EVE Search - Why would someone use blasters

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Why would someone use blasters

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lazer Bear Amarr Original Ganksters O.G.-Alliance	Posted - 2011.04.02 23:12:00 - [1] I know blaster are up but i would like to ask people who use blasters why exactly they use them?? I mean autocannons or lazers have pretty close dps to blasters but they also start their damage a lot earlier due to range, making the overall damage of the blasters very low compared to the other weapons.
Trust'me im'honest	Posted - 2011.04.02 23:14:00 - [2] I see what you have done here!
Buzzmong Aliastra	Posted - 2011.04.02 23:20:00 - [3] Applied to hybrids in general: ship bonuses and skills. At least that's why in my case. Apart from that...well...in light of how good autos are in the same role...I'm drawing blanks. --------------------------------- Go Web! Go!
Lonesome Joe	Posted - 2011.04.03 01:32:00 - [4] Been wondering the same thing. Especially frigates, you're not hitting anything until you are about 1.5k from target. By then you already took damage, you have to maintain a very strict orbit or else you hit nothing and you're deep into web, scram and nuet territory. Oh and they're sucking your cap dry too.
Idicious Lightbane Percussive Diplomacy	Posted - 2011.04.03 01:47:00 - [5] Originally by: Lonesome Joe Been wondering the same thing. Especially frigates, you're not hitting anything until you are about 1.5k from target. By then you already took damage, you have to maintain a very strict orbit or else you hit nothing and you're deep into web, scram and nuet territory. Oh and they're sucking your cap dry too. Frigates are actually the only Gallente ship-size that work properly with blasters as all frigate combat generally happens at short range. NOS in utility high helps keep cap running, say the Taranis is an amazing brawler ceptor with blasters, the Daredevil is just amazing with them as well. Keep in mind you can load Null to keep a bit more range.
Wolfy2449 Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2011.04.03 04:03:00 - [6] Edited by: Wolfy2449 on 03/04/2011 04:03:47 Originally by: Lonesome Joe Been wondering the same thing. Especially frigates, you're not hitting anything until you are about 1.5k from target. By then you already took damage, you have to maintain a very strict orbit or else you hit nothing and you're deep into web, scram and nuet territory. Oh and they're sucking your cap dry too. Exactly that!! 2 ships both have 100hp blastership has 12,5 dps Autocannon has 10 dps They start at 10 yards away. blastership needs to close the ship before he fires, until that time he took 40 damage and has only 60 hp left 6 seconds before the autocannon kills him and he needs 8 seconds to kill the autocannon ships which of course doesnt have I really, cant find a reason why someone would use blasters. Unless eve was a close combat game there is no point at all. CCP PLZ EFFING FIX!!!! Signature removed for being not EVE related. Zymurgist
Straight Edged	Posted - 2011.04.03 04:32:00 - [7] probe. warp to 0. station camp. guys undocks in your face gate camp (where most battles are) people spawn 15km away from the gate. Large blasters has 10km+ optimal, they are already in falloff. They cant scram every single person in your 500 person fleet, making MWD close quite possible. snipe? sentries and railguns for that. blasters are fine. unless you want to hug the planet and hope for kills
Dr Sheepbringer Gallente Halinallen veroparatiisi Inglorious Carebears	Posted - 2011.04.03 08:06:00 - [8] Because we get to your orbit without dying. We stay in your orbit even when scrammed and webbed. The neuts are a tough customer though. Then we die laughing. Originally by: CCP Shadow Dr. Sheepbringer -- It's not that kind of horn.
Shade Millith Caldari Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.04.03 09:33:00 - [9] Originally by: Idicious Lightbane Originally by: Lonesome Joe Been wondering the same thing. Especially frigates, you're not hitting anything until you are about 1.5k from target. By then you already took damage, you have to maintain a very strict orbit or else you hit nothing and you're deep into web, scram and nuet territory. Oh and they're sucking your cap dry too. Frigates are actually the only Gallente ship-size that work properly with blasters as all frigate combat generally happens at short range. NOS in utility high helps keep cap running, say the Taranis is an amazing brawler ceptor with blasters, the Daredevil is just amazing with them as well. Keep in mind you can load Null to keep a bit more range. Comet is also a pretty nice little ship. ------------------------
1600 RT	Posted - 2011.04.03 09:51:00 - [10] i use blaster because they are very good on frigs like taranis daredevil ishkur incursus comet. cruiser like thorax and vexor are deadly if used correctly. T2 cruiser and blaster are not that good not because of a blaster problem but because EVE is too much into blob actually that you probably dont wanna risk 150mil of ship when as soon you aggro you get blobbed. and for battleship size on the 0-20km blaster are pretty good.

Rouge Drone	Posted - 2011.04.03 10:50:00 - [11] Originally by: Wolfy2449 Edited by: Wolfy2449 on 03/04/2011 04:03:47 Originally by: Lonesome Joe Been wondering the same thing. Especially frigates, you're not hitting anything until you are about 1.5k from target. By then you already took damage, you have to maintain a very strict orbit or else you hit nothing and you're deep into web, scram and nuet territory. Oh and they're sucking your cap dry too. Exactly that!! 2 ships both have 100hp blastership has 12,5 dps Autocannon has 10 dps They start at 10 yards away. blastership needs to close the ship before he fires, until that time he took 40 damage and has only 60 hp left 6 seconds before the autocannon kills him and he needs 8 seconds to kill the autocannon ships which of course doesnt have I really, cant find a reason why someone would use blasters. Unless eve was a close combat game there is no point at all. CCP PLZ EFFING FIX!!!! Tranquility pvp does not consist of a series of pre-arranged 1v1s where everyone starts at the same distance and begins locking at the same time.
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.03 11:42:00 - [12] Because I get 1.5k dps, better tracking than any other gun, and 19km range with void. l2fit nubs Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Swynet	Posted - 2011.04.03 11:52:00 - [13] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Because I get 1.5k dps, better tracking than any other gun, and 19km range with void. l2fit nubs The power ranger of blasters !! Pliz enlight all these people not knowing how make them work and pliz link us: Your killboard Your Skills And feel free to invite me and take a close look at you fighting/ass kicking everything and his mother cat dog rabbit with your ultra ubber powmobile blasters. Sadly seems that 1% of the population talking about blasters say they are fine and when you take a good close look at them they don't use them, never use them, mostly fly Matar. I'm still asking myself after your post, why doesn't everyone uses them. Also I'm pretty sure you have THE answer about this, oc. ________________________________________________ Originally by: Goose99 In EVE, PVE can happen anywhere, anytime. Whenever you undock, you subject yourself to involuntary PVE.
Bizheep Minmatar Red Federation	Posted - 2011.04.03 11:58:00 - [14] Originally by: Swynet Your killboard Your Skills where are yours?
Swynet	Posted - 2011.04.03 12:06:00 - [15] Originally by: Bizheep Originally by: Swynet Your killboard Your Skills where are yours? Last time I saw them they were deep in your... nothing forget it. "Bizheep Minmatar Red Federation" Ok ________________________________________________ Originally by: Goose99 In EVE, PVE can happen anywhere, anytime. Whenever you undock, you subject yourself to involuntary PVE.
Guer	Posted - 2011.04.03 12:13:00 - [16] troll thread
Patient 2428190 DEGRREE'Fo'FREE Internet Business School	Posted - 2011.04.03 12:36:00 - [17] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Because I get 1.5k dps, better tracking than any other gun, and 19km range with void. ...Then when you stopped to think about it. All you really said was Lalala.
Brodde Dim Hyper-Nova	Posted - 2011.04.03 12:49:00 - [18] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau l2fit nubs It's the nubs that make the difference. Whatever they are, if you fit them, blasters get better.
Bruce Kemp Minmatar The Shadow Cartel War and Pestilence	Posted - 2011.04.03 16:02:00 - [19] Originally by: Straight Edged probe. warp to 0. station camp. guys undocks in your face gate camp (where most battles are) people spawn 15km away from the gate. Large blasters has 10km+ optimal, they are already in falloff. They cant scram every single person in your 500 person fleet, making MWD close quite possible. snipe? sentries and railguns for that. blasters are fine. unless you want to hug the planet and hope for kills +1 This. Originally by: Lady Spank Minmatar born, Minmatar bred, Strong in the arm, Thick in the head.
Lonesome Joe	Posted - 2011.04.03 16:07:00 - [20] I honestly think that the advantages of projectile guns over blasters is significant. Blasters means ultra close range (more significant on frigates and possibly cruisers too), poor falloff, cap drainage and missing the versatility of the four ammo type projectile. Logic dictates that if you have a close range weapon like blasters you need a fast ship to use them on, but Gal ships aren't known for their speed.

The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2011.04.03 16:09:00 - [21] Reminds me at this: Blasters are awesome ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Dado Prso	Posted - 2011.04.03 16:15:00 - [22] Sheild Hype rocks , ever heard of non-antimatter ammo and TE ....
baltec1	Posted - 2011.04.03 16:52:00 - [23] Originally by: Dado Prso Sheild Hype rocks , ever heard of non-antimatter ammo and TE .... one of my favorate ships
ARES 003	Posted - 2011.04.03 17:14:00 - [24] Originally by: Guer troll thread
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.03 17:28:00 - [25] Edited by: Cambarus on 03/04/2011 17:29:37 Originally by: Bizheep Originally by: Swynet Your killboard Your Skills where are yours? swynet isn't the one making claims about how great blasters are when popular opinion, as well as hard evidence both in the form of global (universal?) ship usage and dps graphs, suggest otherwise. Also just throwing this out there, but I actually did go and look up copine, and his KB stats are pretty good. I do have one question for him though: In the last 3 months you've got 32 kills with a cane, and 37 with a pest. If the shield hyp is so great, why is it not listed in the ships you use? And for that matter, why are there NO gallente ships in your list of flown ships? Edit: I'm going to go ahead and point this out now: Every time I see someone post about how gallente are fine, they either have terrible BC records, or great BC records, but fly almost exclusively winmatar.
baltec1	Posted - 2011.04.03 17:39:00 - [26] Originally by: Cambarus Edited by: Cambarus on 03/04/2011 17:29:37 Originally by: Bizheep Originally by: Swynet Your killboard Your Skills where are yours? swynet isn't the one making claims about how great blasters are when popular opinion, as well as hard evidence both in the form of global (universal?) ship usage and dps graphs, suggest otherwise. Also just throwing this out there, but I actually did go and look up copine, and his KB stats are pretty good. I do have one question for him though: In the last 3 months you've got 32 kills with a cane, and 37 with a pest. If the shield hyp is so great, why is it not listed in the ships you use? And for that matter, why are there NO gallente ships in your list of flown ships? Edit: I'm going to go ahead and point this out now: Every time I see someone post about how gallente are fine, they either have terrible BC records, or great BC records, but fly almost exclusively winmatar. And most of the people who whine about blasters are EFT warriors and have never or rarely ever fly blaster ships.
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.03 17:43:00 - [27] Edited by: Copine Callmeknau on 03/04/2011 17:46:20 Alright, to be fair I don't fly em yet. Training for em when I wrap up this carrier training, bout 2 weeks away, honestly can't wait to be flying em around. For the type of PvP I get, bout the only thing I would consider an improvement over a shieldcane is a shield domi/hype You'll soon see the cane and pest phased out on my kb stats, to be replaced by mostly domi and hype. You may also see me using a mega over a pest occasionally. As was said earlier in this thread, the key is thinking outside the box. Try shields out once in a while, mebbe a TE II would be a better idea than the 2'nd MFS on your megathron you're flying. oh protip: blasters do mad dmg already, adding that 2'nd/3'rd dmg mod is a pretty silly idea when you just sit there complaining about how bad the tracking/range is on it. oh and you can go look up my kb/skills on battleclinic and eveboard yourself. I'm not here to make life easier for chronically lazy people, hell I've already given you too much damn advice. edit: don't get me wrong. Boost em all you want, I'm more than happy to be riding the wave of yet another fotm broken ship class. Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
ARES 003	Posted - 2011.04.03 18:01:00 - [28] Originally by: Lazer Bear I mean autocannons or lazers have pretty close dps to blasters but they also start their damage a lot earlier due to range actually, an incursus has roughly twice the dps of a rifter. furthermore, the only way a rifter puts out any significant damage while the incursus is closing range is if he is using barrage, in which case he will get 0 quality hits once the incursus begins to orbit at close range. the same is true of thorax vs rupture.
