| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maeltstome
Mentally Assured Destruction
247
   |
Posted - 2013.01.06 18:29:00 -
[1] - Quote
This thread will contain a lot of contributing factors to the conclusion i draw, so im afraid you can't TL;DR. Incoming wall of text
The way Eve used to be (I've played since RMR):
Only T1 points, no T2 disruptors. Faction available but not necessary for most fits. Falloff bonuses limited to a select few ships. All webs went 10km for 90%, scramblers didn't turn off MWD's and 20km points where the norm, scramblers (post WCS nerf) are pointless (hohoho, pun!) outside of EXTREME fitting problems on frigates.
The effective range of an autocannon with barrage is around 14-16km without bonuses. Other guns is <10km apart from lasers which aren't heavily used. Falloff bonused ships are hitting out to 20-25km with long range ammo. Falloff hybrids are htiting to 15km or so.
Now:
Damage projection has gone up alarmingly since the change to Tracking Enhancers falloff bonuses. This isn't a bad thing, i like extra range and more to the point, better hit quality. I like the choice of more damage or more range in my low slots. These are good things. So what's this thread all about? I'd like to link the battle report, but i wasn't in a corp when it happened, and the pirate that died hasn't API verified the kill (probably 'cause HE MAD). But here is the situation:
(Retribution Expansion) - This was on day 2 of the expansion release. So it's a while ago.
I'm flying a stabber with a Large ASB, 24km Point and a mix of gyro/TE's in the lows. I jump into a a losec system and a Pirate Hurricane is on the gate - he is dual LSE fit. I engage, knowing my backup of a Blaster Dual-Large-ASB Moa is 1 jump behind. I start fighting and hold a point on the Hurricane. I strip most of his shields before i die and my blaster-buddy arrives just in time to land a scram on him. he finishes him off. Stabber lost for Cane kill. We get 20mil bounty and enough loot to instantly replace my stabber and fitting. GF!
And that's my point, this is a standard fight most people can expect to find and this isn't a big deal, the specifics of the fight are my problem. I had a T2 disruptor on and held a point on this guy. I'm a ship with a Falloff bonus so realistically i operate out of the 10km 'Kill Zone' and my tank is lighter, reflected by my lower fitting and slot layout versus a more 'Brawler' style ship, such as the Hurricane. But the hurricane was still projecting damage, easily, to me at 20-24km - enough to out dps my Large ASB tank and still strip armour and structure. I died after my ASB ran out of charges, but only about 5-6 seconds after... i was already well into structure before it needed to reload (i kept it running anyway).
Now we get to the meat of the issue: Damage projection has gone up a LOT recently but the effective range of combat hasn't. The effective range of combat is defined by the maximum range you can warp disrupt to, since without warp disruption people will just leave and you have a fail-fit with no chance of committing to fights and getting a kill on anyone with enough a brain to warp out.
If you fit a faction disruptor and have an OGB, you can get 45km warp disruptors without over heat. If we look at the same fight i was in and say i was 30-40km away, i would have avoided 90% of the hurricane's dual TE damage and slowly picked him apart. But spending 150mil on a 30km disruptor another billion spent on a Loki to boost my point range, this average fight for new to old players becomes a specialist fight for big spenders with alts... and for what? So my 10 mil stabber can effectively use its range bonus?
Ok lets take into account overheating. Had i overheated my disruptor i would be looking at 28km range. But i'm not going to kill this guy quickly. My disruptor will burn out before i kill him - and at that range is a 50/10 (which is fine, he IS a battlecruiser and im a T1 cruiser). But lets look at the other side of the coin. He has a Scrambler fitted. He can overheat it to around 10km range. He does this and catches me. The secondary effect of the scrambler turns off my MWD and im dead in literally seconds. Once he has scrammed me he can un-overheat his module and it wont burn out. He just needs 1-2 cycles of overheat to catch me. Similarly with Web's - they can be overheated for 1-2 cycles then un-overheated once standard optimal has been reached. This makes the standard disruptor a massive last place in terms of effectiveness during overheating.
