?

I wasn't complaining, I'm simply saying that fitting requirements today are much more likely to be a contributing factor to relative HAM boat rareness as opposed to current HML/HAM differences. The original post I quoted suggested it was the weapon power differences when in reality it's probably a lot more to do with fitting for most.

That I will go with.

Doesn't require T2 weapons to compete with near max skilled ships in its class. Is it optimal, of course not, but it DOES work.

Once you skill into it, its another beast, and if the people complaining that they need local points can't find tacklers, that isn't the issue. The fact that a long range fit with next to no damage bonus competes with EVERY other ship in its class, favorably, should be telling.

HAMS are getting buffed, and the fittings eased.

Sounds pretty good to me.

[

I like the changes now (didnt like wave #1), I was busy cross training before I stopped for a couple of years and am back and continuing to cross train, I'm terrible for wanting to be able to play around in whatever I fancy at the time [:D]

Actually I'd be inclined to suggest that (today) it is more to do with the really, really harsh fitting requirements for HAMS compared to HML. You need stupidlyreally high skills to realistically fit HAMS (assuming no stupid money poured into meta items)

How TD/TC/TE change would have changed other hulls?

We don't even know how new cruisers will perform on TQ and people are already saying this would be bad.

The T2 missile changes are unbelieveably bad. Not one of them really balances the system. So quit fail trolling. And If we caught it I don't doubt we could have killed it. Issue remains that the dps that it was able to output with a short range weapon system was larger then the dps we could output with missiles. Not whether we killed it or not.

I can also bring in examples of Nados, Talos, Pests, even brutix's insta popping frigates from extreme ranges. Ranges outside their optimal but at least unlike missiles they still had a chance to hit,.

And as for the transversal question, yes that was quite the point there. Glad you wrapped your head around it.

The talos does NOT outdps a drake at that range, you're just wrong.

425mm rail Talos.....it would out DPS a drake, but it would matter since the drake would have near triple the tank.

He is talking about a blaster Talos.

Obviously a ship with 8 large rails would out dps hml's.

EDIT: although it may be that he is So bad that he thought a rail talos was a blaster talos.

The talos does NOT outdps a drake at that range, you're just wrong.

Also like i said, large weapons, not medium, large. The difference is Massive. As for a brutix instapopping frigates at long ranges, i've been around for a while but i have never seen that...


Quit being bad.

A 425mm rail Talos with 2 TEs, 2 Mag IIs, and collision and burst rigs pushes 892 dps @ 47km+49km w/ CNAM or 517 dps @ 168km +49km with spike. It's not going to "insta pop" buffered frigates at range, but it will shred them within seconds.

As for the rest, it's irrelevant that we are talking about a large turret. It's a BC weapon. It doesn't matter whether we call it a large rail or a 14" mega-pulse jizzie-jizzler, it fits on a BC and it is relevant to compare to the so-called overpowered HML and Drake. It comes down to this: whether we are talking about dps, dps at range, speed, tank, or whatever else you want to dredge up, there is absolutely nothing that the Drake can do that other BCs cannot also do comparably or better.

Drakes dominate null blobs because they are:

1. Cheap to build and fit (a blob doesn't need T2 weapons or shields, they are going for numbers and alpha)
2. Easy to skill into at the T1 level
3. Easy to command in a large scale battle
4. Effective long range fire platforms that can also apply predictable dps at short ranges and against smaller targets
5. The Drake comes with decent resists out of the box, and this helps logistics

A 425mm rail Talos with 2 TEs, 2 Mag IIs, and collision and burst rigs pushes 892 dps @ 47km+49km w/ CNAM or 517 dps @ 168km +49km with spike. It's not going to "insta pop" buffered frigates at range, but it will shred them within seconds.

And Nighmare does 1100+ dps at 50 km. It also has very good tracking for that range too.

Can we finally stop comparing cruiser sized weapon systems to battleship sized weapon systems?

Posting in a Fozzie thread. Love Fozzie long time.

RIP Drake blob.

To Fozzie:

Is there any way we could get just a small adjustment to Torpedo range during this pass? I think a buff to flight time or velocity to make them around 15%-25% longer range is in order.

I would also suggest a nerf to Cruise range. Out of the box they seem a tad too long and may start having some of the same problems as Heavies did. -20ish percent drop should be good.

wth? Cruises have no needs for a nerf at all ... they are completely broken, what are you smoking? :)

To Fozzie:

Is there any way we could get just a small adjustment to Torpedo range during this pass? I think a buff to flight time or velocity to make them around 15%-25% longer range is in order.