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.03 18:19:00 - [29] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Alright, to be fair I don't fly em yet. Training for em when I wrap up this carrier training, bout 2 weeks away, honestly can't wait to be flying em around. For the type of PvP I get, bout the only thing I would consider an improvement over a shieldcane is a shield domi/hype You'll soon see the cane and pest phased out on my kb stats, to be replaced by mostly domi and hype. You may also see me using a mega over a pest occasionally. You say that now. Wait until you've actually FLOWN the ships you're so excited about, THEN come back and talk about how amazing blasters are. Shield tanked blaster boats have their place, at least moreso than the armor tanked ones, but they're still not as good as their AC/laser counterparts. I flew a shield hyp for a while, it was actually fit to be exactly like a shield/nano pest. To its credit, it DID put out slightly more DPS @ 20 than the pest did, but the lack of utility highs + the cap usage of the guns + the lower agility of the ship made it not worth flying, and I soon switched back. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau As was said earlier in this thread, the key is thinking outside the box. Try shields out once in a while, mebbe a TE II would be a better idea than the 2'nd MFS on your megathron you're flying. You're talking to a guy whose favorite pvp ship is the battlehelios I have no problem thinking outside the box. The PROBLEM is that thinking outside the box in this case simply means "pretending blasters are autocannons" They're not. They do not do as well as ACs, and what's more important is that the only reason you HAVE to think outside the box is that blasters do so poorly in their intended niche that they perform better when shoehorned into the niche of a better weapon system (while still doing worse than the weapon in question) Originally by: Copine Callmeknau oh protip: blasters do mad dmg already, adding that 2'nd/3'rd dmg mod is a pretty silly idea when you just sit there complaining about how bad the tracking/range is on it. Damage is EXACTLY the problem blasters have. A geddon ODs a mega well inside web range, that that is a very, VERY big problem. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Though you should know that blasters and AC's in the BS class are extremely competitive with one another. Pulses however outclass both systems by far, and if you wanna balance the game, you need to nerf their damage. CCP gave some pretty insane boosts to ACs not too long ago, ACs WERE competitive with blasters before they got buffed, now it's just absurd. Originally by: baltec1 And most of the people who whine about blasters are EFT warriors and have never or rarely ever fly blaster ships. If the people who claim blasters are fine don't fly blaster boats, and the people who claim that they're not fine rarely fly blaster boats, wouldn't that suggest that blasters are underpowered?
baltec1	Posted - 2011.04.03 18:26:00 - [30] Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: baltec1 And most of the people who whine about blasters are EFT warriors and have never or rarely ever fly blaster ships. If the people who claim blasters are fine don't fly blaster boats, and the people who claim that they're not fine rarely fly blaster boats, wouldn't that suggest that blasters are underpowered? Seeing as I do fly blaster boats with other pilots who also like blaster boats I have to say no. The main problem is blasters are different the other turrets which catches out many people.

Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.03 18:39:00 - [31] Originally by: baltec1 Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: baltec1 And most of the people who whine about blasters are EFT warriors and have never or rarely ever fly blaster ships. If the people who claim blasters are fine don't fly blaster boats, and the people who claim that they're not fine rarely fly blaster boats, wouldn't that suggest that blasters are underpowered? Seeing as I do fly blaster boats with other pilots who also like blaster boats I have to say no. The main problem is blasters are different the other turrets which catches out many people. Proof? There's mounds of evidence suggesting that blasters need a boost, if you believe that this is not the case, kindly bring fourth some evidence of your own.
baltec1	Posted - 2011.04.03 18:43:00 - [32] Originally by: Cambarus Seeing as I do fly blaster boats with other pilots who also like blaster boats I have to say no. The main problem is blasters are different the other turrets which catches out many people. Proof? There's mounds of evidence suggesting that blasters need a boost, if you believe that this is not the case, kindly bring fourth some evidence of your own. And how exaclty can I do that? I have my experience with blasters in game which is not exactly wasy to put up here. As far as I see it, large blaster work well, small blasters too while med could do with a bit more tracking and be made easyer to fit onto cruiser hulls.
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.03 19:10:00 - [33] Originally by: baltec1 And how exaclty can I do that? I have my experience with blasters in game which is not exactly wasy to put up here. As far as I see it, large blaster work well, small blasters too while med could do with a bit more tracking and be made easyer to fit onto cruiser hulls. Show us some engagements where your blasters did provably well. Saying that blasters are fine because your experience with them says is it is like an eft warrier saying a velator ODs a bhaalgorn because their experience as an eft warrior says so.
Frau Klaps Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:54:00 - [34] I used to fly larger hulls but nowadays mostly stick to frigates. I mostly fly Gallente frigs, rails or blasters, it's all good. Blasters certainly suit me in many cases and on frigates they really perform quite well matched with decent piloting. Fail to get in the right range or load null and kite and things can go wrong. No web? You most likely want to be loading null by default and worrying more about transversal than range. AB/MWD? It's all very situational of course but tracking bonuses/falloff and having a web or not are my key factors in how I use hybrids. Feel free to check my BC stats but I can save you time... average soloer, mostly Gallente, pretty much engage whatever I can catch in space unless it's guaranteed to fail... in which case I might engage anyway if the roam has been slow >_< The advantages of hybrids depends very much on the hull bonuses applied and the situation in which they are used. A major issue that is often overlooked is that any issues percieved as 'blasters are bad' often doesn't consider that the real elements that shafted the hyperion and (mostly the) other larger classes which are namely the mwd/scram change and changes to webs. The reason it can be hard to apply glorious high dps blaster damage is down to it being rather hard to keep in range, or web other ships down enough to track decently. Of course shield tanked ships with hybrid bonuses have their very own concerns with fitting tank or scram/web and like I say, it really comes down to making decent use of the hull bonuses. Tracking bonuses can afford flying without a web or using a larger tiered weapon (if you can fit them). Overall I'm quite happy with blasters right up to BC's. I'd probably feel shafted if I wanted to fly Battleships but then I've seen people do amazing things in Domi's and Megathrons. The Hyperion really seems to be lacking these days but I've never flown one so I don't know. The main reason people prefer to use Minmatar is for an increased ability to GTFO if needed. Killing Jaguars in my Taranis is hawt. TL;DR + I like hybrids, I can see why some people don't + The issue is more hybrids PLUS mwd/scram PLUS web changes + There's far too many EFTards and trolls on this forum + Go big or go home! Blaster boats are not for risk averse fairies ---
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:57:00 - [35] Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: baltec1 Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: baltec1 And most of the people who whine about blasters are EFT warriors and have never or rarely ever fly blaster ships. If the people who claim blasters are fine don't fly blaster boats, and the people who claim that they're not fine rarely fly blaster boats, wouldn't that suggest that blasters are underpowered? Seeing as I do fly blaster boats with other pilots who also like blaster boats I have to say no. The main problem is blasters are different the other turrets which catches out many people. Proof? There's mounds of evidence suggesting that blasters need a boost, if you believe that this is not the case, kindly bring fourth some evidence of your own. This post reserved for fairly sizeable breakdown of armourpest vs neutronpest vs MPgeddon Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Frau Klaps Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:59:00 - [36] Originally by: Cambarus Show us some engagements where your blasters did provably well. Saying that blasters are fine because your experience with them says is it is like an eft warrier saying a velator ODs a bhaalgorn because their experience as an eft warrior says so. And since this was the post above mine, getting this in before the same question is thrown my way. Of course I'm just expressing an opinion rather than simply saying blasters are fine. Gallente ships could probably do with some tweaking. ---
Sapharen	Posted - 2011.04.03 21:20:00 - [37] Originally by: baltec1 And most of the people who whine about blasters are EFT warriors and have never or rarely ever fly blaster ships. blasters need some love. Not a lot, but some. I'd settle for T2 ammo that gets face-melting damage at point-blank range... instead of T2 ammo that is STILL out-classed by faction antimatter. (Basic Incrusus fit w/ my skills, ignoring rigs or speed or weapon upgrades...) 3x Light Neutron II's w/ Faction Antimatter = 118 dps, 1125km opt & 4300 km falloff, tracks at 0.3956 Same w/ void? 132 dps, slightly farther optimal (1600), way worse falloff (2150)... and 25% worse tracking, at 0.2967 Compare this to, oh, a similarly fit rifter... 3x 200m Autocannon II's w/ Faction Plasma = 94 dps, 750km optimal & 5520km falloff, tracks at 0.5414 same w/ hail? 105 dps, same optimal (750), similar falloff (2760), still tracks almost as good as antimatter (0.3790) Oh, and did we mention that the rifter has a bonus high & medium slot, and so can fit a rocket launcher to make up the difference (or a NOS, or even a salvager?)... and is faster, more agile, and has about the same base tank? And can optimize its damage to something other than therm/kin, on the fly? I say remove the tracking penalty from Void, and boost blaster tracking across the board. or give blaster boats a web bonus. or just more damage. (30%? pssaw. i wat a 100% advatage if i get 'em where i want 'em!)
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.03 21:56:00 - [38] Edited by: Copine Callmeknau on 03/04/2011 21:56:27 Originally by: Sapharen I say remove the tracking penalty from Void, and boost blaster tracking across the board. or give blaster boats a web bonus. or just more damage. (30%? pssaw. i wat a 100% advatage if i get 'em where i want 'em!) If I were going to adjust blasters/gal ships (even though I believe the problem lies more with lasers general pwnage of everything) I'd boost dps by 10% boost optimal by 10% Increase cycle time by 30-40%, increase damage mod by same amount (makes em mad alpha close up weapons. Frontloads damage helping to counter dmg lost while getting in range) Introduce web bonus on thorax, brutix, and megathron. Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:15:00 - [39] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Big ol' post missing the basics entirely I've said it before I'll say it again: You're shoehorning the pest into a role that should be filled by the geddon/mega, of course it's going to look bad by comparison. Now do a graph that shows speed and agility of these ships. You really can't compare the mega/geddon with the pest, it's just too different in terms of what it does/can do. By using only t2 high damage ammo you also conveniently ignore TWO of the matari bonuses (damage type selection and absurd falloff) that give ACs an edge over blasters. It's the equivalent of saying blasters are fine, because if we ignore that whole optimal range thing, pulses are totally worse than they are. Anyway, as I said before, come back after you've actually FLOWN the ships you're drooling over, THEN tell everyone how fine blasters are. As for the other dude who posted: small blasters are fine. It's only been said by everyone (myself included) about a million times. Show us how awesome medium/larges are, if you don't mind.