With loki links/faction mods - an overheated disruptor CAN be useful to secure a kill on a fleeing target - but this is only because you had enough disruptor range to keep the fight going long enough to let you maintain enough range to stay out of the majority of the damage of a brawler. The overheat is the just used to keep them pointed while you nibble that last of their HP away.
To this end, i propose: We increase the range of Disruptors. Why? Here's some points.
-T3 links are being heavily nerfed, so combat range will be reduced soon regardless even with OGB.
-Brawlers can now project higher damage to 20k+ against kiting ships who have less damage and tank - but more range (range which is unused due to the limitations of disruptor range).
-Overheating scramblers' and webs' is massively powerful and used in 90% of fights.
-Overheating disruptors is rare and rarely useful outside extreme faction/OGB fights.
-Oversized AB's are incredibly popular and more useful than an MWD now simply because they help avoid damage more so than an MWD... all of which is entirely related to the combat range dictated by warp disruption range. (all ships get amazing tracking against an MWD target, so with higher projection on all ships, kiting ships cannot speed tank or range tank and are forced to Sig-Tank/Speed tank with oversized mods which is only viable on a handful of ships)
The new ranges i think would make more sense would be:
T1 - 25km
T2 - 30KM
Fac - Up to 33KM
Scram/web - unchanged.
*Continues on next post* |
Maeltstome
Mentally Assured Destruction
247
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 18:29:00 -
[2] - Quote
With the nerf to Links incoming, we wont see any real change to extreme faction fits, but un-bonused solo pilots don't have to spend hundreds of millions to take advantage of their ships bonuses. We all know going out solo invites a Blob, and against a Blob range is the only defence you have.
"ERMAGHERD ANOTHER WINMATAR BUFF"
No. This benefits autocannons, i agree, but it also benefits ships such as the shield deimos and ishtar/drone boats, since they can sit out much further and drop drone damage on people.
Nano has been nerfed, speed has been stomped on - i think it's time we actually stopped acting but-hurt over all the ships we lost as kids to people in vagabond/Zealot gangs when they moved at 10km/s and looked realistically at the PVP climate.
Long story short: Brawling ships can be fit for more speed and projection - but kiting ships are limited by combat range and will never be able to brawl more effectively than a close range ship.
|
rektumfreser
Nex Exercitus
Raiden.
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 20:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
After reading ur post, the first thing i can think of is in fleets, proteuses/arazu with faction point (and OGB) is looking at a 90 (110heated) km point range, this is often enough to stop a few hostile battleships and kill them, they wont burn away anytime soon.
ships like the slicer (and many other kiting ships) benefit greatly from disruptors as their sheer speed is useally enough to stop ships from scrambling u
in my opinion its a risk/reward scenario if u roam with scrams, its shorter range but if u do catch things with scram/web they generally wont get anywhere in a hurry, while a point might stop the initial warp but ppl can still speed away from you
if u were to increase the overall point range something would need to be done with gallente recons/t3 as 150km points would be just to much
my 0.02$ |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
Heretic Nation
2560
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 20:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
Anyway, I've long noticed what you're pointing out. Don't forget the new Tier 3s, propagation of range bonuses, and rebalanced/buffed ships that dramatically increase the amount of damage flying all over the battlefield. I mostly agree. I'd go a bit further and say a few things:
- Gang links (but not gang bonuses or mindlinks, IMO) should be massively nerfed almost across the board. 50% bonuses are absurd in a game where months of training yields a mere 2%.
- Scram and web range should be extended as well, but point range should be extended more.
- Local active tank modules (reps/boosters) should have their effectiveness dramatically boosted.
- Mobility should not have base effectiveness improved.
- Passive tanking should not have base effectiveness improved.
-Liang
Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?)
Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com
PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
526
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 20:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Anyway, I've long noticed what you're pointing out. Don't forget the new Tier 3s, propagation of range bonuses, and rebalanced/buffed ships that dramatically increase the amount of damage flying all over the battlefield. I mostly agree. I'd go a bit further and say a few things:
- Gang links (but not gang bonuses or mindlinks, IMO) should be massively nerfed almost across the board. 50% bonuses are absurd in a game where months of training yields a mere 2%.
- Scram and web range should be extended as well, but point range should be extended more.
- Local active tank modules (reps/boosters) should have their effectiveness dramatically boosted.
- Mobility should not have base effectiveness improved.
- Passive tanking should not have base effectiveness improved.
-Liang
This. Especially on the gang links vs training time front... and I have a maxed out link alt. |
Taoist Dragon
Forced Penetration
Hopeless Addiction
173
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 20:39:00 -
[6] - Quote
The thing with this fight is that you are comparing a T1 crusier to one of the best BC's in game even with the stat adjustment (not a nerf more of a rebalance IMO.) they both use the same class of weapons (i.e medium projectiles) but the cane has multiple TE fitted and 1.5x the weapons with a dual damage bonus.
He was also probably fitted with the largest guns of the class. He way out damages you and projects as the same level. You went into this fight knowing you were overwhelmed and held him long enough for you buddy to come in and finish him of. TBH you did the best that would be expected of you in that situation GF.
Changing points would have the potential to completely throw out the balance between brawling and kiting way more than it it now. Currently a kiter being caught by a brawler is dead. A brawler being kited is pretty much dead (best case he forces the kiter off) you probably could have disengaged at any point but decided to hold for your buddy to finish him of, good choice. This was probably the best outcome for this fight so I don't see how your suggestion is better than what happened really.
EDIT: Forgeting OGB and other stuff as they have always thrown out balance of 1v1 situations which this pretty much was.
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
389
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 20:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
how about just nerfing TE's and bringing back close range combat? |
rektumfreser
Nex Exercitus
Raiden.
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 20:54:00 -
[8] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Anyway, I've long noticed what you're pointing out. Don't forget the new Tier 3s, propagation of range bonuses, and rebalanced/buffed ships that dramatically increase the amount of damage flying all over the battlefield. I mostly agree. I'd go a bit further and say a few things:
- Gang links (but not gang bonuses or mindlinks, IMO) should be massively nerfed almost across the board. 50% bonuses are absurd in a game where months of training yields a mere 2%.
- Scram and web range should be extended as well, but point range should be extended more.
- Local active tank modules (reps/boosters) should have their effectiveness dramatically boosted.
- Mobility should not have base effectiveness improved.
- Passive tanking should not have base effectiveness improved.
-Liang
1.) Off-grid boosting should be nerfed, thats a pretty known thing for any1, ON-grid boosting should still be worth doing (perhaps with a dimishing effect, more ppl, less buff)
2.) Scram range should not be extended, beign scrammed is already a death sentence, however the bonus on certain e-war ships could be improved.
3.) Personally im i like the way the changed TD and could work for tanking aswell, decrease the overall effective but increase the bonused ships bonus 7.5 -> 15% for instance (its already lame how much better 5% resistance are vs 7.5% rep effeicieny)
4.) Speed as it currently is are fine
5.) Passive tanking isnt a real issue (yet)
increasing scram range can only end in tears |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
Heretic Nation
2560
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 21:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
rektumfreser wrote:
1.) Off-grid boosting should be nerfed, thats a pretty known thing for any1, ON-grid boosting should still be worth doing (perhaps with a dimishing effect, more ppl, less buff)
No. Gang links, as a whole, are massively overpowered whether they are on grid or off grid.
Quote:5.) Passive tanking isnt a real issue (yet)
Umm. LOL.
Quote:increasing scram range can only end in tears
Yes, that is in fact a desired outcome.
-Liang
Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?)
Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com
PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
rektumfreser
Nex Exercitus
Raiden.
