 2 **ing kilometres and the ability to reach that range, something that doesn't happen now and never will even if you nerf scorch or barrage or whatever range the other weapon systems have. and I threw the angels' ships here to say that if you want to nerf scorch, then you have to invariably nerf barrage. --- Quote:** The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Tiger's Spirit Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.07 13:13:00 - [216] Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 07/10/2010 13:15:39 Originally by: Grimpak Edited by: Grimpak on 07/10/2010 12:28:41 Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Not need extra overpowered blaster for long range too, not need antimatter which can shot to 30km range. if you do that then also please change torps since they do nearly the same damage as blasters at 30km. Man using those ships ? You fly with torp ravens for PvP ? How many pilots use them if the torps good ? 1 percent of pvpers ? How many pilot using tempest in short range fight ? Maybe 5%, because the ACs so good ? The most users using Amarr BSs and Gallente BSes in short range fight, because those ship it's the best with their short range guns. And one more things, please try those torps when a ship use AB, you will hit 30% damage. You will hit the BSs with torps with half damage if they just stand there. You need 3x TP for good damage. And when moving the enemy ship out of range you cant hit to 30km because torps flight speed is so crap. 30km impacts needs 9 sec, when reach 30km, the target with mwd move to +10km and you hit nothing.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.07 14:18:00 - [217] Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 07/10/2010 13:15:39 Originally by: Grimpak Edited by: Grimpak on 07/10/2010 12:28:41 Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Not need extra overpowered blaster for long range too, not need antimatter which can shot to 30km range. if you do that then also please change torps since they do nearly the same damage as blasters at 30km. Man using those ships ? You fly with torp ravens for PvP ? How many pilots use them if the torps good ? 1 percent of pvpers ? How many pilot using tempest in short range fight ? Maybe 5%, because the ACs so good ? The most users using Amarr BSs and Gallente BSes in short range fight, because those ship it's the best with their short range guns. And one more things, please try those torps when a ship use AB, you will hit 30% damage. You will hit the BSs with torps with half damage if they just stand there. You need 3x TP for good damage. And when moving the enemy ship out of range you cant hit to 30km because torps flight speed is so crap. 30km impacts needs 9 sec, when reach 30km, the target with mwd move to +10km and you hit nothing. oh hey, I never said it was used. I only said it was able to. actually, a torp raven can do as much damage as blasterthron, at bigger ranges. and even with said damage reduction it actually does damage, unlike the b-thron. It is true that said torp raven is more reliant on outside help than the b-thron however. anyways we're not going anywhere with all this pointless tirade and theory bashing. my point: nerfing scorch doesn't fix blasters. it doesn't do anything to fix blasters, xcept putting a bandaid over the issue. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Tiger's Spirit Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.07 14:26:00 - [218] Originally by: Grimpak my point: nerfing scorch doesn't fix blasters. it doesn't do anything to fix blasters, xcept putting a bandaid over the issue. The blaster not need fixing that's fine, the lasor need nerf, that's why the difference is so big. I can flight all ship i using all weapon systems, just the lasors so overpowered because scorch others is fine, except rockets.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.07 14:45:00 - [219] Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 07/10/2010 14:28:35 Originally by: Grimpak my point: nerfing scorch doesn't fix blasters. it doesn't do anything to fix blasters, xcept putting a bandaid over the issue. The blaster not need fixing that's fine, the lasor need nerf, that's why feel the pilots it's difference is so big. I can flight all ship i using all weapon systems, just the lasors so overpowered because scorch. Others is fine, except rockets. so a weapon system that trades pretty much everything for marginally better damage and requires to be on point blank ranges yet it has no such platforms that don't have the mobility to work at said ranges (bar frigates) is fine? dayum --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Alyth Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2010.10.07 15:35:00 - [220] Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 07/10/2010 14:28:35 Originally by: Grimpak my point: nerfing scorch doesn't fix blasters. it doesn't do anything to fix blasters, xcept putting a bandaid over the issue. The blaster not need fixing that's fine, the lasor need nerf, that's why feel the pilots it's difference is so big. I can flight all ship i using all weapon systems, just the lasors so overpowered because scorch. Others is fine, except rockets. I think you're missing the point. The problem with blasters is that the ships designed to carry them cannot operate properly at their intended ranges, if they can even reach that range at all that is. The weapons system itself is fine, apart from a minor tracking tweak being needed. As it stands Gallente blasterboats fly like bricks before you add the necessary plates which just serve to exacerbate the existing problem. I'm with Grimpak's suggestion. Buff Gallente blasterboat agility/mass and maybe base speed SLIGHTLY so they stand a chance of not getting thoroughly slaughtered before they get into range. I'm not saying make them the new Vaga, but at least give them a chance to fire back.

Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.10.07 15:40:00 - [221] I sure am glad I've never trained any Gallente Spaceship Command skill beyond Frigate, nor any hybrid turret skills beyond Small Hybrid Turret and Small Blaster Specialization. As far as I'm concerned, the entire Gallente fleet consists of frigates. Certainly, there are some perfectly functional T2 variants in higher ship classes, but Amarr and Minmatar are still clearly superior choices in almost all cases. Caldari too, even, in the proper niche.
Renarla	Posted - 2010.10.07 16:12:00 - [222] Originally by: Orange Lagomorph I sure am glad I've never trained any Gallente Spaceship Command skill beyond Frigate, nor any hybrid turret skills beyond Small Hybrid Turret and Small Blaster Specialization. Lucky. Your looking at a poor sap with Gallente Frigate, Cruiser, and BS all 5 and Small, Medium, and Large Hybrids 5. What I would do for a SP remap. :( However, on another note, I now have one of those annoying sigs.
Zahira Wrath Amarr Dominion Strategic	Posted - 2010.10.07 17:12:00 - [223] Edited by: Zahira Wrath on 07/10/2010 17:13:55 Originally by: Ralnik Most people claim Blasters are broken, because they can't do damage at range like Lasers & Auto Cannons. They are wrong and we don't need just another FoTM turret hitting targets at 30km.. Gallente ships simply need a speed & agility buff and that will go a very long way in fixing Blasters problems. Meaning please before you give in to the many forum whines about fixing Blasters.. Think about their intended purpose and the ships they are fitted on then think about what actually needs fixed. After reading quite a lot of this thread, I have to agree with the OP in that Blasters, as a weapon system are not broken. The problem, as stated many times is that they cannot apply the damage. They quite simply cant get into range anymore without dying ... unless very lucky. Well how about this is a possible solution: introduce a script based statis webifier. Please, hear me out: Before the web nerf, once a blaster ship got its targer below 10km, it could web it down 90% and apply its damage to a practically non moving target. At these speeds, tracking should not be a problem. Webs and blasters were always used together. It was the only way that a blaster ship could hold down its target and dictate range. Plates and all. Now that webs only reduce targets to 60% instead of 90% of their speed, it is very hard for them to pin down a target and apply damage. If a script based stasis web was introduced, it could allow a blaster pilot to web his target at different ranges, with different web values. Eg. 15km-> 30% web 10km -> 60% web 5km -> 90% web (on a standard web .. I am not going to cover faction or officer modules) With these values, a blaster ship would have the following abilities: 15km: have a hope of getting in range, if not, switch to LR ammo 10km: same as now 5km: the target is just as webbed as he would be in the past and thus would die very quickly, tracking no longer an issue This would reinforce the close range shotgun mythos that a few have been throwing around. Blaster tracking below 5km would not be a problem with a non moving target, and blaster ships can reach out to 15km and begin to tackle. Anyhoo, just an idea. Flame away. (CSM! where are you)
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.07 17:53:00 - [224] Originally by: Zahira Wrath Edited by: Zahira Wrath on 07/10/2010 17:13:55 Originally by: Ralnik Most people claim Blasters are broken, because they can't do damage at range like Lasers & Auto Cannons. They are wrong and we don't need just another FoTM turret hitting targets at 30km.. Gallente ships simply need a speed & agility buff and that will go a very long way in fixing Blasters problems. Meaning please before you give in to the many forum whines about fixing Blasters.. Think about their intended purpose and the ships they are fitted on then think about what actually needs fixed. After reading quite a lot of this thread, I have to agree with the OP in that Blasters, as a weapon system are not broken. The problem, as stated many times is that they cannot apply the damage. They quite simply cant get into range anymore without dying ... unless very lucky. Well how about this is a possible solution: introduce a script based statis webifier. Please, hear me out: Before the web nerf, once a blaster ship got its targer below 10km, it could web it down 90% and apply its damage to a practically non moving target. At these speeds, tracking should not be a problem. Webs and blasters were always used together. It was the only way that a blaster ship could hold down its target and dictate range. Plates and all. Now that webs only reduce targets to 60% instead of 90% of their speed, it is very hard for them to pin down a target and apply damage. If a script based stasis web was introduced, it could allow a blaster pilot to web his target at different ranges, with different web values. Eg. 15km-> 30% web 10km -> 60% web 5km -> 90% web (on a standard web .. I am not going to cover faction or officer modules) With these values, a blaster ship would have the following abilities: 15km: have a hope of getting in range, if not, switch to LR ammo 10km: same as now 5km: the target is just as webbed as he would be in the past and thus would die very quickly, tracking no longer an issue This would reinforce the close range shotgun mythos that a few have been throwing around. Blaster tracking below 5km would not be a problem with a non moving target, and blaster ships can reach out to 15km and begin to tackle. Anyhoo, just an idea. Flame away. (CSM! where are you) If you boost web, that applies to the enemy aswell. + If you want to follow the logic that shorter ranged ships should be faster, gallente should be faster than minmatar which is not going to happen. I'd vote for less speed and agility penalty for gallente when using armortank, and tracking boost for blasters, but none of theese individually would fix the problem. (seriously, its stupid that ACs have more tracking with double the range)
Tiger's Spirit Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.07 18:03:00 - [225] Originally by: Zahira Wrath /// Eg. 15km-> 30% web 10km -> 60% web 5km -> 90% web (on a standard web .. I am not going to cover faction or officer modules) With these values, a blaster ship would have the following abilities: 15km: have a hope of getting in range, if not, switch to LR ammo 10km: same as now 5km: the target is just as webbed as he would be in the past and thus would die very quickly, tracking no longer an issue This would reinforce the close range shotgun mythos that a few have been throwing around. Blaster tracking below 5km would not be a problem with a non moving target, and blaster ships can reach out to 15km and begin to tackle. Anyhoo, just an idea. Flame away. (CSM! where are you) Do you know what happen with this solution ? If Enemy has range advantage will using on you the web at 20km. (15km+overheat) You need think about it, what will happen, if u cant hit the enemy, but he slowing you and can shot you with full damage. Your ship will approach the enemy slower than now and you will suffering more damage till you reach your blaster range.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.07 18:24:00 - [226] Edited by: Grimpak on 07/10/2010 18:26:10 Originally by: Zahira Wrath If a script based stasis web was introduced, it could allow a blaster pilot to web his target at different ranges, with different web values. Eg. 15km-> 30% web 10km -> 60% web 5km -> 90% web (on a standard web .. I am not going to cover faction or officer modules) With these values, a blaster ship would have the following abilities: 15km: have a hope of getting in range, if not, switch to LR ammo 10km: same as now 5km: the target is just as webbed as he would be in the past and thus would die very quickly, tracking no longer an issue This would reinforce the close range shotgun mythos that a few have been throwing around. Blaster tracking below 5km would not be a problem with a non moving target, and blaster ships can reach out to 15km and begin to tackle. Anyhoo, just an idea. Flame away. (CSM! where are you) this would only make it worse since now you'll really be unable to apply dps because you're webbed out at 20km. and I still say that a weapon that has minor damage advantage vs major range disadvantage is not "fine" should be major damage advantage vs major range disadvantage. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.08 14:02:00 - [227] dump
Hentes Zsemle	Posted - 2010.10.10 06:56:00 - [228] up
Aloe Cloveris The Greater Goon	Posted - 2010.10.11 01:21:00 - [229] Do something about them anything I don't care. Blasters. Hulls. Something. ****sux, seriously. Bump.
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.10.11 02:21:00 - [230] Always bet on Amarrmatar.

Discrodia Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2010.10.11 03:37:00 - [231] I believe that blasters probably do need a buff, however if that buff is anything it should be a tracking speed one, anything else is just going to make them either overpowered or too similar to the other weapons. I've used blasters on every single gallente gunship I've even played in, both for PvP and PvE, and I must say that when you know what you're doing and have the right skills, blasters can be devastating. Even if most people can't figure out how to use them. Originally by: anonymous WE JUST DID SCIENCE!
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.10.11 04:29:00 - [232] Originally by: Discrodia Even if most people can't figure out how to use them. Confirming another person who believes there's nothing wrong with a weapon that takes far more skill to operate at the same level of effectiveness as other weapons, some of which a chimpanzee could easily operate.
Faith'Ann Justice	Posted - 2010.10.11 04:32:00 - [233] I rather enjoy the fact I am an elite pilot because I shoot down amarr and minmatar ships in blaster-fit caldari ships. Being the underdog is fun.
Jacob Flint	Posted - 2010.10.13 14:59:00 - [234] Drags the topic back to the first page. This topic won't vanish in the mist of the forum!
Alyth Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2010.10.13 22:24:00 - [235] Originally by: Faith'Ann Justice Edited by: Faith''Ann Justice on 11/10/2010 04:36:28 Edited by: Faith''Ann Justice on 11/10/2010 04:35:52 I rather enjoy the fact I am an elite pilot because I shoot down amarr and minmatar ships in blaster-fit caldari ships. Being the underdog is fun. Quote: That's because blasters work on Caldari ships, they don't suffer as badly from the 'get diced before you even get in range' problem that the Gallente boats have. All that just goes to show that blasters are (mostly) fine, it's the Gallente ships themselves that are borked.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.