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:30:00 - [40] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau No really, you think that typical AC ships forgo a second dmg mod for a TE? Dunno what crazy ac fits you're flying around. If anything, the multiple dmg mod is a trademark of AC ships in order to boost their low dps output. DPS is the natural weakness of AC's, so people fit to minimise that weakness. Most matari ships have room for at least 2 damage mods + a TE, because most of them have the option to shield tank. As far as which combination of TEs/Gyros is best, you should be looking at the range you expect to engage at, and see what combination will give you the best results at said range. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Blasters for instance, do the greatest base dmg of any turret in game, meaning you don't need to fit multiple MFS to break 1k dps, you do need to fit TE's to bring your range and tracking up to par though. Tracking and range are the weakness of blasters, the question is why aren't you fitting mods to minimise this weakness? See this right here is your problem. You're explicitly TRYING to turn blasters into ACs. The whole blaster mentality is that they do extremely well at very close ranges, and the whole blaster PROBLEM is that they really don't. Matari ships will STILL outperform them (limiting yourself to nothing but close range t2 ammo does not mean that the others don't come into play) and pulses will outperform both (this being balanced with matari because of higher agility/speed/utility combined with damage type selection and capless guns) Originally by: Copine Callmeknau By 'thinking outside the box', I mean that you are boxed into this world where you assume dmg mods are the only thing worth fitting, and that minmatar ships are the only turret ships you can shieldtank. This is not the case, life will be easier when you all realise this. I've actually flown a shield hyp in the past, wasn't terrible, but I found I missed the 2 heavy neuts of the pest too much (+more range, speed and agility). Shield tank is the standard fit for the brutix, so not sure what you're whining about this box crap for when what you're describing is fairly standard stuff for blasters. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Reference above dps graphs, once you account for resists and tracking the mega outdamages the geddon. Keep in mind that's a 1 MFS mega and a triple HS geddon. I already ran those numbers, the difference being that in MY comparisons the 2 ships are flying in the same direction (if you're in a geddon and you hit orbit @ 3km, you deserve to lose your ship, assuming the geddon pilot is an idiot doesn't prove anything) Originally by: Copine Callmeknau On top of that, you have a very strange idea of competitive if you thought AC's were good before the change. There was a damn good reason minmatar were known as the 'hard mode' race for what, 4-5 years? Go back, start again, compare armour fits to armour fits, or shield fits to shield fits. Blasters outclass AC's in a matching configuration, but a shieldfit AC ship should ** an armour blaster ship so long as the ac ship is kiting things properly. The primary boost that AC's received were tracking enhancers increasing falloff. This is an advantage for blaster ships as well, all you have to do is fit them. 1)Minmatar ruled the nano age, stfu if you think this isn't true 2)Blaster boats tend not to have the speed/agility to properly compete with matari when it comes to shield tanking roles, the ability to disengage is as big an advantage as any amount of dps. 3)Shield AC boats and armor blaster boats are pretty much the standard 4)I'll say it again: Go and fly the ships in question, THEN come back and tell us all how great they are.**

Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:49:00 - [41] Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Big ol' post missing the basics entirely I've said it before I'll say it again: You're shoehorning the pest into a role that should be filled by the geddon/mega, of course it's going to look bad by comparison. Now do a graph that shows speed and agility of these ships. You really can't compare the mega/geddon with the pest, it's just too different in terms of what it does/can do. By using only t2 high damage ammo you also conveniently ignore TWO of the matari bonuses (damage type selection and absurd falloff) that give ACs an edge over blasters. It's the equivalent of saying blasters are fine, because if we ignore that whole optimal range thing, pulses are totally worse than they are. Anyway, as I said before, come back after you've actually FLOWN the ships you're drooling over, THEN tell everyone how fine blasters are. As for the other dude who posted: small blasters are fine. It's only been said by everyone (myself included) about a million times. Show us how awesome medium/larges are, if you don't mind. sigh No, I'm not shoehorning anything. Pest does absolutely fine as an armour tanking ship, I know this because it is the only tempest configuration I use, and by your own admission I do alright on the kb's with it. What you end up with is lower dps but good ewar, devastating when combined with the twin heavy neuts. If you want a fast t1 high damage matari shield ship you get a cane, it does the job much better. Pest != Machariel. Minmatar != shieldfit only Minmatar = versatility of fit, ie many different viable fits for the same ship Just because it doesn't happen to prove your case that blasters are the worst weapons that ever graced the game doesn't make it an unviable fit. I'll do a graph of shield blasterboat vs shield acfit and you can see AC's get outclassed in that arena as well. I compare t2 short ammo cause I'm trying to make a fair comparison. If this doesn't fit with your predetermined opinion don't put the blame on me. Don't ask for proof or evidence if you just dismiss it when it doesn't fit your theory, that's what intelligent design people do. I also used hail because it's the ammo I'm using 90% of the time, I switch out to EMP for a shield ship, or PP in the case of amarr tech 2 ships. For everything else it's hail all the way baby. It's also pretty interesting that you think blasters are too broken to be used in game, but it's OK for hail to have so many negative effects on AC's. If you really, really want, I'll make another set of graphs comparing EMP/AM/MF, then a set comparing Barrage/Null/Scorch. The results are much the same no matter which ammo you use Go back and read the post by the way, there is less than 1.5% difference in normalised agility between pest and mega. Are you seriously claiming this is an omgwtf advantage? Pest is about 11% faster than mega, a stunning advantage for sure when both are webbed For the record, I've flown my shielddomi/hype extensively on SiSi in order to establish that the fit is viable for combat. I will come back and continue to say the same things once I'm bbqing things in my domi on TQ. Of course, we both know that even if I get 1000 kills with it that you aren't going to change your tune on this. When presented with facts and evidence you'll find a way to brush it under the rug because you don't feel like fitting your ships that way. Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.04 02:14:00 - [42] Quote: See this right here is your problem. You're explicitly TRYING to turn blasters into ACs. The whole blaster mentality is that they do extremely well at very close ranges, and the whole blaster PROBLEM is that they really don't. Matari ships will STILL outperform them (limiting yourself to nothing but close range t2 ammo does not mean that the others don't come into play) and pulses will outperform both (this being balanced with matari because of higher agility/speed/utility combined with damage type selection and capless guns) We obviously have completely different views of this, imo the problem with blasters is catching your target and applying the dps, not the amount of dps you are doing when you reach it. I rarely see anybody complain that blasters don't do enough dps, as when fitting the same amount of damage mods as a laserboat the blasters easily outdamage them. I'm more than happy to graph conventional ammo's to prove once again that blasters outclass AC's Quote: I've actually flown a shield hyp in the past, wasn't terrible, but I found I missed the 2 heavy neuts of the pest too much (+more range, speed and agility). Shield tank is the standard fit for the brutix, so not sure what you're whining about this box crap for when what you're describing is fairly standard stuff for blasters. I should clarify I'm strictly talking about BS sized ships here, I have no interest in the brutix at all. also lol, me whining? I'm not the one ***ing about how awful my ultrahigh dps weaponry is. Quote: I already ran those numbers, the difference being that in MY comparisons the 2 ships are flying in the same direction (if you're in a geddon and you hit orbit @ 3km, you deserve to lose your ship, assuming the geddon pilot is an idiot doesn't prove anything) Um, OK? Cool story bro. Good method to see how the tracking compares between ships Also how hard is it to manually fly in the opposite direction when you see someone matching trajectory? Assuming the mega pilot is an idiot doesn't prove anything Quote: 1)Minmatar ruled the nano age, stfu if you think this isn't true lolol Yeh, some specific minmatar ruled it, along with curse's, torp grouping ravens, ishtars, deimos, rooks, sacrileges, zealots, harbingers, domis, the list goes on. Nano age was fairly short term thing anyway, lasted what, a year? year and a half? Also iirc the only minnie ships that really ruled during that time was vaga, sleip, and phoon, mebbe huginn in some situations. That wasn't even due to a superior weapon system either, it was due to extreme gtfo ability. How about the many years that AC flat out sucked as a weapon system? ie from the dmg mod stacking nerf all the way until the buff you complain so much about. Quote: 2)Blaster boats tend not to have the speed/agility to properly compete with matari when it comes to shield tanking roles, the ability to disengage is as big an advantage as any amount of dps. haha, this is pretty funny. You have the range and dps to force a minnie ship off the field, in a position where you would otherwise have been toast. I like how you consider this a bad thing. Quote:** 3)Shield AC boats and armor blaster boats are pretty much the standard Yes they are, adapt or die in a cookiecutter. Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.04 02:56:00 - [43] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau I should clarify I'm strictly talking about BS sized ships here, I have no interest in the brutix at all. also lol, me whining? I'm not the one ***ing about how awful my ultrahigh dps weaponry is. If by ultrahigh you mean +~5-10% over lasers then yes, totally what I'd call ultrahigh. Originally by:** Copine Callmeknau Um, OK? Cool story bro. Good method to see how the tracking compares between ships Also how hard is it to manually fly in the opposite direction when you see someone matching trajectory? Assuming the mega pilot is an idiot doesn't prove anything That's just it though, assuming similar agilities on both ships, it is MUCH easier to reduce transversal at any given range than it is to increase it. Think about it for a second, in order to maintain a high transversal, your blaster ship essentially needs to be moving in the opposite direction of the geddon, at reasonably high speed. How long does it take a bs to get up to speed? 10 seconds? more? The geddon turns around and starts moving in the same direction, what do you do? If you keep moving in the same direction, transversal gets severely reduced. If you change the direction you're moving in, you have to slow down, and it is easy to match your movements, transversal is reduced. Alternately you can think of it this way: Assuming 2 pilots with absolutely perfect manual flying skills, one trying to increase transversal and one trying to decrease it, the 2 ships would remain almost perfectly still: Mega starts going left Geddon starts going left mega sees this, starts going right geddon starts going right mega heads left again etc. The end result would be neither ships doing much moving at all, and nearly 0 transversal. (a good way to do this in practice is to focus your camera on your target, swing it in the direction of the other guy, and keep double clicking in line with his ship) Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Nano age was fairly short term thing anyway, lasted what, a year? year and a half? Also iirc the only minnie ships that really ruled during that time was vaga, sleip, and phoon, mebbe huginn in some situations. That wasn't even due to a superior weapon system either, it was due to extreme gtfo ability. GTFO-ability is exactly what makes minmatar so good. The ability to disengage (which matar still have more than any other race) equates to the ability to not lose your ship when facing someone with bigger guns. If gallente had that ability they would be just fine as a race, but being FORCED into web/scram range the vast majority of the time is yet another nail in the gallente coffin. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau How about the many years that AC flat out sucked as a weapon system? ie from the dmg mod stacking nerf all the way until the buff you complain so much about. And how many years have blasters flat out sucked? They've been repeatedly nerfed (as well as drones, AND damps, because ** gallente) over the years while literally every other weapon system has been receiving boosts. Originally by:** Copine Callmeknau haha, this is pretty funny. You have the range and dps to force a minnie ship off the field, in a position where you would otherwise have been toast. I like how you consider this a bad thing. Not really. Hyp might OD a pest on paper at 20 if they're both shield fit, but my money in a 1v1 would be on the pest. Utility highs; just because YOU don't use them doesn't mean they're not useful (also hyp om noms cap) I do however have this to ask of you: why are you so insistent on defending a race that you've already admitted you've never even flown?
Mavnas	Posted - 2011.04.04 05:11:00 - [44] Blasters are totally awesome for EFT warrioring. How else are you supposed to hit 2k+ DPS on a single subcap ship (with no environmental effects)?
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.04 05:53:00 - [45] Originally by: Cambarus If by ultrahigh you mean +~5-10% over lasers then yes, totally what I'd call ultrahigh. No, I'm talking ~1.5k dps for t1 BS. That's 20-25% more than a geddon, in the case of a vindicator you're looking at 1.9kdps or so, 45-50% more than a geddon/nightmare. Regardless of the actual numbers, lets entertain it as 10%. In a game where you put 25d+ skill training for a 2% bonus to dps, or pay well over a bil for a 6% damage implant, 10% is a significant improvement. Quote: <transversal theory> Yep, a very good point. You'd have me stumped if it weren't for the fact that the megathron has a web and the geddon doesn't. Therefore he can just orbit as normal without fear of the geddon gaining enough speed to lower the angular velocity. Quote: GTFO-ability is exactly what makes minmatar so good. The ability to disengage (which matar still have more than any other race) equates to the ability to not lose your ship when facing someone with bigger guns. If gallente had that ability they would be just fine as a race, but being FORCED into web/scram range the vast majority of the time is yet another nail in the gallente coffin. heh, I wouldn't know. I've never flown minmatar ships like that, never owned a vagabond, never flown a dramiel/cynabal/mach in combat, nanophoons are silly. I've always gone for heavy gank ships and flown em like blaster ships. Up close and personal. Hasn't been a problem for me so far, my k:d ratio is pretty good. The idea is if you have enough gank you don't need to escape, and gallente certainly have lots of gank. 99.9% of the time I'm in BC or larger anyway, not much option to gtfo when in one of those. I should mention that I've only looked a BS sized blasters. I had a quick glance at the cruiser ones and they looked really sucky. I haven't flown a frig in years so didn't even bother with those. I'm interested in BS and only BS, and they look absolutely fine. Quote: And how many years have blasters flat out sucked? They've been repeatedly nerfed over the years while literally every other weapon system has been receiving boosts. Well that's a silly question to ask the guy who says they're fine, cause I'm gonna say 0 years ^^ Please outline the nerfs, as far as I can tell blasters are a lot more powerful now then they were 6 yrs ago when I started, of course all the other weapon systems have been boosted harder than blasters have. I think a constant cycle of buff buff buff for each weapon as it becomes the worst is a silly idea, I would much prefer the clear best weapon be nerfed than the worst weapon buffed, this stops things getting out of control. Wouldn't a pulse laser nerf be about the same as a blaster buff? I mean afterall, your #1 complaint is that blasters are outperformed in CQB by pulse lasers. A slight tracking nerf to pulse may lvl the playing field. Quote: Not really. Hyp might OD a pest on paper at 20 if they're both shield fit, but my money in a 1v1 would be on the pest. Utility highs; just because YOU don't use them doesn't mean they're not useful (also hyp om noms cap) I don't use em on shieldcane. I do use em on pest, on the other hand the hype is fitting a cap injector, has more EHP, and can engage the pest with higher dps to a range of 41km. It also suffers less from falloff dmg losses, oh and it tracks better. Just ran it through EFT, and with the heavy neuts running the pest will cap out in 1min 4sec, the hype will cap out in 1min 21 sec. I suppose the pest could drop his invuln for a cap injector, but then he has only half the EHP of the hype. ie around a 40 second survival time. Quote: I do however have this to ask of you: why are you so insistent on defending a race that you've already admitted you've never even flown? 1) Deliberate misrepresentation of facts ****es me off 2) Creating FOTM ships is bad 3) I'm right 4) Boost to blasters would leave AC's well behind blasters and pulse Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.04 06:01:00 - [46] Oh and I ran a full set of graphs, so peruse at your leisure if you really believe that the only reason blasters looked so good on paper before was because I plugged t2 ammo in and used armourpests ^^ The results will surprise you, go ahead and look at them and then tell me how blasters are broken. Armour BS comparison - T2 Short range ammo Armour BS comparison - Faction ammo Armour BS comparison - T2 Long range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Short range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - Faction ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 long range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Short range ammo (and drones) Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - Faction ammo (and drones) Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Long range ammo (and drones) Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Vmir Gallahasen Gallente United Mining And Distribution	Posted - 2011.04.04 06:46:00 - [47] I look forward to reading about your first real experiences using blasters, when your EFT cardhouse comes crashing down. Whether it be getting your shield hype bent over an amarr bs's knee, kited out of your range by a nano ship, neuted to impotence, or just plain 'ol nosehumped by your target such that you can't hit him and he holds you for minutes until his backup shows up from 10 jumps away. We salute you, Mr. I've-Never-Flown-Blaster-Ships-But-They're-Fine-Because-EFT-says-so Guy
Dr Richard Dawkins	Posted - 2011.04.04 07:07:00 - [48] Wasn't sure if Copine was trolling... Quote: Boost to blasters would leave AC's well behind blasters and pulse That ought to settle it for anyone else on the fence.