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 21:26:00 -
[10] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Quote:5.) Passive tanking isnt a real issue (yet) Umm. LOL.
care to elaborate?
I cannot recall a single time, on any toon, that iwe been beaten or had any problem with passive TANKING (as in, shield power relays/purger tanks)
If ur talking about shield passivly recharging iwe always seen that as a pve niche confined mostly to drake/rattlers. |
Maeltstome
Mentally Assured Destruction
249
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 21:59:00 -
[11] - Quote
Taoist Dragon wrote:The thing with this fight is that you are comparing a T1 crusier to one of the best BC's in game even with the stat adjustment (not a nerf more of a rebalance IMO.) they both use the same class of weapons (i.e medium projectiles) but the cane has multiple TE fitted and 1.5x the weapons with a dual damage bonus.
He was also probably fitted with the largest guns of the class. He way out damages you and projects as the same level. You went into this fight knowing you were overwhelmed and held him long enough for you buddy to come in and finish him of. TBH you did the best that would be expected of you in that situation GF.
Changing points would have the potential to completely throw out the balance between brawling and kiting way more than it it now. Currently a kiter being caught by a brawler is dead. A brawler being kited is pretty much dead (best case he forces the kiter off) you probably could have disengaged at any point but decided to hold for your buddy to finish him of, good choice. This was probably the best outcome for this fight so I don't see how your suggestion is better than what happened really.
EDIT: Forgeting OGB and other stuff as they have always thrown out balance of 1v1 situations which this pretty much was.
I am comparing a T1 cruiser to a good BC. I'd also like to point out i've fought a dominix in an assault frigate and held him to ransom. Eve is not about "Bigger = better", it's about a million different factors and video's such as 'The Stabber' by Yuki Li all those years ago where the perfect example of a no-tank ship with good speed and projection doing that they do best, and showcasing pilot skill.
Brawlers have a MUCH larger margin for error but are rewarded with more damage and surviability - this is is not countered by kiting ships having range advantage anymore, since range is relative to warp disrupt range which hasnt changed in 5 years, but projection and speed have. All these things contribute to a slow death of kiting ships outside of billion isk fits with OGB.
Here is a graph of stabber DPS versus Hurricane DPS in the 25km -50km range. They are both using 425's with 2x TE and RF-PP ammo.
[IMG]http://i1262.photobucket.com/albums/ii606/B1zmark/StabberVersusCaneGraph_zps03b550f3.png[/IMG]
SO basically its 27km before that range bonus benefits the stabber over the raw 'guns and deeps' of the hurricane. Now that's fine. You expect to loose a LOT of dps due to range, but you make sure you THEY LOOSE MORE. That's the point of a kiting fit.
Now lets look at those figures with 180's and no TE's - since 180's where the base falloff range before the larger guns got a falloff buff, and TE's never used to increase falloff. And for arguments sake, we'll do it with barrage since that's what people used to use before faction ammo and TE's.
[IMG]http://i1262.photobucket.com/albums/ii606/B1zmark/StabberVersusCaneGraph2_zpsf3b4eaf7.png[/IMG]
As you can see the changeover happens at about 21km, which (and here is the point) it within 24km T2 Disruptor range. Right now a brawler in disruptor range almost exclusively have better damage than a kiter.
Could i have killed that hurricane? Maybe not, he still has more drone and more EHP than me. But i can hold tackle on him for a longer time and i wouldn't have lost my ship in that situation.
"but thats not the point, it's still a T1 cruiser versus a BC!"
Fine, then why don't we all just fly 'Canes and play Hurricanes-Online. |
Maeltstome
Mentally Assured Destruction
249
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 22:01:00 -
[12] - Quote
rektumfreser wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:Quote:5.) Passive tanking isnt a real issue (yet) Umm. LOL. care to elaborate? I cannot recall a single time, on any toon, that iwe been beaten or had any problem with passive TANKING (as in, shield power relays/purger tanks) If ur talking about shield passivly recharging iwe always seen that as a pve niche confined mostly to drake/rattlers.
