| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Fred Meyer
   |
Posted - 2005.02.02 05:58:00 -
[1]
So far, I'm likeing what they did with the projectiles. Still wish my T2 280mm Howitzers tracked a little better, but I like the damage they're putting out! Pre-patch, my damage mod was 9.97, now its 13.71! I just got a perfect strike while testing it on some rats for 411.4 damage. I'm liking it. 
Definately a step in the right direction IMO.
|
Red Six
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 06:32:00 -
[2]
Just wish they had bumped the optimals like they said they were going to do.  No explanation as to why they didn't just some people's theories.
|
Valentine Keen
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 09:29:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Red Six
Just wish they had bumped the optimals like they said they were going to do. No explanation as to why they didn't just some people's theories.
Not this too.
WTB: 1 Non-screwed up patch. Have been waiting since June 2003. 
|
Troublegum
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 09:31:00 -
[4]
Yeah i noticed the damage on the 720 IIs, with 1 gyro i now got 13.xxxx damage mod :)
|
Matthew
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 10:45:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Matthew on 02/02/2005 10:55:16
Originally by: Red Six
Just wish they had bumped the optimals like they said they were going to do. No explanation as to why they didn't just some people's theories.
EDIT: for eyes not working properly
Well which guns have you checked for the increased optimals? They were going to be applied to the artilleries only - there are actually very few guns under this class. Note that the 1400mm is a howitzer not an artillery, so won't get the bonus, and the 800mm repeating artillery is actually an autocannon - they just played with the names a bit to confuse us.
In fact, there's only one gun in each size class that should have seen the optimal boost anyway - the 250mm, the 650mm and the 1200mm.
|
Valentine Keen
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 10:55:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Matthew
Originally by: Red Six
Just wish they had bumped the optimals like they said they were going to do. No explanation as to why they didn't just some people's theories.
Where did they say they were going to do this? Certainly wasn't part of the post CCP Hammer made about the changes.
You mean this bit here.
Quote:
Basically what we've done is boost autocannons damage by 10% and their tracking by 20%, boosted artilleries damage by 15% and optimal range by 15% and finally boosted Howitzers damage by 15%.
|
Matthew
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 10:56:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Valentine Keen
Originally by: Matthew
Originally by: Red Six
Just wish they had bumped the optimals like they said they were going to do. No explanation as to why they didn't just some people's theories.
Where did they say they were going to do this? Certainly wasn't part of the post CCP Hammer made about the changes.
You mean this bit here.
Quote:
Basically what we've done is boost autocannons damage by 10% and their tracking by 20%, boosted artilleries damage by 15% and optimal range by 15% and finally boosted Howitzers damage by 15%.
Yes, sorry about that, saw it almost as soon as I hit post - so was correcting my response even as you were typing that. See above for my revised question.
|
d'hofren
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 11:18:00 -
[8]
Edited by: d'hofren on 02/02/2005 11:19:52
I haven't got around to trying the autocannons yet but I wasn't too impressed with how the Artie changes benefited my game. Added optimum isn't that useful to me as a youngster kicking around in BC's and playing the lvl 3 agent grind. It means I have a greater amount of short range dead air where I have to rely on drones and hvy missiles. Surviving any intie or drone infested deadspace becomes a lottery. If the gate lands you a distance from the enemy you live and walk the mission with ease, if the gate lands you too close to anything you have a good chance of finding that all your arty points are useless.
Having said that medium arty is now fantastic for playing around with belt rats. You actually get to dictate your engagement range here. I suspect it is also rather good for long range pvp.
I'am hoping that the autocannon tracking changes might make the heavier medium auto's, (425's), a little move viable for closer range work. If that isn't the case I hope that damage changes mean the 220's and dual 180's pack enough punch to be usefull. I'll test out close range ruppy and stabber loadouts tonight if I get the chance.