Kn1v3s 999 Gallente TH3 UnT0uChaBl3S Bang Bang You're Dead	Posted - 2011.04.04 07:57:00 - [49] Edited by: Kn1v3s 999 on 04/04/2011 07:57:53 cause i have put in it and in the ships that acutally use them as first weapon a **load of SP, so now i' m doomed to use them (blasters). That' s why. And btw i crosstrained for lazorz and AC but my char is still focused on Gallente boats so... I' am **ed anyway.
Wolfy2449 Gallente WE CAN HAZ CHEEZBURGER	Posted - 2011.04.04 08:07:00 - [50] Originally by: Kn1v3s 999 Edited by: Kn1v3s 999 on 04/04/2011 07:57:53 cause i have put in it and in the ships that acutally use them as first weapon a **load of SP, so now i' m doomed to use them (blasters). That' s why. And btw i crosstrained for lazorz and AC but my char is still focused on Gallente boats so... I' am **ed anyway. Well even with medium ac/lazer skills you ll do more overall damage than with blasters Signature removed for being not EVE related. Zymurgist

Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.04 08:55:00 - [51] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Oh and I ran a full set of graphs, so peruse at your leisure if you really believe that the only reason blasters looked so good on paper before was because I plugged t2 ammo in and used armourpests ^^ The results will surprise you, go ahead and look at them and then tell me how blasters are broken. Armour BS comparison - T2 Short range ammo Armour BS comparison - Faction ammo Armour BS comparison - T2 Long range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Short range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - Faction ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 long range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Short range ammo (and drones) Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - Faction ammo (and drones) Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Long range ammo (and drones) several things you forgot to say: 1st: major culprit on blasters are actually medium blasters. being medium their range is pretty much bonkers since blaster cruisers can't apply damage far enough and because of their diminute EHP they need to be plated, which means loss of damage + loss of mobility 2nd: shield hype. probably the only better blaster battleship since it doesn't lose mobility, and L blasters kinda compensate with bigger range. vindicator might be a special case, but then again, if you cram a fed navy web on it and overheat the damn thing you have a 18km 90% web, which takes us to... 3rd: blasters were balanced mostly around the 90% webs, so, when CCP, in their great foresight, hit nanos with the sledgehammer, they decided to hit webs with it too, indirectly nerfing blaster tracking by 500%. so what do we end up with: a weapon system that relies on superior damage and the fact that you need mobility to be of use, in theory. what we have in reality is a weapon system that has only a tiny damage advantage over the other weapon systems that can simply operate at better ranges, AND, to make it worse, you need to sacrifice even more mobility to be able to actually survive the approach. thing is, you sacrifice mobility, and you get kited, or you increase mobility and you start to do damage when you're already at armor or deeper, while you still need to pump your cap-intensive guns and your cap-intensive mwd to pierce through the target's shields. of course that if you have a vindicator, all you need is a fed navy web, mobility be damned, I have a 18km 90% web. oh and btw, torp ravens outdamage blasterthron/blasterhype. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
baltec1	Posted - 2011.04.04 08:58:00 - [52] Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: baltec1 And how exaclty can I do that? I have my experience with blasters in game which is not exactly wasy to put up here. As far as I see it, large blaster work well, small blasters too while med could do with a bit more tracking and be made easyer to fit onto cruiser hulls. Show us some engagements where your blasters did provably well. Saying that blasters are fine because your experience with them says is it is like an eft warrier saying a velator ODs a bhaalgorn because their experience as an eft warrior says so. Thats where your wrong. An EFT warrior will simply look at numbers and make an opinion without trying it in game while I have flown them in game and got real experience in using them. Long ago I learned that the only use for EFT is to see if you can fit a ship and get a rough idea of what it can do. The only real way to test a ship is to get out and use it and not just once or twice but for months. As for engagements, one that comes to mind is when in venal and attacking several carriers my hyperion was very effective at killing fighters orbiting me and I forced several BS to dock and just about two vollied a rapier. When I took the hype roaming I did not have issues with applying my damage or keeping range. I currently have a mega which I am testing but unfortunatly I have not had the time to do much of anything.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2011.04.04 09:25:00 - [53] Originally by: Grimpak 3rd: blasters were balanced mostly around the 90% webs, so, when CCP, in their great foresight, hit nanos with the sledgehammer, they decided to hit webs with it too, indirectly nerfing blaster tracking by 500%. It is actually closer to a 2000% tracking nerf if you figure in sig bloom to. Also a massive utility nerf for point blank combat for preventing you to hold stuff in place after you cached them and most important control the range/transversal of them. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous IMPERIAL LEGI0N	Posted - 2011.04.04 10:15:00 - [54] Originally by: Rouge Drone Originally by: Wolfy2449 Edited by: Wolfy2449 on 03/04/2011 04:03:47 Originally by: Lonesome Joe Been wondering the same thing. Especially frigates, you're not hitting anything until you are about 1.5k from target. By then you already took damage, you have to maintain a very strict orbit or else you hit nothing and you're deep into web, scram and nuet territory. Oh and they're sucking your cap dry too. Exactly that!! 2 ships both have 100hp blastership has 12,5 dps Autocannon has 10 dps They start at 10 yards away. blastership needs to close the ship before he fires, until that time he took 40 damage and has only 60 hp left 6 seconds before the autocannon kills him and he needs 8 seconds to kill the autocannon ships which of course doesnt have I really, cant find a reason why someone would use blasters. Unless eve was a close combat game there is no point at all. CCP PLZ EFFING FIX!!!! Tranquility pvp does not consist of a series of pre-arranged 1v1s where everyone starts at the same distance and begins locking at the same time. Counterpoint: a very large fraction of TQ PvP happens on gates where exactly this happens. 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.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2011.04.04 10:38:00 - [55] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Rouge Drone Tranquility pvp does not consist of a series of pre-arranged 1v1s where everyone starts at the same distance and begins locking at the same time. Counterpoint: a very large fraction of TQ PvP happens on gates where exactly this happens. Counterpoint: You can't catch ** with 9km scram range, you can't hold or hit them with lol 60% webs and my pest ganks stuff better than my mega in this scenarios, it is also a lot better against stuff that burns away from the gate instead back to it. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by:** Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Wacktopia Dark Side Of The Womb	Posted - 2011.04.04 11:31:00 - [56] Edited by: Wacktopia on 04/04/2011 11:35:51 Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Oh and I ran a full set of graphs, so peruse at your leisure if you really believe that the only reason blasters looked so good on paper before was because I plugged t2 ammo in and used armourpests ^^ The results will surprise you, go ahead and look at them and then tell me how blasters are broken. Armour BS comparison - T2 Short range ammo Armour BS comparison - Faction ammo Armour BS comparison - T2 Long range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Short range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - Faction ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 long range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Short range ammo (and drones) Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - Faction ammo (and drones) Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Long range ammo (and drones) 1) I'm gonna need to see the fits for these 2) You have chosen only ONE specific example that happens to fit your argument (large guns) 3) This is all on paper and does not take into account real game scenarios They are nice graphs but really you are just showing a letter-box bias to support your argument rather than a full picture. Most people are griping about the performance of medium blasters and curiser/bc because this is where the difference in speed, agility and being on or out of web/scram range will affect you more.
Fer DeLance	Posted - 2011.04.04 11:50:00 - [57] There is something wrong with the Gallente and it can be seen by the easy others attack Gallente ships when they get the chance. If a Gallente ship is railgun fitted, it's party time. If it's blaster fitted just stay out of web, and you will be fine... Fighting in a Gallente ship can become very very complicated. Too many parameters to be taken into account, and usually a "minus" point to start compared to almost every possible opponent.
Rouge Drone	Posted - 2011.04.04 12:15:00 - [58] Edited by: Rouge Drone on 04/04/2011 12:24:24 Originally by: Wacktopia 1) I'm gonna need to see the fits for these 2) You have chosen only ONE specific example that happens to fit your argument (large guns) 3) This is all on paper and does not take into account real game scenarios They are nice graphs but really you are just showing a letter-box bias to support your argument rather than a full picture. Most people are griping about the performance of medium blasters and curiser/bc because this is where the difference in speed, agility and being on or out of web/scram range will affect you more. His graphs show raw data across a variety of statistics without bias. In real game scenarios statistics are much less important because it's more about pilot skill and the lay of the engagement. Blasters simply aren't as bad as you seem to think they look in eft. You know what you percieve is wrong with them so instead of whining why don't you try altering your fitting and the way your playing to counter that instead of trying to whine them into having the range of pulse and the tracking of autocannons? Can't get it into range? Then make sure the fight starts in range. Can't track? Stop orbiting and get a damn tackler.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2011.04.04 12:29:00 - [59] Originally by: Rouge Drone In the real game if you're having trouble getting into range and staying there with blasters it's probably because you're a bad player who is fitting or using your ship incorrectly. Bad optimal and tracking are your disadvantages to work around as a gallente pilot and if you can't even do that you have no business whining about the balance of the race. I'm yet to see anyone take serious issue with blasters who wasn't more eft than skill. They simply aren't that bad in game as you seem to think they look on paper. So you basically coming to the forums with a faceless alt and telling that blaster pilots are just incompetent? Bravo sir, you are my hero. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Trust'me im'honest	Posted - 2011.04.04 12:32:00 - [60] Originally by: baltec1 Originally by: Cambarus Originally by: baltec1 And how exaclty can I do that? I have my experience with blasters in game which is not exactly wasy to put up here. As far as I see it, large blaster work well, small blasters too while med could do with a bit more tracking and be made easyer to fit onto cruiser hulls. Show us some engagements where your blasters did provably well. Saying that blasters are fine because your experience with them says is it is like an eft warrier saying a velator ODs a bhaalgorn because their experience as an eft warrior says so. Thats where your wrong. An EFT warrior will simply look at numbers and make an opinion without trying it in game while I have flown them in game and got real experience in using them. Long ago I learned that the only use for EFT is to see if you can fit a ship and get a rough idea of what it can do. The only real way to test a ship is to get out and use it and not just once or twice but for months. As for engagements, one that comes to mind is when in venal and attacking several carriers my hyperion was very effective at killing fighters orbiting me and I forced several BS to dock and just about two vollied a rapier. When I took the hype roaming I did not have issues with applying my damage or keeping range. I currently have a mega which I am testing but unfortunatly I have not had the time to do much of anything. Wish my geddon could do that... hyuk hyuk hyuk!

Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.04 13:02:00 - [61] Originally by: Rouge Drone Can't get it into range? Then make sure the fight starts in range. there's a better solution for that: get a pulse geddon or a pulse apoc. there, range problems solved. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
knobber Jobbler Executive Intervention Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2011.04.04 13:40:00 - [62] My beef with blasters is getting in close enough in the first instance. People don't hang around! When faced with that choice I'd rather take a projectile boat out and get some ability to damage over a range. Blasters do seem like you need to compromise the rest of the ship to fit them and keep them running. The MWD to get onto the target and then firing means having a cargo bay full of cap boosters. Rails...different story. Just not a fan of those. The cap usage and charge usage and the bad tracking just makes me want to use anything else. Still, I have seen some awesome videos of people in vindicators solo taking on many opponents at once. Would be good if some of the people here advocating BS blaster boats could post small gang and solo mega and hype fits...rail fits too.
Wacktopia Dark Side Of The Womb	Posted - 2011.04.04 15:03:00 - [63] Originally by: Rouge Drone Edited by: Rouge Drone on 04/04/2011 12:27:19 Originally by: Wacktopia 1) I'm gonna need to see the fits for these 2) You have chosen only ONE specific example that happens to fit your argument (large guns) 3) This is all on paper and does not take into account real game scenarios They are nice graphs but really you are just showing a letter-box bias to support your argument rather than a full picture. Most people are griping about the performance of medium blasters and curiser/bc because this is where the difference in speed, agility and being on or out of web/scram range will affect you more. His graphs show raw data across a variety of statistics without bias. In real game scenarios statistics are much less important because it's more about pilot skill and the lay of the engagement. Blasters simply aren't as unusable as you seem to think they look in eft. You've identified what you perceive is wrong with them so instead of whining why don't you try altering your fitting and the way your playing to counter that instead of trying to whine them into having the range of pulse and the tracking of autocannons? Can't get it into range? Then make sure the fight starts in range. Can't track? Fit tracking mods, stop orbiting or get a damn tackler. It's not rocket science and you guys would know these things if you had any experience worth a damn to back up your arguments. I cannot work out if this is a troll or what? They are biased. They only show battleship guns, which have a longer range and therefore do not suffer the normal lol-range that medium blasters do. Furthermore, battleships are slow beasts then do not need to move as much as a medium hull ship would and therefore the issue is further-hidden in his example. Cruiser and BC hulls suffer when using blasters because their effective range is deep within web/scram. This is a problem because (in short) your ability to dictate range at this point is extremely difficult unless you are 1:1 and have more/stronger webs. There is an added pain of little or no gtfo but there are countless posts explaining this that I shall not repeat in detail. Originally by: Rouge Drone In real game scenarios statistics are much less important because it's more about pilot skill and the lay of the engagement. Blasters simply aren't as unusable as you seem to think they look in eft. WHAT? Real game scenarios are the problem. EFT stats mean NOTHING compared to real-game scenarios. It cannot believe you wrote that. You're trolling? Originally by: Rouge Drone You've identified what you perceive is wrong with them so instead of whining why don't you try altering your fitting I normally fly Winmattar/DRAEK now. This is not a "baw buff mah ships" post. Fly Myrm sometimes too... with A/C ofc. Ill come up with some medium graphs if I have time.
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.04 15:32:00 - [64] Originally by: Wacktopia 1) I'm gonna need to see the fits for these 2) You have chosen only ONE specific example that happens to fit your argument (large guns) 3) This is all on paper and does not take into account real game scenarios They are nice graphs but really you are just showing a letter-box bias to support your argument rather than a full picture. Most people are griping about the performance of medium blasters and curiser/bc because this is where the difference in speed, agility and being on or out of web/scram range will affect you more. There is absolutely no way I'm handing out fits that I've been fine tweaking over hours of testing. I put the effort in to make blasters work, how abut you do the same? I've already hinted at how I fit earlier in this thread. I chose large blasters for 3 reasons 1) They're the ones I'm actually skilling for 2) I don't fly anything smaller than a BC 3) Medium blasters are pretty terrible. The example for large blasters is here to prove that a blanket buff to all blasters would totally unbalance the game. Medium blasters definitely need a fix, and maybe frigate size as well (haven't even looked at frigs) Bah, it does take into account real game scenarios. In fact it's been deliberately weighted against the blaster ships, the target has a high natural kinetic resist, and the transversal numbers are much much higher than in the real world. 99% of the time you are engaging a target <20km away, and he's burning directly towards you because you're camping a gate and he's trying to get back through, Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate	Posted - 2011.04.04 16:41:00 - [65] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau No, I'm talking ~1.5k dps for t1 BS. That's 20-25% more than a geddon, Geddon puts out 1172 DPS using faction ammo and 3 damage mods, mega puts out 1250. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau lets entertain it as 10%. In a game where you put 25d+ skill training for a 2% bonus to dps, or pay well over a bil for a 6% damage implant, 10% is a significant improvement. So the ~300% bonus to range that amarr get would be considered OP then yes? (and that's not even counting scorch) Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Yep, a very good point. You'd have me stumped if it weren't for the fact that the megathron has a web and the geddon doesn't. When I ran the numbers I actually factored in the web. There is a roughly 1km area in which the mega gets to keep his tracking advantage (IIRC it was at 2.5-3.5km) and given the absurd time it takes to move a BS, it wouldn't take much for the geddon to screw that up for the mega. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau heh, I wouldn't know. I've never flown minmatar ships like that, never owned a vagabond, never flown a dramiel/cynabal/mach in combat, nanophoons are silly. I've always gone for heavy gank ships and flown em like blaster ships. Up close and personal. Hasn't been a problem for me so far, my k:d ratio is pretty good. Then you have been absurdly lucky, or the people you fight are really, really stupid. You're intentionally ignoring the things that make minmatar great, then claiming that they would be underpowered if blasters got a buff, when the reality is just that YOU happen to want to fly AC boats like they're blaster boats (or the other way around, I'm not even sure with you anymore tbh). Yes, blaster boats will be better than ACs at being DPS ships. Matari make up for this the same way they always have: by being faster, more agile and more versitile. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Please outline the nerfs, as far as I can tell blasters are a lot more powerful now then they were 6 yrs ago when I started, of course all the other weapon systems have been boosted harder than blasters have. The big blaster-killers were the big HP buffs, the introduction of rigs (and how poorly damage rigs compare to trimarks/extenders), and the changes to scrams/webs with the nano nerf. Blasters needed their 90%webs to work well, and doubling-tripling the EHP of every ship in the game severely reduced the importance of raw gank at the expense of tank. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Wouldn't a pulse laser nerf be about the same as a blaster buff? It would have, before the AC/arty buff. Revert those, THEN talk about nerfing pulses to make everything balanced. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Just ran it through EFT, and with the heavy neuts running the pest will cap out in 1min 4sec, the hype will cap out in 1min 21 sec. I suppose the pest could drop his invuln for a cap injector, but then he has only half the EHP of the hype. ie around a 40 second survival time. ...41km? half the ehp? really? How the hell are you fitting your ships? Originally by: Copine Callmeknau 2) Creating FOTM ships is bad 4) Boost to blasters would leave AC's well behind blasters and pulse Currently the fotm ships are all amarr/minmatar, with the drake being thrown in for caldari. If fotm is so bad why are you advocating pushing the metagame to further improve ACs? As for 4, I'm going to say it again: fly the ships you're so obsessed with, THEN come back and tell us how great they are.
baltec1	Posted - 2011.04.04 17:02:00 - [66] Edited by: baltec1 on 04/04/2011 17:03:59 Originally by: Cambarus As for 4, I'm going to say it again: fly the ships you're so obsessed with, THEN come back and tell us how great they are. Although we dissagree with blasters I have to say this to both sides. Originally by: Grimpak there's a better solution for that: get a pulse geddon or a pulse apoc. there, range problems solved. geddons cant roam very well and while I have an idea for a nano apoc Im banned from trying
Apollo Gabriel Brotherhood Of Fallen Angels Etherium Cartel	Posted - 2011.04.04 17:08:00 - [67] Originally by: The Djego Reminds me at this: Blasters are awesome wonderful!! *** Signature may appear without warning! *** Please do not feed the trolls, it builds dependency.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2011.04.04 17:15:00 - [68] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Oh and I ran a full set of graphs, so peruse at your leisure if you really believe that the only reason blasters looked so good on paper before was because I plugged t2 ammo in and used armourpests ^^ The results will surprise you, go ahead and look at them and then tell me how blasters are broken. Armour BS comparison - T2 Short range ammo Armour BS comparison - Faction ammo Armour BS comparison - T2 Long range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Short range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - Faction ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 long range ammo Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Short range ammo (and drones) Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - Faction ammo (and drones) Shield BS comparison (and geddon) - T2 Long range ammo (and drones) I'm not happy with this methodology. You compare ammo types such as Null vs. Scorch, but this isn't sensible because they have such wildly different optimals. It would be better to state a specific engagement range, such as 5 km or 20 km, then produce a comparison using the sensible ammo choice for that range. Your use of maximum, unwebbed orbit speeds is deeply unrealistic. Since BS are gang ships, it's more reasonable to assume a good two webs on the target, and it takes a long time for a BS to settle into a proper orbit. I'm also having difficulty matching your fits and getting the right raw DPS figures. And your seem to have chosen an unrealistic resist profile that is suitable only for duels. I strongly suspect that if you plug in a sensible transversal, the Geddon will outdamage the Megathron beyond something pathetic like 3-4 km.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.04 17:20:00 - [69] Originally by: baltec1 geddons cant roam very well and while I have an idea for a nano apoc Im banned from trying apocs with pulse + scorch can dish out like 70-90km ranges with ease. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
baltec1	Posted - 2011.04.04 17:45:00 - [70] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: baltec1 geddons cant roam very well and while I have an idea for a nano apoc Im banned from trying apocs with pulse + scorch can dish out like 70-90km ranges with ease. anything up to 100km is game for an apoc. Its the getting it to roam part thats iffy. I have a fit but its 50/50, It could be great but it could also be epicly fail

Trust'me im'honest	Posted - 2011.04.04 17:52:00 - [71] Originally by: baltec1 Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: baltec1 geddons cant roam very well and while I have an idea for a nano apoc Im banned from trying apocs with pulse + scorch can dish out like 70-90km ranges with ease. anything up to 100km is game for an apoc. Its the getting it to roam part thats iffy. I have a fit but its 50/50, It could be great but it could also be epicly fail
Wacktopia Dark Side Of The Womb	Posted - 2011.04.04 19:08:00 - [72] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Originally by: Wacktopia 1) I'm gonna need to see the fits for these 2) You have chosen only ONE specific example that happens to fit your argument (large guns) 3) This is all on paper and does not take into account real game scenarios They are nice graphs but really you are just showing a letter-box bias to support your argument rather than a full picture. Most people are griping about the performance of medium blasters and curiser/bc because this is where the difference in speed, agility and being on or out of web/scram range will affect you more. There is absolutely no way I'm handing out fits that I've been fine tweaking over hours of testing. I put the effort in to make blasters work, how abut you do the same? I've already hinted at how I fit earlier in this thread. I chose large blasters for 3 reasons 1) They're the ones I'm actually skilling for 2) I don't fly anything smaller than a BC 3) Medium blasters are pretty terrible. The example for large blasters is here to prove that a blanket buff to all blasters would totally unbalance the game. Medium blasters definitely need a fix, and maybe frigate size as well (haven't even looked at frigs) Bah, it does take into account real game scenarios. In fact it's been deliberately weighted against the blaster ships, the target has a high natural kinetic resist, and the transversal numbers are much much higher than in the real world. 99% of the time you are engaging a target <20km away, and he's burning directly towards you because you're camping a gate and he's trying to get back through, Its great you have some great fits and are skilling for large guns but it does not add much to the discussion if we cannot see fits to compare all the factors. Think you said it too but yeah medium blasters seem to express the worst comparable performance on the ships used.