Passive means cap-less/Non-Active. Purger rigs and extenders are PVE only REGEN tanks, based on the peak regen stat of shield.
Good enough? |
Taoist Dragon
Forced Penetration
Hopeless Addiction
173
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 23:38:00 -
[13] - Quote
You are still fighting withing the same class of ship i.e. medium just one half class bigger I'e BC over cruiser. What ever you can do in you stabber the cane will do better apart from raw speed. vOv It can out damage you get similar range due to better fitting abiltiy and tank way better than you. Your AF v BS is a totally different scenario and has no bearing on what you are arguing for here.
Simple fact of the matter is you probably had the best outcome of that engagement that you could expect with the tools you used for it. The stabber v cane is too similar a tool set that in this case yes bigger did equal better.
Don't get me wrong i'm not saying you didn't fight well and if your opponent was less skilled you could well have survived but given the match up you described I fail to see any argument to changing the stats of points/tackle other than you didn't want to lsoe your ship. I love the stabber myself i think it's great ship but in that fight I would expect to lose 9 of 10 enagements 1v1. Not the right tool for the job you are describing. Simple
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Maeltstome
Mentally Assured Destruction
249
|
Posted - 2013.01.06 23:57:00 -
[14] - Quote
Taoist Dragon wrote:You are still fighting withing the same class of ship i.e. medium just one half class bigger I'e BC over cruiser. What ever you can do in you stabber the cane will do better apart from raw speed. vOv It can out damage you get similar range due to better fitting abiltiy and tank way better than you. Your AF v BS is a totally different scenario and has no bearing on what you are arguing for here. Simple fact of the matter is you probably had the best outcome of that engagement that you could expect with the tools you used for it. The stabber v cane is too similar a tool set that in this case yes bigger did equal better. Don't get me wrong i'm not saying you didn't fight well and if your opponent was less skilled you could well have survived but given the match up you described I fail to see any argument to changing the stats of points/tackle other than you didn't want to lsoe your ship. I love the stabber myself i think it's great ship but in that fight I would expect to lose 9 of 10 enagements 1v1. Not the right tool for the job you are describing. Simple
You have no logical argument against my post. I used the fight as an example - believe it or not i can afford to loose a few douzen stabbers without bothering. My point was that ships OF THAT TYPE are unable to do what they where designed to do simply because warp disruptors are dictating the range of the fight more than the ships/pilots involved. That's fine, unless everyone can fight effectively in that range, regardless of ship type. |
Taoist Dragon
Forced Penetration
Hopeless Addiction
173
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 00:20:00 -
[15] - Quote
Maeltstome wrote:
You have no logical argument against my post. I used the fight as an example - believe it or not i can afford to loose a few douzen stabbers without bothering. My point was that ships OF THAT TYPE are unable to do what they where designed to do simply because warp disruptors are dictating the range of the fight more than the ships/pilots involved. That's fine, unless everyone can fight effectively in that range, regardless of ship type.
My argument is that the fight you used to decribe your point is not a very good one as the ships used do not in any way give you a logical argument to support your propsal.
I am predominantly a brawler and I often have issues around catching kiters. If the point/tackle ranges were increased it would potentially imbalance the brawling/kiting tactics.
I said potentially as i'm not oppossed to it just that you haven't presented a reasonable or logical argument to support your proposal IMO.
Now if the fight were for example the stabber against a rupture and the same out come was pretty much guarunteed then i could see your point but it wasn't and an armour brawling ruppie would have issues killing you that cane just doesn't. If you can demonstrate that in equal class ships i.e two cruisers, BC's whatever that the kiting ships always get beaten by the brawler the I would agree with you. But as this is definately not the case (much as I would like to trounce all kiters!) then your argument has no logical basis.