I would also suggest a nerf to Cruise range. Out of the box they seem a tad too long and may start having some of the same problems as Heavies did. -20ish percent drop should be good.

He is talking about a blaster Talos.

Obviously a ship with 8 large rails would out dps hml's.

EDIT: although it may be that he is So bad that he thought a rail talos was a blaster talos.

Its a BS weapon system,

It is ******* relevant. We are comparing weapon systems, not ships. You cannot compare Medium guns to large guns just because one medium ship can fit them. It doesn't work and if you can't see why, well you're bad.

And if you had bothered to read a bit further you would have seen me saying that obviously a ship with 8 large rails would out dps hml's. Again, large guns.. also eight of them.

Discussing BC balance while ignoring these ships is like praising the Titanic's seaworthiness while ignoring the hole in the bow. If we are going to selectively ignore 1/3 of the BC's, why stop there. Why don't we just ignore any ships, weapons, or fittings that don't advance the Drake Nerf Crusade? If you are going to selectively invent criteria, then why stop there? Why not tell us that the Drake is the FASTEST BC in the game? Why not claim that the Drake has the largest Drone bay compared to the other BC's? It's true, right? You just have to ignore all the cases where it isn't. And in any case, yes, large turrets are not medium turrets, nor are medium turrets HMLs, and HMLs are not HAMs, and HAMs are not Hybrids, and Hybrids are not Lasers, and.... and so what?

All fit on the class of ships we are discussing here. That's what matters.

The reason you object is the reason they must be considered. Your objection, of course, is that including these four BC's into our balance discussion makes the entire premise of a HML Drake nerf laughable. Long range damage projection? The HML Drake isn't even close to the top of that mountain. Maximum DPS? The HML Drake falls into the middle or even lower end of the scale. Mobility? The HML Drake is near the bottom of the pack. Tank? Here the Drake nears the summit. It might or might not be the best, but it's damn close, though why the Tank on this one ship would inspire CCP to nerf the missiles on multiple ships no one has yet explained.

You are welcome to try. Have at it. Post the numbers showing how uberfantastic the HML Drake is compared to these other ships. Show us the long range damage projection, the speed and mobility, the raw dps, post ANYTHING that justifies this middle of the road ship warranting a nerf. But you don't get to set the parameters and arbitrarily exclude the battlecruisers that don't support your case. Not if you want to be taken seriously.

I am afraid you did the opposite of a buff to make tech 2 missiles usefull in terms of the rage torpedo. The biggest problem with them was never their sig penalty, or damage potential it lied with their range. as it stands before winter i have to use two tech 2 range extenders and a 5% implant to just barely touch a theoretical 40km. I am an incursion runner primarily these days and from my general knowledge this is an acceptable envelope for pvp but for incs it was never quite satisfactory. the primary target for dps boats like my golem is the ostingles which like to hover between 35 and 45 km on average. with reducing the flight time and not altering the velocity accordingly with an increase you have just pushed the majority of my targets out of reach. The level 4 mission realm as i remember it primarily used the javelines since it required the same number of jav volleys as rage volleys so engaging at max range was more efficient. please revise this for increased velocity in on rage as they were borderline useful before.

wth? Cruises have no needs for a nerf at all ... they are completely broken, what are you smoking? :)

You do realize that Short ranged weapons means short ranged right? I would say Pulses need there range reduce a little but other then that all other ships are similar with there based ranged ammo.

I obviously didn't read through 212 pages of comments, but wanted to give my opinion on the subject all the same.

I'm a pilot heavily trained towards medium sized missiles and all the appropriate ship hulls, both heavy missiles and heavy assault missiles alike. From my experience I can tell that heavy missiles are quite overpowered, especially in PvE use, and nerfing them is a good decision. The problem is that HAMs are quite far from being on par with other close range medium weapon systems. Sure, on paper they might look well balanced in terms of dps and range, but the reality is quite different. Medium pulse lasers, autocannons and blasters can fairly easily hit targets once they are properly scrammed and webbed, whereas HAMs are strugling to hit stationary cruiser sized targets, even with their current stats. Against frigates they are utterly pittyful, compared to guns which almost instapop every frig that stays still enough. With the t2 HAMs being heavily penalized in terms of damage projection and heavy missile damage reduced, missile pilots aren't really left with any competitive setups at all.

This same imbalance in damage projection can be seen with Battleship and Capital sized weapon systems as well, but I suppose that belongs into another discussion thread.