Sigras	Posted - 2011.04.04 19:30:00 - [73] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau I chose large blasters for 3 reasons 1) They're the ones I'm actually skilling for 2) I don't fly anything smaller than a BC 3) Medium blasters are pretty terrible. The example for large blasters is here to prove that a blanket buff to all blasters would totally unbalance the game. Medium blasters definitely need a fix, and maybe frigate size as well (haven't even looked at frigs) Frigates are really the only blasters that work IMHO, they dont usually have tracking issues, or problems getting into range, they just pwn, which is why the blaster taranis is aweseome. Originally by: Copine Callmeknau 99% of the time you are engaging a target <20km away, and he's burning directly towards you because you're camping a gate and he's trying to get back through, You may have just lost all your credibility bro, come to the 0.0 world of nano drake, nano hurricane, amror bro fist zealot, nano vagabond, and then we'll talk. Additionally, in the scenario you mentioned, a pulse geddon is still better because you have 2 options: 1. The target lands 15 km away from us, and we're both sitting on the gate you have null loaded and I have conflag; you do (negating drones because we both have 5 unbonused heavys) 695 DPS until he closes to 11km at which time you do 724 DPS until he gets to 2.5 km and jumps the gate I do a solid 968 DPS the whole time. 2. The target lands 15 km away from us, and we're both sitting on the gate you have void loaded and I still have conflag; you do a pathetic 213 DPS at that range escalating to our break even point at 8.2 km where we both do 968 DPS and you peak at 1030 DPS @ 6.68 km until he hits the gate at 2.5 km I do a solid 968 DPS the whole time. Does the 6% extra damage you do between 6.68 and 2.5 km make up for the fact that you may as well be throwing rocks at him from 15-10km?
Ryan Starwing Gallente Cryptonym Sleepers Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.04.04 20:41:00 - [74] Cross trained to mini/amarr and alot happier. Also real reason to train gallente ship skills is so you can fly the dram/cyn/mach.
Tony SoXai	Posted - 2011.04.04 20:48:00 - [75] Battlecruiser and down Gallente >> all.
Gabriel Karade Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.04.04 22:03:00 - [76] Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Because I get 1.5k dps, better tracking than any other gun, and 19km range with void. l2fit nubs er, no you don't. Unless you are counting ~45% peak damage as 'effective'... -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Gabriel Karade Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.04.04 22:14:00 - [77] Originally by: The Djego Reminds me at this: Blasters are awesome Ha, yeah been a while since I last watched that. -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Terianna Eri Senex Legio Get Off My Lawn	Posted - 2011.04.04 23:32:00 - [78] Originally by: Sigras Frigates are really the only blasters that work IMHO, they dont usually have tracking issues, or problems getting into range, they just pwn, which is why the blaster taranis is aweseome. Funnily enough, frigate railguns work pretty well too, while being completely awful at the cruiser+level ________________ Originally by: CCP Incognito PS the "time to P*nis" is the shortest time recorded in human history. :)
Swynet	Posted - 2011.04.05 11:49:00 - [79] Edited by: Swynet on 05/04/2011 11:50:15 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Because I get 1.5k dps, better tracking than any other gun, and 19km range with void. l2fit nubs er, no you don't. Unless you are counting ~45% peak damage as 'effective'... Not only he doesn't get those numbers in game in normal fights, but the chance that he can ever make a perfect shot 100% dmg or even a wrecking one is close to 0. But yeah I can deal great numbers when orbiting a structure AB on and overheating... It's like Loto, 100% of the winners will tell you it's easy. ________________________________________________ Originally by: Goose99 In EVE, PVE can happen anywhere, anytime. Whenever you undock, you subject yourself to involuntary PVE.
Straight Edged	Posted - 2011.04.05 12:58:00 - [80] Blasters is fine. Its damage is one of the best up to 10-11km compared to any ships (large blasters). Station camp = you can easily hug at 0km Gate camp = everything appears at 15km, and 0 velocity. That means, the more agile and short ranged gallente boats could apply most dps in this situation. Any dps beyond 20km is pointless. because everything is between 0-15km. Blaster has no role? 99% of pvp happens at gate and stations.

Clementina The Scope	Posted - 2011.04.05 14:57:00 - [81] I fly Gallente and Caldari up to battlecruisers, and Caldari Battleships. Blasters are broken at the Battlecruiser level. People fly Autocannon Myrmidons, and the Autocannon Myrmidon is more rational than the blaster or rail Myrmidon. The Brutix just sucks and actually is shield tanked in reality. I've never seen a New School Ferox in space. Everyone docked their Feroxes when they were changed into railboats a long time ago and the Drake was introduced. At the Cruiser level, blasters could use some help. The ranges that cruiser blasters have are outclassed by similar laser and projectile based weapons systems. Also the ranges that they are able to engage at do not occur as much in the current game. Targets optimistically are found sitting within 10km of the vehicle unless you are camping a station undock or perhaps the end of an acceleration gate. Furthermore because warp scramblers turn off microwarpdrives a ship may not be able to get less than 6km away from its target. Cruisers make up for these challenges because they are still somewhat fast. However a boost to blaster range would help nevertheless blaster boats a lot, and you would see more of them in PvP. If Antimatter on a thorax can have an optimal at 7.5km, the problems would be solved. I've never flown a battleship which fitted blasters. But from looking at the ships, I'm sure that blasters need to have their ranges boosted also, I was going to say antimatter on a Megathon should have an optimal at 10km. That could be just right, if it manages to be overpowered, maybe some falloff can be taken away.
Sutskop PILSGESCHWADER Monkey Circus	Posted - 2011.04.05 16:35:00 - [82] Originally by: Frau Klaps The main reason people prefer to use Minmatar is for an increased ability to GTFO if needed. And you can hit basically anything, anywhere, having unique possibilities due to ammo options. And utility hi slots (neuts are the new webs).
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2011.04.05 16:46:00 - [83] Originally by: Clementina But from looking at the ships, I'm sure that blasters need to have their ranges boosted also, I was going to say antimatter on a Megathon should have an optimal at 10km. That could be just right, if it manages to be overpowered, maybe some falloff can be taken away. A solution that turns blasters into pulse lasers isn't much of a solution, really. The answer can't lie in range, it must lie in applied damage at blaster optimal - suggesting some combination of increased blaster tracking/DPS, or decreased AC/Pulse tracking/DPS.
Jacob Stov	Posted - 2011.04.05 22:37:00 - [84] Originally by: Gypsio III A solution that turns blasters into pulse lasers isn't much of a solution, really. The answer can't lie in range, it must lie in applied damage at blaster optimal - suggesting some combination of increased blaster tracking/DPS, or decreased AC/Pulse tracking/DPS. The damage solution is B.S. in my opinion. Mega already wins hands down within it's optimal range. Yeah, Gheddon yada yada, just try it. Issue is it's non-performance at longer range. Can ac or laser ships still fire and do damage at webranges ? How perform hybrid platforms compared to laser/ac boats at medium ranges ? Answer those two questions and it is absolutely clear why many people don't like blaster platforms. Just buffing damage doesn't change anything. Buffing blasters for situations they already perform quite well within while completely ignoring the frustrating side of blaster pvp makes it even more boring. Maybe some people are happy with creating favourable situations as the dominant part of pvp. I, for my part, prefer ships that allow me to turn a fight, with proper flying. A flat damagebuff creates only black and white. Not a bit of grey, that makes combat interesting.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.05 23:00:00 - [85] Originally by: Clementina Everyone docked their Feroxes when they were changed into railboats a long time ago and the Drake was introduced. ferox was always a railboat with optimal range + shield % bonus combo. This hasn't change since it was introduced (slot layout too). it's just that it performed better fitting missile launchers instead rails. also, on reguard to the rest of your post: It would probably be better to do a huge boost to damage (no less than 20%) with a small increase to tracking (no less than 5%), even if they had to nerf range, making blasters pretty much death inside scram range, and in a decisive way, and not in a marginally better way. Granted this should be done in a per-size basis, since, as stated, frigate-sized blaster platforms don't really suffer that much in the agility and speed department. of course this is only acceptable if they tweak either local tank and/or passive EHP setups to actually not make your ship into an unmovable brick that can't chase anything for it's life even if we set their ass on fire. blasters being point blank death dispensers and not washed out versions of either pulses or AC's. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Lost Greybeard	Posted - 2011.04.05 23:46:00 - [86] To kill drones while tackling. Nothing beats a good set o' blasters for drone-whacking. --- If you outlaw tautologies, only outlaws will have tautologies. ~Anonymous
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2011.04.06 08:13:00 - [87] Originally by: Jacob Stov Maybe some people are happy with creating favourable situations as the dominant part of pvp. I, for my part, prefer ships that allow me to turn a fight, with proper flying. A flat damagebuff creates only black and white. Not a bit of grey, that makes combat interesting. I know what you mean. My big worry is that a blaster damage/tracking buff won't actually fix blasters because Pulse and ACs will still be almost as good as blasters at blasters' optimal, while also having vastly superior DPS at range. This can be avoided if you make the blaster damage buff sufficiently big, but that just leads to the black/white problem that you described. So I can't help but think that the solution involves considerable reductions in Pulse/AC tracking, to give blasters a greater advantage close up, but one that can still be negated by controlling transversal.
baltec1	Posted - 2011.04.06 09:18:00 - [88] Originally by: Clementina I've never seen a New School Ferox in space. Everyone docked their Feroxes when they were changed into railboats a long time ago and the Drake was introduced. Oh I have seen a few now and again. Most are horrible but you do get the odd gem which will go out and **** everything in its path like a tornado made out of acid and razor blades.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.04.06 11:39:00 - [89] Originally by: Jacob Stov Originally by: Gypsio III A solution that turns blasters into pulse lasers isn't much of a solution, really. The answer can't lie in range, it must lie in applied damage at blaster optimal - suggesting some combination of increased blaster tracking/DPS, or decreased AC/Pulse tracking/DPS. The damage solution is B.S. in my opinion. Mega already wins hands down within it's optimal range. Yeah, Gheddon yada yada, just try it. Issue is it's non-performance at longer range. Can ac or laser ships still fire and do damage at webranges ? How perform hybrid platforms compared to laser/ac boats at medium ranges ? Answer those two questions and it is absolutely clear why many people don't like blaster platforms. Just buffing damage doesn't change anything. Buffing blasters for situations they already perform quite well within while completely ignoring the frustrating side of blaster pvp makes it even more boring. Maybe some people are happy with creating favourable situations as the dominant part of pvp. I, for my part, prefer ships that allow me to turn a fight, with proper flying. A flat damagebuff creates only black and white. Not a bit of grey, that makes combat interesting. the reason why of a damage buff to blasters it's because a blaster ship sacrifices pretty much everything, from range to survivability to deal an extra 5% damage over pulses (the next most damaging weapon). they also get outdamaged by torps btw, which have a range of nearly 30km with skills. ok yes maybe not a blanket damage buff to all sizes (small blasters really don't need any change), and using a case-by-case approach, but the fact is, blasters don't do enough damage for the drawbacks they have. Making them into a washed out version of either AC's or pulses is lack of imagination. However, a simple damage boost isn't really the way to fix it. taking a broader view, one must consider too the penalties that a blaster ship must take when trying to achieve survivability, this is the main reason why the hyperion works somehow but only if you passive shield tank it, because it removes the problem that comes from fitting armor rigs and plates that slows them to a crawl and makes work twice as hard to reach anything into optimal to apply the 5% more damaging blasters while you're taking the full brunt of pulses or being kited by AC ships. Vindicator kinda fixes this by giving a huuuuge damage bonus to hybrids while throwing in a 90% web to the fray. so yes, a fix to blasters needs to be pretty much two-pronged: at ship level (or module level), working out the synergy on armor vs. shield where the mass increase/speed decrease are much more penalizing than signature increase on respective ships (point in case, shield blaster hype > armor hype), together with a review on active tanks vs passive tanks so that active tanks can have a more general usage than today (or maybe rework the active tank bonuses). some people suggested an interesting change to rigs. removal of penalties and decrease of the bonuses they provide, coupled with a change to the skills themselves that increase the bonus of the rigs (IE, trimark for example, gives a 7.5%, and armor rigging skill increases the bonus all the way to 15% at lvl 5), or re-shuffle the penalties of armor rigs somewhat (it is understandable why trimarks cut speed, but the repping rigs? or the resist rigs somewhat?) and the other change is directed to blasters themselves with the damage and (small) tracking increase, balanced by a optimal+falloff cut if needed. it is a very extreme way to change ways, but it's better than nothing. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Swynet	Posted - 2011.04.06 12:15:00 - [90] Edited by: Swynet on 06/04/2011 12:25:12 Quote: ...so yes, a fix to blasters needs to be pretty much two-pronged: at ship level (or module level), working out the synergy on armor vs. shield where the mass increase/speed decrease are much more penalizing than signature increase on respective ships (point in case, shield blaster hype > armor hype), together with a review on active tanks vs passive tanks so that active tanks can have a more general usage than today (or maybe rework the active tank bonuses). some people suggested an interesting change to rigs. removal of penalties and decrease of the bonuses they provide, coupled with a change to the skills themselves that increase the bonus of the rigs (IE, trimark for example, gives a 7.5%, and armor rigging skill increases the bonus all the way to 15% at lvl 5), or re-shuffle the penalties of armor rigs somewhat (it is understandable why trimarks cut speed, but the repping rigs? or the resist rigs somewhat?) I see it like this: Useless/situational -any dps dealing omgftom 15000dps once per 100shots and dying like a rat to everything and his mother knowing how blasters work and keep it at the good range, witch is easy because those are the slowest ships with short engagement distance. General use/situation ability to survive - any dps dealing 750dps 45/65% of 100shots and be able to tank better because of it's mobility and dmg distance/application/type PVP it's not a matter of shooting once per week at 500billions omgpown, it's matter of dealing good dmg every time in any situation at every circumstances with the good dmg type, and in this matter blasters suck. You guys can come here saying blasters are fotm because you know a guy that know another guy that saw a video from 1500 before Christ or because he fly in a 20/30men fleet with logis etc etc.. How many of you who really use hybrid platforms every day, use blasters or used blasters over 50% time playing and are NOT in that small, very small window where you have several tacklers/bubble on your target slow down to 5% of it's speed that you are flying a buffer ship with logis behind you remoting your stuff and transferring you power enough to make your overpriced and mwd'd ship work perfectly? -how many? It's a matter of general interest and it's not because a couple of nerds are in the perfect situation 10% of their time playing and are happy that every thing is ok, so yes blasters and platforms using them really need a very close look and get some love. Edit: we can always argue what's going wrong with people not knowing/eft warriors/dreamers/trolls but everything has already bean said, CCP does and will not do anything but change turrets animation you/I/we better spend our time cross training. This kind of thread, I really hope, opens newbies eyes enough so they don't waste a single second training for that ** stuff that are blasters/rails and Gallente sub-caps. Learn them to fly useful, learn them to have fun right now: Minmatar ________________________________________________ Originally by:** Goose99 In EVE, PVE can happen anywhere, anytime. Whenever you undock, you subject yourself to involuntary PVE.

Vheri Hareka	Posted - 2011.04.06 17:41:00 - [91] Originally by: Patient 2428190 Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Because I get 1.5k dps, better tracking than any other gun, and 19km range with void. for a megathron he has a point. the mega with large neutrons and using null/void charges has better tracking than megapulses with t1/navy ammo (whilst also fitting a tracking computer/tracking script script!) if you use t1 blaster ammo you will have better tracking than even autocannons with say depleted uranium. just don't sit at 0km. blasters are actually quite powerful (on the mega). use a web to keep the target at range and melt.
Ebrey mark2	Posted - 2011.04.07 06:57:00 - [92] Just remove hybrids. Give Gallente Projectiles and Caldari Lazors. I¦d rather have bonused autocannons on any Gallente hull except the Taranis, but I could live with that.
Wolfy2449 Gallente WE CAN HAZ CHEEZBURGER	Posted - 2011.04.07 07:32:00 - [93] Isnt armor tank another weakness for blasters?? most gallente shisp use armor tank to be effective, that take all the low slots where a hurricane can just use shield tank and use 3x gyrostabalizers and 2 tracking enchancers to do ridiculous dps since msot range modules give 30% failoff... Plus blasterships have very few mid slots+plus u have to have an afterburner/mwd and other things making the tracking computer even more rare Signature removed for being not EVE related. Zymurgist
Jerick Ludhowe Tri-gun	Posted - 2011.04.07 11:34:00 - [94] Too many clowns saying a dmg buff is the solution... Issue has to do with relative fitting requirements, active rep rig draw backs and poorly designed ammo types. Fix these three issues and I think you will say a large swing in favor of Gallente close range pvp.
Ste Weiss modro R.A.G.E	Posted - 2011.04.07 13:43:00 - [95] It's not that difficult to understand the ins and outs of the turret types and their usefulness'. Hybrids obviously lack range compared to any other turret. However they have awesome potential. Say your in a Mega and you land on another BS but you have neutron cannons / scram / web? You will kill it no matter what it is. Blasters do have the most DPS in game. BUT that requires you landing directly on top of it or at least within scram and web range, and they don't help cap, so you do need to cap boost whilst maintaining a tank. Rails are most likely the worse dps in game, unless you are working with a ship bonus to hybrid dps...the harpy for instance is great at sniping. Rails are also the general rule of thumb for large scale combat with fleet fights as they easier to change distance etc, but even long range they lack dps. Maybe CCP should do something to hybrid ammo if they refuse to do anything to hybrid's themselves. If you fly gallente you dont need to just stick with hyrbids. Myrmidons work well with autocannons, producing a better tank as well cause they don't require cap. If your ship is a drone boat primarily, means you can actually ignore the bonus to hybrids, generally drone boats are fitted with as much tank as you can. I.E the ishtar. Blasters are good for solo work, ranis' solo wise, are great blasterboats, plus with the 2 drones u can pull away to rep if need be whilst maintaining damage. Ste
Ste Weiss modro R.A.G.E	Posted - 2011.04.07 13:50:00 - [96] Originally by: Wolfy2449 Isnt armor tank another weakness for blasters?? most gallente shisp use armor tank to be effective, that take all the low slots where a hurricane can just use shield tank and use 3x gyrostabalizers and 2 tracking enchancers to do ridiculous dps since msot range modules give 30% failoff... Plus blasterships have very few mid slots+plus u have to have an afterburner/mwd and other things making the tracking computer even more rare They dont have as much problems as the Amarr boats, (apart from arty fit abaddons) lasers use more Cap than Blasters (well i thnk) yet they are use a lot for solo and fleet fights, cause of the dps. Armour tanking like shield tanking requires a lot of SP work with your background skills then you will find it easier, plus using some drugs to help repping means you are repping more = less cap Armour is the strongest tank type for fleet fights as it soaks up more damage but in turn your slow as hell. Shield is strong for solo work as u can nano it to make it faster...harder to track, but using an MWD makes your sig ridiculously high, but does well shield boosting for solo work. ste
Yankunytjatjara Amarr Blue Republic	Posted - 2011.04.07 14:20:00 - [97] Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Too many clowns saying a dmg buff is the solution... Issue has to do with relative fitting requirements, active rep rig draw backs and poorly designed ammo types. Fix these three issues and I think you will say a large swing in favor of Gallente close range pvp. QFT. If that is not enough, then, after a test period, add a damage buff. And don't forget the tactical overview option for solo/small gangs: Ship Velocity Vectors
NightmareX Infinitus Odium Scum Alliance	Posted - 2011.04.07 15:06:00 - [98] Edited by: NightmareX on 07/04/2011 15:13:33 Originally by: Cambarus GTFO-ability is exactly what makes minmatar so good. The ability to disengage (which matar still have more than any other race) equates to the ability to not lose your ship when facing someone with bigger guns. If gallente had that ability they would be just fine as a race, but being FORCED into web/scram range the vast majority of the time is yet another nail in the gallente coffin. Ok, here is the problem. You guys have turned into weak ***** online where you don't have any balls to make a hard choice of getting into a fight or not with a Blaster ship. You guys just need to HTFU and risks some ships in a fight instead of going omgwtf, someone is hurting my ship, RUN!11111one!. Ofc, losing ships isn't directly fun, but being on the safe side all the time by having the ability to run all the times if the fight doesn't go you're way will get extremely boring. It's something called risk vs reward. With a Mega for example, you just have to think a bit harder if you should take it into a fight or not. Ofc, if you are getting blobbed by a 20 man cruser gang, you wont survive that, but it will be the same with an Armageddon, Abaddon, Hyperion or any of the normal BS'es. The only thing i see as a little problematic sometimes is that you have to change ammos in the middle of the fight. To like longer ranged ammo like Null L. So except for that, there shouldn't be any problems with a Mega as long you are fighting on a gate (the big regional gates are excluded here) or a station or anywhere else where you are warping in on top of their asses.
Michael RGZ	Posted - 2011.04.10 06:25:00 - [99] I use Medium Neutron Blasters T1's. I use them on a Thorax to assault serpentis battle-cruisers, cruisers, and battleships. I use 4 to assault the battle-cruisers and cruisers. I use a full rack to destroy the battleship. The tactical maneuver here is that the battleships are setup to do maximum damage in the 15km to 35km range, or so. not 500m or 1.500m range. when u add rigs that boost ur turrets rate of fire and tracking speed. u can receive 150 to 200 dps per shot fired on the target at those short ranges. I myself use a mwd, that when active increases my speed to 1500 m/s when in orbit of 500m,my actual orbit is 1700m to 2100m. makes me harder to hit. with the bc and the cruisers its a bit different, they're range is shorter, they can fire excellent dps per shot at really close range. so on them I use the same tactical maneuver as on the battleship, but this time I activate my shield recharger or my armor repairer, they are more than capable of holding them off for a while when I activate my cap booster, which increases battle time. All in all blasters are a excellent turret to use in ratting scenarios or celestial hunting. if pvping, use same setup just T2's instead, also add webifier and warp disruptor modules, with one warp-core stabilizer.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2011.04.10 09:18:00 - [100] Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Too many clowns saying a dmg buff is the solution... Issue has to do with relative fitting requirements, active rep rig draw backs and poorly designed ammo types. Fix these three issues and I think you will say a large swing in favor of Gallente close range pvp. Fitting was allways hard on blaster ships. There is no reason to redesign the ammo, everything worked fine the way it was before QR. The main difference is that blaster ships are not worth flown if they can't deal damage at point blank reasonable well in small gang/solo pvp(what you can't without proper range/transversal control with the 60% webs today). I would agree that one issue is the armor rep/resist rig drawback what makes you basically a brick for no reason. Also you need more damage in the end, before you consider it as useful turret(ie not getting shredded at point blank by a missle/ak/laser ship). ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.

Songbird Gallente T.I.E. Inc.	Posted - 2011.04.11 15:06:00 - [101] solo warfare is nearly extinct. Blasters are good for solo work, and in fact no matter how much you raise their dps and tracking they will always be good for solo work and little else. Group warfare requires some mid ranged DPS from the guns so the whole group can shoot at the same target without spending 13 hours to get into effective attack range. Blasters don't fit the bill and changing them would completely destroy their uniqueness - they'd turn into lasers or auto cannons. The solutions as I've posted 100 times before is to give rails a real punch - the 425 should have the dps of a tachyon. As a compensation their range should be severely cut down , making them the shortest ranged long range guns - similar to blasters which are the shortest range, highest damage short range guns. Their tracking should be somewhat raised to compensate for their short range. This would make caldari ships, which have no damage bonuses but range bonuses for hybrids actually worth flying. This would make gallente ships useful in mid range group engagements and give em plenty of dps to compete with the short range with extreme reach guns i.e. AC/PL. The downside of the solution would be gallente ships extreme vulnerability at extremely short ranges - so the change won't be all roses and rainbow unicorn farts. You'd see a gall ship and would think - is he using blasters? in which case you can kite it, or is he using rails in which case you'd have to hug it.