A caught kiter (scram/web) is generally a dead kiter. A brawler that can't catch a kiter is generally a dead brawler. Or best case scenario can tank until help arrives. Seems like balance to me.
That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
I'm NOT a Pirate! I'm a privateer! |
Dibblerette
The Phantom Regiment
THE ROYAL NAVY
130
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 06:11:00 -
[16] - Quote
Maeltstome wrote:rektumfreser wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:Quote:5.) Passive tanking isnt a real issue (yet) Umm. LOL. care to elaborate? I cannot recall a single time, on any toon, that iwe been beaten or had any problem with passive TANKING (as in, shield power relays/purger tanks) If ur talking about shield passivly recharging iwe always seen that as a pve niche confined mostly to drake/rattlers. Passive means cap-less/Non-Active. Purger rigs and extenders are PVE only REGEN tanks, based on the peak regen stat of shield. Good enough?
At least in my experience, "passive" tanks refer to SPRs and purgers, whereas a BUFFER fit relies on extenders and resists to simply have enough EHP that the enemy is dead before you run out of buffer.
So you have: Active, Passive, Buffer, (Speed/Sig) as tanking styles. |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
1569
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 06:57:00 -
[17] - Quote
tl;dr I as in special snowflake ME should always a kiting BC in my kiting cruiser CCP change the game so!!11
Your OP makes no sense whatsoever and you should be ashamed.
Shiva Furnace is recruiting! Small gang PVP in wormholes and lowsec. |
Solotta Erquilenne
1
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 16:21:00 -
[18] - Quote
ITT: OP is upset about TE bonus because hurricanes have more HP and more guns than his stabber.
ITT: OP thinks scramblers are overpowered because his stabber got scrammed by a shield cane.
ITT: OP thinks disruptor need a buff because skirmish gangboosts are underpowered/overpriced, and republic fleet points are too expensive.
ITT: OP forgets that in the old days of 90% webs, kiting ships were still billion isk fits. |
Wivabel
Exanimo Inc
Unclaimed.
80
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 16:46:00 -
[19] - Quote
Kiting ship vs kiting ship bad example for u argumenting ..........
 Wiv
To be a part of future EVE intrigue check us out. Sov in the south. Small gang pew is what we do when we are-ánot defending our space.-á
Join "Exan-áRecruitment"-áin game |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
917
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 17:15:00 -
[20] - Quote
Maeltstome wrote:
The new ranges i think would make more sense would be:
T1 - 25km
T2 - 30KM
Fac - Up to 33KM
Go away with such moronic values. If anything, ask for deadspace longer points. (R)isk vs reward, you know.
As long as current supercaps exist, you can not really ask an expensive RF point to be merely 10% better than a free tech2 one.
Also, you failed to realize how the core problem is overtanking. Reduce EHP back to normal values and a crapload of issues will get fixed right away - active tanking, for instance.
rektumfreser wrote:1.) Off-grid boosting should be nerfed, thats a pretty known thing for any1, ON-grid boosting should still be worth doing (perhaps with a dimishing effect, more ppl, less buff)
No "perhaps" but "surely". Unlimited gang-boosting is one of the most dumb EVE concepts, second after instant risk-free bridging.
14 |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
Heretic Nation
2563
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 18:08:00 -
[21] - Quote
No, Fon. The problem is that gang links are damn near required to get "reasonable" ranged tackle. I think everyone knows there's a problem when blasters outrange point range.
-Liang
Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?)
Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com
PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Solotta Erquilenne
2
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 18:30:00 -
[22] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:No, Fon. The problem is that gang links are damn near required to get "reasonable" ranged tackle. I think everyone knows there's a problem when blasters outrange point range.