This isn't a whine. I am a strong believer in using the best tools for the task in hand. That's why I have almost equal skills in Minmtr and Caldari weapons and ships. It's no trouble for me to change ships and weapons to get a job done. I've just swapped over to a Ferox so I can fit a decent rack of missiles for future deadspace or fit a decent rack of rails for standard missions.
|
starfox2004
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 11:22:00 -
[9]
what skills have you got to get a 411 hit with a 280mm II ?
|
Matthew
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 11:30:00 -
[10]
Originally by: d'hofren
Edited by: d'hofren on 02/02/2005 11:19:52
I haven't got around to trying the autocannons yet but I wasn't too impressed with how the Artie changes benefited my game. Added optimum isn't that useful to me as a youngster kicking around in BC's and playing the lvl 3 agent grind. It means I have a greater amount of short range dead air where I have to rely on drones and hvy missiles.
Increased optimum shouldn't affect your short-range "dead-air". That close-in deadzone is determined by your tracking, independant of your range stats. Increased optimal range should mean you start to hit at the same range, but can go out further before your damage starts to tail off again.
Originally by: starfox2004
what skills have you got to get a 411 hit with a 280mm II
Well, as they mention a "perfect strike", I think it's safe to assume that this is a wrecking hit, and thus boosted by the random-huge-number factor that wrecking hits give you. So it's not really representative of the performance of the gun or pilot.
|
|
|
d'hofren
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 11:49:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Matthew
Increased optimum shouldn't affect your short-range "dead-air". That close-in deadzone is determined by your tracking, independant of your range stats. Increased optimal range should mean you start to hit at the same range, but can go out further before your damage starts to tail off again.
I wish I had known that before about 7pm last night. Oh well, you learn best from the painful mistakes.
|
starfox2004
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 12:09:00 -
[12]
thanx for the response matthew w !
i get 'perfect hits' for 120 (pre patch)
and wreckings are like 350+ so that answers it !
|
Siddy
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 13:03:00 -
[13]
OMG
quit whinage! nowz!
the artys do now more damage than any long range wepon cause of gyro t2 stacking!
now its your job to mach the direction of the target to reduce transvelar speed - after all we got fastes ships to do it propercly
and the 800mms are now just Ybah
And if not satisfyed with 1400mms
try full rack of 1200mms with Shield tank, Cap injektor and 6 gyros t2 
-------------------------------------------
|
Damien Vox
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 13:43:00 -
[14]
I'm a semi-happy Minmatar now. I was doing lvl 3's in my Cyclone in about 30-45 minutes this patch has helped cut about 10 minutes off the longer ones which is a blessing given how much 'loot' (in quotations due to it not really being loot but wasted space with what you get now a days) you get on some. My 720's now constantly do over 200 damage and I love it though I do wish they'd have adjusted tracking just a bit.
|
Snake Jankins
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 14:27:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Snake Jankins on 02/02/2005 14:29:45
Originally by: Matthew
Note that the 1400mm is a howitzer not an artillery
You're wrong here. Howitzers ARE the largest artilleries in each class (S,M,L). They run under artilleries and the description of the 1400mm says, that it's the 'ultimate artillery cannon'. And that's why we have this confusion. Some people read too fast and thought, that each artillery type gets more optimal range and not only the non-howitzer artilleries. 
|
Matthew
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 15:10:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Matthew on 02/02/2005 15:10:39
Originally by: Snake Jankins
Edited by: Snake Jankins on 02/02/2005 14:29:45
Originally by: Matthew
Note that the 1400mm is a howitzer not an artillery
You're wrong here. Howitzers ARE the largest artilleries in each class (S,M,L). They run under artilleries and the description of the 1400mm says, that it's the 'ultimate artillery cannon'. And that's why we have this confusion. Some people read too fast and thought, that each artillery type gets more optimal range and not only the non-howitzer artilleries.
I was referring to the terms as used by CCP Hammer in his post about the changes (as those seemed the best terms of reference in this case). Hence for the purposes of the patch changes, they get the ones for howitzers, not the ones for artilleries.
Though I admit that the terms "Artillery Cannon" and "Howitzer artillery" do share the word artillery, I'm sure it would not seem unreasonable to refer to the former as "Artillery" and the latter as "Howitzers"
And we all know that descriptions of items can be more than a little deceptive!
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |