EVE Search - Please make the ares not suck

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Please make the ares not suck

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
DrunkenOne	Posted - 2005.06.28 17:48:00 - [1] Edited by: DrunkenOne on 28/06/2005 17:48:23 Its easilly the worst interceptor. A thermal damage bonus? Great thermal is the worst type of damage. It only has 2 mids so it cant even tackle as good as the malediction or an ares (the other 2 missile intys), and a malediction can fit 3 guns while an ares (and raptor too) can only fit 2. Combine that with the fact that it has simply pitiful grid and is slow as hell and you basically have an inty that can either imitate a longe range crow cept with like 1/2 the damage and only 1 free mid, or can imitate a short range taranis cept again with like 1/2 the damage and only 1 free mid. Some may speak about how it has a 4th low, which is great, except that that low is useless cause of the grid. Sure you can fit a damage mod, but that only affects 1/2 of your highslots. And you don't have the grid to fit a plate or a rep unless you gimp your highslots by only using missiles. So that 4th low is basically an extra cap relay or nanofiber, great.
Selim	Posted - 2005.06.28 17:51:00 - [2] Should lose a highslot and gain a mid.
DrunkenOne	Posted - 2005.06.28 17:56:00 - [3] Just to show you what I'm talking about, ares with engy 5 has 37.5 grid. mwd II=17 grid, so you have 20.5 grid free. If you fit only 125 rails and std launchers and shoot at range, you now have 2x 125 IIs (8 each)=16 grid 2x std= (3 each) =6 grid =22 grid. Conrats, you cannot fit a mwd II and WEAPONS on an ares. And you can JUST fit a mwd I with 125 rails (which arent even the biggest hybrid gun to use...) and standard launchers. And of course now you have 0 grid for the 4 lows and a mid, meaning you need a micro aux just to fit the rest of your slots. But of course that micro aux takes up some of your cpu, meaning you now dont have enough to fit a damage mod or something.
Cycerin Strikebeam	Posted - 2005.06.28 17:57:00 - [4] Edited by: Cycerin Strikebeam on 28/06/2005 17:57:45 Either divert the lowslot to a midslot to make it good for utility, or **** the launchers, give it an optimal bonus and make it the crusader's railgun-toting twin. EDIT: and give it some love related to fitting. teehee.
Meridius	Posted - 2005.06.28 17:57:00 - [5] Edited by: Meridius on 28/06/2005 17:58:15 Originally by: DrunkenOne A thermal damage bonus? Great thermal is the worst type of damage. wtf wtf Thermal does the best normalized damage. It's tanked often but that doesn't matter for inties and frigs. ________________________________________________________
Zaintiraris	Posted - 2005.06.28 17:58:00 - [6] If you add up that you want raptor to have another gun slot...then... I endorse this message! --- Originally by: CCP Hammer This game was so much better back before people knew math.
Meridius	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:01:00 - [7] Taranis should lose a midslot and gain a lowslot like the Claw and Crusader. Ares should get that mid as it's the tackler inty. ________________________________________________________
Montero	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:02:00 - [8] the raptor has exactly the same problem. 37.5 grid with eng 5, it's slow as hell for an inty, and it has crappy damage output. really crappy. i'd definatly agree that the ares and the raptor need some kind of boost. for people with only caldari frig at 5 theres the choice of 18 mill per crow or flying raptors, which suck, same for gallente
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:03:00 - [9] All ceptors shouls lose some highs, all damage bonuses, gain mids, a bit of lows and taclking ew bonuses.
Montero	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:04:00 - [10] the only way ive found to not completelly gimp the setup is to used named stuff rather than t2, and thats pretty damned gimpy itself.
ponieus	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:04:00 - [11] I shouldnt do this but whatever.. High: 150mm Tech2 x2 2 whatever lauchers(I use limos) x2 MID: MWD tech2 20km scrambler LOW: CPR x3 MAPC There you have it about the only setup worth using on the ares. Mkaes for a a great fleet tackler. I use it. Plus its faster than a transis and just about as fast as me crow. Have fun..
Montero	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:05:00 - [12] Originally by: Nomen Nescio All ceptors shouls lose some highs, all damage bonuses, gain mids, a bit of lows and taclking ew bonuses. i hate people who say that. they obviously either aren't inty pilots or dont understand the role of intys in EVE.
DrunkenOne	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:07:00 - [13] Originally by: ponieus I shouldnt do this but whatever.. High: 150mm Tech2 x2 2 whatever lauchers(I use limos) x2 MID: MWD tech2 20km scrambler LOW: CPR x3 MAPC There you have it about the only setup worth using on the ares. Mkaes for a a great fleet tackler. I use it. Plus its faster than a transis and just about as fast as me crow. Have fun.. How is that a "great fleet tackler?" Its not like you are divulging some uber setup. You can do the same thing, on a crusader or malediction, cept be much faster, do more damage, and have a 3rd mid on a malediction. You can also do the same thing in a crow, do more damage, be faster, and have a third mid. Or a claw, more damage, be faster. The ares is pathetic. So is the raptor but at least the raptor has a 3rd mid.
DrunkenOne	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:08:00 - [14] Edited by: DrunkenOne on 28/06/2005 18:09:44 Originally by: Meridius wtf wtf Thermal does the best normalized damage. It's tanked often but that doesn't matter for inties and frigs. K, i'll take explosive and EM over it anyday. "it doesnt matter for intys and frigs?" I doubt an ares could kill any non-idiot inty, and would probably lose to some t1 frigs as well. Originally by: Meridius Taranis should lose a midslot and gain a lowslot like the Claw and Crusader. Ares should get that mid as it's the tackler inty. It makes sense since the taranis is the "damage" inty. But then again, crow shouldnt have a 3rd mid either.
Montero	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:08:00 - [15] Edited by: Montero on 28/06/2005 18:09:00 Originally by: DrunkenOne Originally by: ponieus I shouldnt do this but whatever.. High: 150mm Tech2 x2 2 whatever lauchers(I use limos) x2 MID: MWD tech2 20km scrambler LOW: CPR x3 MAPC There you have it about the only setup worth using on the ares. Mkaes for a a great fleet tackler. I use it. Plus its faster than a transis and just about as fast as me crow. Have fun.. How is that a "great fleet tackler?" Its not like you are divulging some uber setup. You can do the same thing, on a crusader or malediction, cept be much faster, do more damage, and have a 3rd mid on a malediction. You can also do the same thing in a crow, do more damage, be faster, and have a third mid. Or a claw, more damage, be faster. The ares is pathetic. So is the raptor but at least the raptor has a 3rd mid. it doesn't particularly have the cap to run anything in the 3rd mid tho :\
LUKEC	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:11:00 - [16] Originally by: Montero Originally by: Nomen Nescio All ceptors shouls lose some highs, all damage bonuses, gain mids, a bit of lows and taclking ew bonuses. i hate people who say that. they obviously either aren't inty pilots or dont understand the role of intys in EVE. Give me th. missile damage bonus on malediction and i'd be soooo happy. And yes... interceptors do too much dmg, compared to AF.
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:22:00 - [17] Originally by: Meridius Taranis should lose a midslot and gain a lowslot like the Claw and Crusader. Ares should get that mid as it's the tackler inty. /signed ------------------- Quote: Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
Meridius	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:22:00 - [18] Originally by: DrunkenOne K, i'll take explosive and EM over it anyday. "it doesnt matter for intys and frigs?" I doubt an ares could kill any non-idiot inty, and would probably lose to some t1 frigs as well. I don't think you get it, thermal does the highest normalized damage. Way more then explosive and more then EM. Better DOT. It certainly isn't the reason the Ares sucks ________________________________________________________
spiritfa11	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:22:00 - [19] yeah the ship sux, really dont know why i fly one. --------------------- Swallow the knife... carve the way for your pride
Earthan	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:24:00 - [20] But nonetheles ares sucks like a vacum cleaner. Its one of those nice ships and modules nobody uses Stars, stars like dust, all around me....
DrunkenOne	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:27:00 - [21] Edited by: DrunkenOne on 28/06/2005 18:33:34 Originally by: Meridius Originally by: DrunkenOne K, i'll take explosive and EM over it anyday. "it doesnt matter for intys and frigs?" I doubt an ares could kill any non-idiot inty, and would probably lose to some t1 frigs as well. I don't think you get it, thermal does the highest normalized damage. Way more then explosive and more then EM. Better DOT. It certainly isn't the reason the Ares sucks YES SOMETHING TO ARGUE ABOUT! "Normalized damage" is stupid. Everything that matters when you are in an inty is tanked, except in a fleet battle where you are tackling and in an inty it doesnt really matter what damage you are doing, as all you are supposed to be doing is tackling. Hunting NPCers in a gank squad? They will be tanked. Fighting other intys? They have t2 resists (which we will get into in a second). Vs standard shield tank, em is obviously best damage. vs armor tanks it is the 2nd best damage. VS standard armor tank, explosive is the best damage. vs standard shield tanks its the 2nd best damage. If you look at t2 ships: Only amarr have low thermal resists. Only minmatar have low kinetic resist. Gallante and caldari both have crap EM and explosive resists. Basically, thermal and kinetic do "ok" damage vs both shield and armor if they are untanked, while EM does uber vs shields but crap vs armor, and explosive does uber vs armor but crap vs shields. Now if only an ammo could do both explosive and EM damage... EMP ammo 4tw. \o/ But now I'm off topic so lets just say the ares still sucks...
Meridius	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:27:00 - [22] Originally by: LUKEC i'd be soooo happy. And yes... interceptors do too much dmg, compared to AF. AF's don't do enough. ________________________________________________________
Meridius	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:33:00 - [23] Originally by: DrunkenOne YES SOMETHING TO ARGUE ABOUT! "Normalized damage" is stupid. Everything that matters is tanked, except in a fleet battle where you are tackling and in an inty it doesnt really matter what damage you are doing, as all you are supposed to be doing is tackling. Vs standard shield tank, em is obviously best damage. vs armor tanks it is the 2nd best damage. VS standard armor tank, explosive is the best damage. vs standard shield tanks its the 2nd best damage. If you look at t2 ships: Only amarr have low thermal resists. Only minmatar have low kinetic resist. Gallante and caldari both have crap EM and explosive resists. EMP ammo 4tw. \o/ Like i said, in terms of fighting inties/frigs thermal is the best. 27.5% Thermal 30% EM 32.5% KIN 35% EXP Explosive sucks ass. Most ships you will encounter in PVP are untanked btw, not tanked. Unless you're camping the Nonni gate in Aunenen ________________________________________________________
DrunkenOne	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:41:00 - [24] Edited by: DrunkenOne on 28/06/2005 18:42:43 Originally by: Meridius Like i said, in terms of fighting inties/frigs thermal is the best. 27.5% Thermal 30% EM 32.5% KIN 35% EXP Explosive sucks ass. Most ships you will encounter in PVP are untanked btw, not tanked. Unless you're camping the Nonni gate in Aunenen Now we are getting somewhere. In theory you are right. But think of it this way: Explosive owns armor. Now, compare the amount of shields intys have with the amount of armor that they have. Only 1 race's intys have more shields than armor, caldari. So, the only race that thermal is more effective than explosive is caldari. Now, caldari also have a 10% bonus to thermal resist on their shields, meaning thermal is only 20% more effective vs them than explosive. Caldari also have 55% thermal resist on their armor. Meaning even after you burn through the shields with your uber thermal damage, you now are heavily resisted. Every other inty has 35% thermal resist on their armor. Now, on the other hand, only amarr intys have a "bonus" to explosive resist, and that "bonus" still leaves explosive as the best damage type on armor. Though it does make explosive terrible vs their shields, but thats what EMP is for . So, in summary, explosive > thermal in inty combat because 3/4 races intys have more armor than shields, and explosive does more damage to armor than thermal does.
Meridius	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:49:00 - [25] Originally by: DrunkenOne [ Now we are getting somewhere. In theory you are right. But think of it this way: Explosive owns armor. Now, compare the amount of shields intys have with the amount of armor that they have. Only 1 race's intys have more shields than armor, caldari. So, the only race that thermal is more effective than explosive is caldari. Now, caldari also have a 10% bonus to thermal resist on their shields, meaning thermal is only 20% more effective vs them than explosive. Caldari also have 55% thermal resist on their armor. Meaning even after you burn through the shields with your uber thermal damage, you now are heavily resisted. Every other inty has 35% thermal resist on their armor. Now, on the other hand, only amarr intys have a "bonus" to explosive resist, and that "bonus" still leaves explosive as the best damage type on armor. Though it does make explosive terrible vs their shields, but thats what EMP is for . So, in summary, explosive > thermal in inty combat because 3/4 races intys have more armor than shields, and explosive does more damage to armor than thermal does. Hmm good points. Now, calc all armor and all shields and all resistances across all inties and let me know explosive really does more normalized damage ________________________________________________________
DrunkenOne	Posted - 2005.06.28 18:56:00 - [26] Edited by: DrunkenOne on 28/06/2005 18:59:06 Originally by: Meridius Hmm good points. Now, calc all armor and all shields and all resistances across all inties and let me know explosive really does more normalized damage Thats too much calculations and there would be too many things to factor in such as the fact that I'm sure more players have hull upgrades 4-5 compared to shield upgrades 4-5 (or whatever the skill is that gives u more shields). So that would mean that most players have 5-10% more armor than shields not even counting the base armor/shields. Combine that with the increasing use of plates on crusaders, claws, and taranises and now theres even MORE armor to get through. Hell even close range crows fit plates, and no inty fits shield extenders (which are worthless on anything smaller than cruisers), so there will often be 2 or 3x as much armor as shields (400mm plate claws and crusaders have like 4-5x armor). The more armor u have to get through, the better explosive is over thermal.
Meridius	Posted - 2005.06.28 19:14:00 - [27] Originally by: DrunkenOne Edited by: DrunkenOne on 28/06/2005 18:59:06 Originally by: Meridius Hmm good points. Now, calc all armor and all shields and all resistances across all inties and let me know explosive really does more normalized damage Thats too much calculations and there would be too many things to factor in such as the fact that I'm sure more players have hull upgrades 4-5 compared to shield upgrades 4-5 (or whatever the skill is that gives u more shields). So that would mean that most players have 5-10% more armor than shields not even counting the base armor/shields. Combine that with the increasing use of plates on crusaders, claws, and taranises and now theres even MORE armor to get through. Hell even close range crows fit plates, and no inty fits shield extenders (which are worthless on anything smaller than cruisers), so there will often be 2 or 3x as much armor as shields (400mm plate claws and crusaders have like 4-5x armor). The more armor u have to get through, the better explosive is over thermal. Yeah makes sense, explosive with plates in definetly wins out. That doesn't mean the Ares should get a non-thermal missle damage bonus tho. Think i like having EM on Malediction ________________________________________________________
Bobby Wilson	Posted - 2005.06.28 19:18:00 - [28] Originally by: Earthan But nonetheles ares sucks like a vacum cleaner. Its one of those nice ships and modules nobody uses On the contrary. People do use them. They're a great, expensive shuttle. Put on 4 nanos you're as fast as a shuttle. 4 overdrives, faster. And that's afk, if you tap the MWD the odd time it gets better. OFC, even in this (ridiculously limited) role the Claw is better (more base speed), and OFC the Claw is in addition a good damage interceptor that ppl actually USE. Ares is a terrible ship for anything but travel. BW Originally by: Harisdrop No I think you hit it right on winterblink. I agree most sci fi nerds that play Eve are 4-7 in thier social and tact skills. Pirates Yarr!!!!
DrunkenOne	Posted - 2005.06.28 19:18:00 - [29] Edited by: DrunkenOne on 28/06/2005 19:19:08 Originally by: Meridius Yeah makes sense, explosive with plates in definetly wins out. That doesn't mean the Ares should get a non-thermal missle damage bonus tho. Think i like having EM on Malediction I'm not saying it should get a different missile damage bonus, I'm saying the bonus is worthless. It should get a RoF bonus, but of course it wont cause CCP hates RoF bonuses now and removed them from the intys. But the ares sure could use one . Hell I wouldnt even care, as long as the ares and raptor get like 5 more base grid each.
Alex Harumichi	Posted - 2005.06.28 20:40:00 - [30] Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 28/06/2005 20:41:02 Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 28/06/2005 20:40:03 Agreed, the Ares is far and away the worst interceptor out there. There is nothing that it can do better than the others, and a ton of areas where it's worse. The combo of only 2 midslots and a pitiful grid makes it a doorstop. Give it a third midslot and it could perform in it's intended(?) role of tackler. Take away the third mid on the Taranis for all I care. Or give it a useful bonus instead of the stupid missile damage bonus. Or at least give it a lot more grid, so it could actually fit something. Compare to Claw. Theoretically same type of ship, but the Claw is faster, has much bigger grid, and is simply much better in all respects. Even as a shuttle (the only use Ares has atm) the Claw is far and away the better ship. It's just sad.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.