-Liang
if your blasters are outranging point-range, then you aren't flying a brawler anymore. If you say "but Talos" then we get into the issue why are you trying to kite a ship that is setup to kite? Outranging a ship with larger guns has always been a bit dicey. AC tornado and pulse oracle will do the same thing if you're trying to maintain a 23km range on them. Perhaps I'm just making your point for you, but it seems like getting ranged tackle just means you need a specialized ship, and not just any cookie-cutter vagabond will do. IMO there are still plenty of options, such as tackle ceptor, using ewar to neutralize the target's offensive capabilities, or yeah gallente recons! Its a bit hard for standard kiting ships to mitigate damage now since pulse always has scorch and blasters with null actually do something, but this just represents a change in which ships are viable targets, and the kiting ship still has GTFO ability. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
Heretic Nation
2563
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 18:36:00 -
[23] - Quote
You're illustrating the problem, but not in the way you think you are. Everyone seems to think the Talos gets a range bonus, but it doesn't. the "standard" Talos fits don't even stack up TEs to get range either. So would it help if I'd specified "Hyperion", "Megathron", "Naga", or "Rokh" instead? The fact of the matter is that ranges have been creeping up for many years while point range has stayed steady. The problem is so bad that even unbonused blasters quite thoroughly outrange unlinked point range.
That is to say: you're saying that getting ranged tackle should require a special ship. And I totally agree. Unfortunately, that range is far beyond the 24km we have now.
-Liang
Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?)
Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com
PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
917
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 18:56:00 -
[24] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:No, Fon. The problem is that gang links are damn near required to get "reasonable" ranged tackle. I think everyone knows there's a problem when blasters outrange point range.
-Liang
That's like saying that logistics are required to get reasonable tank.
I'm not saying link values are fine (in fact, they are not), but trying to get it down to just values alone (without addressing unlimited boosting - imagine 1 logistics healing 10 ships at a time for the same effect as when healing just 1) is wrong way to go. Because of that unlimited boosting everyone can bring a gang-linking ship without making trade-offs in the fleet composition and that's why it becomes required that the other side brings it, too. Introduce proper mechanics (and then reduce link effects themselves) and then you'll find out that bringing 10 gang boosters into a gang of 20 is not viable, while 1 booster provides pretty minor boosts and thus is no longer mandatory.
Also, yes, range is inflated, but this is mostly due to 2 very simple things: TEs and OP tier3 BCs.
14 |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
Heretic Nation
2563
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 19:00:00 -
[25] - Quote
No, it is not at all like saying that logistics are required for a reasonable tank. It's more like saying that even the shortest range weapons in the game, completely unbonused, outrange an unlinked T2 disruptor. And the problem isn't also related to unlimited boosting. It's related to boosting - on grid, off grid, limited, and unlimited.
-Liang
Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?)
Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com
PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
917
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 19:34:00 -
[26] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote: It's more like saying that even the shortest range weapons in the game, completely unbonused, outrange an unlinked T2 disruptor.
I don't see that being true. If anything, this may come as a result of CCP's weird policy of constantly giving ships more and more grid/CPU so that they always pick the heavier guns. I remember playing with plain tech1 points (tech2 didn't exist) and don't recall point range as an issue, although there already were scorch and barrage. Neither Blasters nor ACs outrange tech2 points without adding TEs. Which weaponry has got excessive range in your opinion?
14 |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
Heretic Nation
2563
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 19:40:00 -
[27] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:Liang Nuren wrote: It's more like saying that even the shortest range weapons in the game, completely unbonused, outrange an unlinked T2 disruptor. I don't see that being true. If anything, this may come as a result of CCP's weird policy of constantly giving ships more and more grid/CPU so that they always pick the heavier guns. I remember playing with plain tech1 points (tech2 didn't exist) and don't recall point range as an issue, although there already were scorch and barrage. Neither Blasters nor ACs outrange tech2 points without adding TEs. Which weaponry has got excessive range in your opinion?
Oh come now. What a worthless post. "If only people didn't fit modules to their ships!" The problem is not weaponry having excessive range - it's with unlinked tackle being too short range.
-Liang
Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?)
Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com
PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
917
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 19:47:00 -
[28] - Quote
When exactly unlinked tackle became lacking in terms of range?
