EVE Search - Mr Hammer have u come up with a solution to the 1400 ammo problem

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Mr Hammer have u come up with a solution to the 1400 ammo problem

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2005.03.13 18:41:00 - [1] as the title says the new ammo changes are a slight nerf to 1400`s hammer notice this and said he would think on it. Any answer yet I would hate to lose my 1400`s after i just got them back Thanks You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Dust Puppy	Posted - 2005.03.13 18:46:00 - [2] What was the problem again? __________ Capacitor research
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2005.03.13 18:55:00 - [3] the new ammo changes actully nerf the damage out put of 1400`s as the range pen is to sever You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.03.13 19:00:00 - [4] Originally by: Lord Anubis the new ammo changes actully nerf the damage out put of 1400`s as the range pen is to sever whats wrong with that? :D ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Deros	Posted - 2005.03.13 19:12:00 - [5] basically, 1400's work better past their optimal range. this is due to their tracking being low. by dropping the optimal so greatly, 1400's will no doubt end up with a heck of a lot more misses compared to hits, even if when they hit they hit for a big hit.
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.13 19:49:00 - [6] Which is why I keep suggesting that they make the high-damage projectile ammo give -25% range, compared to -50%. Especially since its weaker than the other high-damage ammo.
Lallante	Posted - 2005.03.13 19:57:00 - [7] Lasers got a dmg nerf at long range too: complain abotu that Lall - THE Vocal Minority - ShinRa
Reatu Krentor	Posted - 2005.03.13 20:08:00 - [8] Originally by: Lallante Lasers got a dmg nerf at long range too: complain abotu that They did ? I don't see a reduction in damage though. actually on a (4slotn 1 energized adaptive, 3 active the, kin, exp), tank, it would do more damage with multifrequency, and with radio. Not to mention lasers get even better range now (max 1.625x). ------------------------------------------ The ammatar are not the enemy, they are the smoke and mirrors of the amarr.
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2005.03.13 20:37:00 - [9] Edited by: Rod Blaine on 13/03/2005 20:37:17 Both projectiles and hybrids will need to rely alot more on falloff now that there are no intermediate ranges anymore. Lasers do not. I calculated it with hybdrid ammo. Under the new system there is quite a large swath of range where there is a damage loss of 25% compared to AM ammo due to falloff making it better to use for example lead ammo at a point that is quite alot below its optimal range. Under the 'old' ammo system, this would come into play also, but the ability to switch ammo to match range reduces the damage loss to a maximum of 16.6%. So, there's a inevitable d.o.t. loss of 9% in the new ammo compared to the old once a railgun gets above optimal + 66% of its falloff with short range ammo. Of course, some of the ammos got a damage increase, and that is what most people stare at and are thankfull for since rails and howitsers needed it. But they don't realise that damage in falloff on both races just got nerfed by 9%. _______________________________________________ Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know. Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online Solutions to your issues.
Meridius	Posted - 2005.03.13 20:49:00 - [10] Originally by: Reatu Krentor Originally by: Lallante Lasers got a dmg nerf at long range too: complain abotu that They did ? I don't see a reduction in damage though. actually on a (4slotn 1 energized adaptive, 3 active the, kin, exp), tank, it would do more damage with multifrequency, and with radio. Not to mention lasers get even better range now (max 1.625x). Right and you have to tank like that right otherwise your ship goes omfg boom? Better range? 2.5% more range for -28% damage, yeah thats awesome \o/ ________________________________________________________

Selim	Posted - 2005.03.13 20:50:00 - [11] Originally by: Rod Blaine Edited by: Rod Blaine on 13/03/2005 20:37:17 Both projectiles and hybrids will need to rely alot more on falloff now that there are no intermediate ranges anymore. Lasers do not. I calculated it with hybdrid ammo. Under the new system there is quite a large swath of range where there is a damage loss of 25% compared to AM ammo due to falloff making it better to use for example lead ammo at a point that is quite alot below its optimal range. Under the 'old' ammo system, this would come into play also, but the ability to switch ammo to match range reduces the damage loss to a maximum of 16.6%. So, there's a inevitable d.o.t. loss of 9% in the new ammo compared to the old once a railgun gets above optimal + 66% of its falloff with short range ammo. Of course, some of the ammos got a damage increase, and that is what most people stare at and are thankfull for since rails and howitsers needed it. But they don't realise that damage in falloff on both races just got nerfed by 9%. Yep. I think they should increase falloff of all hybrids and projectiles by 50%, or 25% or something.
Joshua Calvert	Posted - 2005.03.13 20:53:00 - [12] Where is this information about ammo changes? LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!
Kaeten	Posted - 2005.03.13 21:23:00 - [13] omg stop whining for once. Let ccp do their job. ___________________________________ Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante
Lily Savage	Posted - 2005.03.13 21:40:00 - [14] Originally by: Joshua Calvert Where is this information about ammo changes? ...in this dev blog Cheers Lily
El Yatta	Posted - 2005.03.13 21:57:00 - [15] Originally by: Meridius Originally by: Reatu Krentor Originally by: Lallante Lasers got a dmg nerf at long range too: complain abotu that They did ? I don't see a reduction in damage though. actually on a (4slotn 1 energized adaptive, 3 active the, kin, exp), tank, it would do more damage with multifrequency, and with radio. Not to mention lasers get even better range now (max 1.625x). Right and you have to tank like that right otherwise your ship goes omfg boom? Better range? 2.5% more range for -28% damage, yeah thats awesome \o/ Surely if you loved Radio so much, why not use the new Microwave, which has the same range boost as the old radio, a better cap use, and only one damage lost instead of two? Or, perhaps go all teh way to IR, which is the same as the old Radio damage wise, but even better in cap, and for a slightly shorter range... ---:::---
Meridius	Posted - 2005.03.13 22:13:00 - [16] Originally by: El Yatta Surely if you loved Radio so much, why not use the new Microwave, which has the same range boost as the old radio Last time i checked a 50% range bonus wasn't equal to a 60% range boost. ________________________________________________________
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.13 23:16:00 - [17] Projectile and Hybrid long range got nerfed for range
Admiral Yatta	Posted - 2005.03.13 23:29:00 - [18] Originally by: Meridius Originally by: El Yatta Surely if you loved Radio so much, why not use the new Microwave, which has the same range boost as the old radio Last time i checked a 50% range bonus wasn't equal to a 60% range boost. I apologise - I didnt spot that. However, I think the pertinent issue is how come laser users were and still are ***ing about 2.5% and 10% range difference on their short range weapon** (as this is all about pulses, admit it!), when everyone else can barely tell the difference in effective optimal range when in moving combat, between 50% reduction and 50% boost in their short range weaps. There's never a situation when a blaster user wants to change to iron -count yourself lucky that even with new pulses, there's a reason for Radio, IR and Micro. As for beams, they're still very range-comparable when using micro, and damn good sniping with new radio. Amarr frigs need grid to fit small beams, and there you are: a reason to use beams to snipe outside of web range, instead of whinimg that the short range weapons cant (what is, effectively for a frigate) snipe.
Kaylona Tso	Posted - 2005.03.14 05:36:00 - [19] Well I think if they bork up the new 1400s I am going to put down my 1400 IIs and stop working for that Fleet Tempest and just train for the munnin again. All these damn changes just because the armageddon has a stupid RoF bonus that should never have been put in the game. BTW; to all you laser 'role players' in the stat forum... you just don't belong here go home. Lasers under the newer tracking system will always be good. -----
Phades	Posted - 2005.03.14 06:34:00 - [20] Edited by: Phades on 14/03/2005 06:41:36 Originally by: Admiral Yatta Originally by: Meridius Originally by: El Yatta Surely if you loved Radio so much, why not use the new Microwave, which has the same range boost as the old radio Last time i checked a 50% range bonus wasn't equal to a 60% range boost. I apologise - I didnt spot that. However, I think the pertinent issue is how come laser users were and still are ***ing about 2.5% and 10% range difference on their short range weapon** (as this is all about pulses, admit it!), when everyone else can barely tell the difference in effective optimal range when in moving combat, between 50% reduction and 50% boost in their short range weaps. There's never a situation when a blaster user wants to change to iron -count yourself lucky that even with new pulses, there's a reason for Radio, IR and Micro. As for beams, they're still very range-comparable when using micro, and damn good sniping with new radio. Amarr frigs need grid to fit small beams, and there you are: a reason to use beams to snipe outside of web range, instead of whinimg that the short range weapons cant (what is, effectively for a frigate) snipe. Dual light beams dont quite have the reach or the hitting power to really snipe without multiple bonuses for performance in terms of range and damage which the majority of amarr ships do not have. They are not howitzer/rail gun equivilants, having both less range and damage, in addition to suffering a greater damage loss from the long range crystals used in order to "snipe" with against unhardened armor. Doing around 5 damage per gun just doesnt cut it. This is the reason why i think the tachyons were made for the battle ship class in order to have a more comparable gun for long range. Meduim beams are basically impossible to fit realistically on any amarr frig and their fitting requirements for power grid would have to be brought down close to what the pulse lasers are now. If the current adjustments are any indication of what kind of affect that has on the entire line of weapons, then people really dont want that to happen, because of how easy it will be for the battle ships to fit the largest guns after the change. The problem lies in the battleships and what really needs to happen is a change directly to all battleships in order to retune the fittings, weapons, and bonuses in order to bring them all more into line with each other. Somehow i doubt the development team is going to back peddal and nerf the most popular ship class though.

Damien Vox	Posted - 2005.03.14 07:37:00 - [21] This after they didn't adjust the tracking on the 1400s but 'upped the damage so it hits harder'....yeesh.
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.14 16:45:00 - [22] To be honest the devs are making too many consessions to the amarr right now. Even further range for radio? WTF? Yeah it does less damage now, but so what? If you can hit further you win any fight. And now railguns and artillery are borked again.
Lord Anubis	Posted - 2005.03.14 17:05:00 - [23] dont get me wrong this id not a oan or whine im just wondering if we have a solution to the problem You cant beat Death But you can make the bastard work hard for it wtb Jerek Zuomi's Insignia
Damien Vox	Posted - 2005.03.14 20:06:00 - [24] Originally by: Selim To be honest the devs are making too many consessions to the amarr right now. Even further range for radio? WTF? Yeah it does less damage now, but so what? If you can hit further you win any fight. And now railguns and artillery are borked again. It would be called favoritism Selim.
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.14 20:53:00 - [25] They really better do something about the stealth nerf to rails and artillery.
El Yatta	Posted - 2005.03.14 21:45:00 - [26] Originally by: Selim To be honest the devs are making too many consessions to the amarr right now. Even further range for radio? WTF? Yeah it does less damage now, but so what? If you can hit further you win any fight. And now railguns and artillery are borked again. Just you wait till they nerf missiles (deservedly, even though I be caldari...) - because SO many people are caldari chars, and because SO many people use ravens, the whinign will be so massive, that it'll end up a missile boost through successive revisions... ---:::---


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.