Copine Callmeknau Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams The KWFL Republic	Posted - 2011.04.11 18:06:00 - [102] Originally by: Michael RGZ I use Medium Neutron Blasters T1's. I use them on a Thorax to assault serpentis battle-cruisers, cruisers, and battleships. I use 4 to assault the battle-cruisers and cruisers. I use a full rack to destroy the battleship. The tactical maneuver here is that the battleships are setup to do maximum damage in the 15km to 35km range, or so. not 500m or 1.500m range. when u add rigs that boost ur turrets rate of fire and tracking speed. u can receive 150 to 200 dps per shot fired on the target at those short ranges. I myself use a mwd, that when active increases my speed to 1500 m/s when in orbit of 500m,my actual orbit is 1700m to 2100m. makes me harder to hit. with the bc and the cruisers its a bit different, they're range is shorter, they can fire excellent dps per shot at really close range. so on them I use the same tactical maneuver as on the battleship, but this time I activate my shield recharger or my armor repairer, they are more than capable of holding them off for a while when I activate my cap booster, which increases battle time. All in all blasters are a excellent turret to use in ratting scenarios or celestial hunting. if pvping, use same setup just T2's instead, also add webifier and warp disruptor modules, with one warp-core stabilizer. -2/10 Stunning EVE Online Theme for PS3
Tyme Xandr Gallente Dark Circle Enforcement	Posted - 2011.04.11 23:23:00 - [103] Originally by: Michael RGZ I use Medium Neutron Blasters T1's. I use them on a Thorax to assault serpentis battle-cruisers, cruisers, and battleships. I use 4 to assault the battle-cruisers and cruisers. I use a full rack to destroy the battleship. The tactical maneuver here is that the battleships are setup to do maximum damage in the 15km to 35km range, or so. not 500m or 1.500m range. when u add rigs that boost ur turrets rate of fire and tracking speed. u can receive 150 to 200 dps per shot fired on the target at those short ranges. I myself use a mwd, that when active increases my speed to 1500 m/s when in orbit of 500m,my actual orbit is 1700m to 2100m. makes me harder to hit. with the bc and the cruisers its a bit different, they're range is shorter, they can fire excellent dps per shot at really close range. so on them I use the same tactical maneuver as on the battleship, but this time I activate my shield recharger or my armor repairer, they are more than capable of holding them off for a while when I activate my cap booster, which increases battle time. All in all blasters are a excellent turret to use in ratting scenarios or celestial hunting. if pvping, use same setup just T2's instead, also add webifier and warp disruptor modules, with one warp-core stabilizer. You PVP with stabs? [≡v≡]
Misstress Iteron	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:09:00 - [104] I don't have issues with blasters
Headerman Minmatar Metanoia. Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.04.12 02:58:00 - [105] sooo... what would win: torp and AC phoon or blaster mega? And i think the idea of changing or removing the drawbacks for active armour tanking rigs is an awesome idea
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2011.04.12 07:39:00 - [106] Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Too many clowns saying a dmg buff is the solution... Issue has to do with relative fitting requirements, active rep rig draw backs and poorly designed ammo types. Fix these three issues and I think you will say a large swing in favor of Gallente close range pvp. This does not address the problem of ACs and Pulse being almost as good as blasters at being blasters. Why would you use blasters when ACs and Pulse deal close to blasters' damage at blasters' optimal, but have immensely superior DPS projection? For weapons designed to operate at longer range, ACs and Pulse track far too well.
Sutskop PILSGESCHWADER Monkey Circus	Posted - 2011.04.12 08:24:00 - [107] Originally by: Headerman sooo... what would win: torp and AC phoon or blaster mega? torp and neut phoon
Swynet	Posted - 2011.04.12 08:43:00 - [108] Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Too many clowns saying a dmg buff is the solution... Issue has to do with relative fitting requirements, active rep rig draw backs and poorly designed ammo types. Fix these three issues and I think you will say a large swing in favor of Gallente close range pvp. Maybe some changes like fitting requirements improvements: -base 10% increase of the recharge rate to hybrid platforms would help? - Gallente are supposed to be the race where mega corps can do whatever they want, but they can't build a **ing capacitor that works properly, useful blasters, rails doing dmg and drones that ARE the ubber ultra dmg drones? -wtf? -add one middle slot? -reduce armor riggs drawbacks or just add a mwd bonus: when hybrids are active 35-50% reduction consumption capacitor/PG for mwd. -reduction of fitting requirements for armor reps? Once this is done only dps it's left, lets see: Middle slot for warfare or cap?-check Better fitting due to +cap recharge rate and less consumption by rep and mwd -check Do we still have to change Rails/blasters ? -maybe not Is it enough to apply the 10% dmg blasters are supposed to do? -maybe, 10%+ dps is not that important when every cat/his mother and dog from cruiser to BC can already overall do the same dps because of they r better dmg projection/application/type since they don't miss that much has blasters do. The important stuff is to be able to apply that +dps in any situation in blasters (total?) range op+fall off and we still have the problem vs T2 stuff, heavy kin/thermal base resists. K kill newbies or overkilled ships but at the gate 1v1 the chances the cane will kick your mega's ass with no effort at same skill/experience is very high. Do I still think blasters should get some +dps? -yes, blasters are the close range arty's so yes they should have a volley increase higher by ammo tweek or dmg selection with no tracking/capacitor drawbacks. Is it the perfect solution? -nah, but this would help for sure. ________________________________________________ Originally by:** Goose99 In EVE, PVE can happen anywhere, anytime. Whenever you undock, you subject yourself to involuntary PVE.
Flex Nebura Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.12 08:58:00 - [109] Originally by: Swynet Gallente are supposed to be the race where mega corps can do whatever they want. Thats Caldari you are thinking of.
Swynet	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:02:00 - [110] Edited by: Swynet on 12/04/2011 09:03:54 Originally by: Flex Nebura Originally by: Swynet Gallente are supposed to be the race where mega corps can do whatever they want. Thats Caldari you are thinking of. Nah, Caldari are under military so if that should be true than your engineers are worst than junky galenteen ones since your cap is worst The true galenteen government is made by/for all the corrupted ultra rich mega corps Edit: Some storylines tell you a lot more about this and how the "president" is elected corrupted etc ________________________________________________ Originally by: Goose99 In EVE, PVE can happen anywhere, anytime. Whenever you undock, you subject yourself to involuntary PVE.

freshspree	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:57:00 - [111] This is how and why you use blasters. BLASTER PWNAGE
Jargo Stonecutter Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2011.04.12 14:49:00 - [112] IMHO its not the blasters themselfs where the main problem is but at the ships. Sure blasters have a bunch of problems like fitting requirements BUT the main problem is getting into range to apply their DPS, a problem i really dont want to see solved by increasing their optimal/falloff. From my pov the easiest solution would be to change the bonuses on the gallente blaster-boats, like getting rid of that MWD-bonus (o/c with a buff to cap) and giving it something usefull that helps to get in range. Sadly the web bonus is already in the hands of the Serpentis and i think you will agree that a speed bonus is out of question but how about a range bonus to warp scramblers? This would enable gallente blasters-boats to actually catch up with their targets as those couldnt use their MWDs. May you live in interresting times.
Lubomir Penev Dark Nexxus S I L E N T.	Posted - 2011.04.12 14:53:00 - [113] Originally by: Lazer Bear I know blaster are up but i would like to ask people who use blasters why exactly they use them?? I mean autocannons or lazers have pretty close dps to blasters but they also start their damage a lot earlier due to range, making the overall damage of the blasters very low compared to the other weapons. Because your covops warpin let you land straight at optimal?
ValentinaDLM Minmatar Zaratha Zarati Shaktipat Revelators	Posted - 2011.04.12 18:31:00 - [114] Originally by: Jargo Stonecutter IMHO its not the blasters themselfs where the main problem is but at the ships. Sure blasters have a bunch of problems like fitting requirements BUT the main problem is getting into range to apply their DPS, a problem i really dont want to see solved by increasing their optimal/falloff. From my pov the easiest solution would be to change the bonuses on the gallente blaster-boats, like getting rid of that MWD-bonus (o/c with a buff to cap) and giving it something usefull that helps to get in range. Sadly the web bonus is already in the hands of the Serpentis and i think you will agree that a speed bonus is out of question but how about a range bonus to warp scramblers? This would enable gallente blasters-boats to actually catch up with their targets as those couldnt use their MWDs. I think this is a reasonable idea, after all Gallente alread have a few ships with point range bonuses such as the keres and arazu. This would fit in with the race more than say a velocity bonus. The only problem though, is that would mean gallente would then get to field it's secondary ewar on combat ships with a bonus, and that would be a bit off balance as we wouldn't have say vagabonds with a web range bonus or zealots with a neut bonus. Though to be fair the primary ewar from gallente was nerfed so hard back in trinity something needs to compensate for it... But yeah, I would be all about that solution, but minmatar players would probably whine about lack of balance, even if they forget caldari don't even have a secondary ewar (which is why I don't whine about falcons much), so it isn't like every race should mirror the others in bonuses.
Gabriel Karade Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.04.12 19:29:00 - [115] Originally by: freshspree Edited by: freshspree on 12/04/2011 14:20:03 This is how and why you use blasters. BLASTER PWNAGE Do I really need to point out the errors in this line of argument? Or just assume you are trolling?... -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Jerick Ludhowe Tri-gun Auctorita Alliance	Posted - 2011.04.12 19:39:00 - [116] Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Too many clowns saying a dmg buff is the solution... Issue has to do with relative fitting requirements, active rep rig draw backs and poorly designed ammo types. Fix these three issues and I think you will say a large swing in favor of Gallente close range pvp. Fitting was allways hard on blaster ships. There is no reason to redesign the ammo, everything worked fine the way it was before QR. The main difference is that blaster ships are not worth flown if they can't deal damage at point blank reasonable well in small gang/solo pvp(what you can't without proper range/transversal control with the 60% webs today). I would agree that one issue is the armor rep/resist rig drawback what makes you basically a brick for no reason. Also you need more damage in the end, before you consider it as useful turret(ie not getting shredded at point blank by a missle/ak/laser ship). You need to just give up on the whole old school blaster ideals BS. We are not going to get 90% webs back and we are not going to get the ratio of gank over tank that we had before the hp buff and void nerf. To be quite frank, blaster ships were IMBA back then and that is not what we should be striving for today. I stand strongly by my 3 major points and think that these are the core issues that need to be addressed before a large sweeping dmg buff. We have seen what a broad weapon type increases can do (look at lasers) and I'd rather this issue be worked in a far more precise manor.
Jargo Stonecutter Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2011.04.12 22:09:00 - [117] Originally by: ValentinaDLM Originally by: Jargo Stonecutter .... .... But yeah, I would be all about that solution, but minmatar players would probably whine about lack of balance, even if they forget caldari don't even have a secondary ewar (which is why I don't whine about falcons much), so it isn't like every race should mirror the others in bonuses. I think its quite balanced even for the minmatars as they have enough mid slots in general to allow for AB/MWD-dual fits if they want to, those work at frig class already and i honestly dont see why it shouldnt on bigger ships. Actually the more i think about it the more i like the idea to force the minmatar to choose between securing their speed advantage and more tank/utility. May you live in interresting times.
Violine Ming Gallente Garoun Investment Bank	Posted - 2011.04.12 22:32:00 - [118] In general, based on ship usage statistics - they don't use blasters. I'm current crosstraining to winmatar now.
Lusian	Posted - 2011.04.13 00:26:00 - [119] I have an idea. This will let most of us know what those ogf us who have flown Gallantian ships or the other ship x pilot is talking about and tell us what happened to your ship in X experience and we can all see what is going on. I will give an example. Number 1 = who were you fighting? and where? 2 = what were you fitted with and what was happening to you while you were enguaged 3 = tell us what happened with your target and why they poped your ship. 4 = how does this apply to the arguement and what is it your trying to prove? 5 = EFT or paperwork will not amount to actual competence. Actual ingame loss or kills that prove your point for said situation. If you all can agree to this maybe this will help everyone on this thread and ccp balance the problem out. Or just continue to thow in eft and paperwork.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2011.04.13 14:19:00 - [120] Edited by: The Djego on 13/04/2011 14:20:24 Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe You need to just give up on the whole old school blaster ideals BS. We are not going to get 90% webs back and we are not going to get the ratio of gank over tank that we had before the hp buff and void nerf. A blaster ship in skilled hands was very lethal, however this is correct for many ships and pvp styles in eve. Without a proper web strength however it is pretty bad outside of frigs at close range for solo/small gang pvp(and for anything above this anyway). I wouldn't even change base damage as long as damage application is as poor at it is today for point blank. shrugs Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe To be quite frank, blaster ships were IMBA back then and that is not what we should be striving for today. Compared to cap ** multispec domis? Compared to the first nano BS that did nearly ignore webs by her mass? Compared to targets going 2-4 times as fast as blaster ships during the time the nano HACs where common? Help me a bit out here, I can't remember a single nerf blaster pvp thread from like the last 5 years, even if anybody did fap about the DPS and getting face melted at point blank, everybody serious did know that anything around this concept(fitting, cap use, range, gtfo, cost efficiency, skill requirements etc.) where basically crap. Did we play even the same game over the last 5 years? ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by:** Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [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.