I, for one, can say exactly when EVE became overtanked. Surely every issue can be traced down to its origin.
14 |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army
Heretic Nation
2563
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 20:04:00 -
[29] - Quote
To answer your question in short: I'd say that it's been lacking for a long time - certainly much earlier than the introduction of 'those OP Tier 3s'. People have always pointed out that blaster battleships were outperforming AC battleships at point range. The introduction of T3s allowed the commonplace extension of point range out to more natural ranges, which permanently altered Eve's landscape.
And that's something you don't seem to understand. Eve is never going back to the time that you want it to. CCP is never going to cut every ship's HP by 3/4s. CCP is similarly not going to nerf the range of every weapons system in the game just to prevent boosting unlinked tackle range. You're so busy wailing at the loss of the past that you fail to understand it's the wrong course of action to simply reverse the changes of the past.
The problem here is that tackle ranges are too short for today's ships and modules. The answer is not to nerf everything in the game, as you suggest. The problem is to take a path of lesser disruption, and increase disruption range. Heh, heh, heh. Puns.
-Liang
Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?)
Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com
PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Maeltstome
Mentally Assured Destruction
253
|
Posted - 2013.01.07 20:07:00 -
[30] - Quote
I am actually shocked people think i'm being but-hurt over loosing a stabber. The fight i gave an example of was because IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. I'm not debating that the result was favourable for my side, i agree 100%. But it highlighted something that didn't make sense.
SO since you're hating on a real situation, I'll go back to theory-crafting since you love it so much on these forums. Thorax VS Stabber. Both in the same class and specialisation of ship. Here are the 2 fits im running. Both are Twin extended fits using long range ammo - which it common for this class of cruiser. Here are the fits.
Quote:
[Stabber, Stabber 220's 2xTE 2xGYRO]
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
10MN Microwarpdrive II
Warp Disruptor II
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Barrage M
Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Light Missile
Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Light Missile
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Quote:[Thorax, Thorax Neutrons 2x TE 2xMFS]
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Damage Control II
Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Large Shield Extender II
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
J5 Prototype Warp Disruptor I
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Medium Ancillary Current Router I
Medium Ancillary Current Router I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Hammerhead II x5
Now they both have a 5% damage bonus and the secondary bonus reflects their usage. The stabber has a falloff bonus for kiting, the thorax has a tracking bonus for closer range combat (i guess that's why it has it...). The main discrepancy is the that the stabber is using medium guns instead of large ones, like the thorax. But it's not possible to get 425's on the stabber without seriously gimping the EHP by a factor of 10-20%. It's borderline made of paper as it is. But here's a graph of their dps in 0-25km without the stabbers missiles being used or the thoraxes drones being used (so bonused slots only).
http://i1262.photobucket.com/albums/ii606/B1zmark/StabberVersusThoraxNoDrones_zpsbd75bbfb.png
So its basically 22km before the stabbers range bonus becomes useful. Beyond that the story is very 1-sided in favour of the stabber. It has very reliable damage up to around 40km... but since disruptors only go to 24km... that doesn't make any difference.
Oh btw, here's the graph with missile launchers/drones included. But this proves nothing other than the new stabber is trash. And yes, im serious. The rupture is still a better stabber than the stabber due to the combat range of 24km and the Stabbers general sucky slot/turret layout.
http://i1262.photobucket.com/albums/ii606/B1zmark/StabberVersusThoraxwithDrones_zps32d89063.png
So i'm struggling to see how range bonused ships will ever be viable with current combat ranges when brawlers can easily achieve these effective ranges and still have triple the DPS of kiting ships up close. Speed is the only real advantage kiting ships have, but 1 mistake and that advantage is gone. A brawler can make many mistakes in a fight and only has to get 1 slingshot right to win the fight.
Be careful when referring to 'winmatar' btw. Much of what you base your hatred on revolves around gang links and faction mods when you don't have either. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |