| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sky Hunter
   |
Posted - 2005.07.28 15:34:00 -
[31]
Oh yes, im still doing math to figure how to fit 5x 425 Autocannons IIs on Vagabond and still maintain some tank
-=-
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2005.07.28 15:41:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: DrunkenOne
Agreed with all of it. After the first missile nerf (you know, the one that was... actually a nerf) where you couldnt fit cruiser in std launchers anymore, gallante suddenly jumped from the worst to the best. Crows and kestrals and rifters could no longer slaughter the missile-less gallante frigs with easy. And Caracels and Ruptures could no longer *****thoraxes with cruiser (and torps? Can't remember if u could fit 1 in a heavy or not). Then, with the dual drive nerf, the thorax was suddenly uber again, no longer overshadowed by the dual drive mallers and ruptures. And, of course, the nerfs to (in sucession) Tempests/projectiles and Megapulse, and the missile rebalanced. And then the lowering of grid for hybrids.
So yes, gallante=4tw.
Heavy Launcher = 2 (3 if named) Cruise or 1 Torp.
Actually, the Gallente frigs didn't jump as such. The Kestrel, Vigil and Rifter were still the most used ships after that patch. I myself used Kestrels to learn PvP and not Incursus. What truely happened was that people started using interceptors, and the Taranis took place as the best interceptor.
To be a bit more illustrative: people DIDNT use Crow with 3 Cruise Missiles because the Kestrel with 4 outdamaged it by far!
No, it wasn't a nerf, it was a necessary rebalance. (Note how nerf is excessive debuffing that is harmful to game balance).
Missiles will become better over time, just as Hybrids weren't very good through all of Gemini and Castor (disregarding interceptors for a moment here). It may take time, but I think considerably less time than I spent waiting for hybrids to become better (I used to rat hunt in Megathron with Dual Heavy Pulse, cause hybrids weren't very good at all). Fall from grace is hard, though. My sympathies.
Ah, and Enyo must fit MAPC and CPU in order to get a decent 150mm II setup. Megathron has problems with blasters, not railguns (any fair pro-Gallente forum warrior will tell you the boost to railguns PG was done a bit too generously). Blasters have, in combination with other required modules, powergrid and above all CPU problems.
--
If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please.
Josameto III - Moon 1
|
DrunkenOne
|
Posted - 2005.07.28 15:51:00 -
[33]
Edited by: DrunkenOne on 28/07/2005 15:51:29
Originally by: Ithildin
Heavy Launcher = 2 (3 if named) Cruise or 1 Torp.
Actually, the Gallente frigs didn't jump as such. The Kestrel, Vigil and Rifter were still the most used ships after that patch. I myself used Kestrels to learn PvP and not Incursus. What truely happened was that people started using interceptors, and the Taranis took place as the best interceptor.
To be a bit more illustrative: people DIDNT use Crow with 3 Cruise Missiles because the Kestrel with 4 outdamaged it by far!
No, it wasn't a nerf, it was a necessary rebalance. (Note how nerf is excessive debuffing that is harmful to game balance).
Missiles will become better over time, just as Hybrids weren't very good through all of Gemini and Castor (disregarding interceptors for a moment here). It may take time, but I think considerably less time than I spent waiting for hybrids to become better (I used to rat hunt in Megathron with Dual Heavy Pulse, cause hybrids weren't very good at all). Fall from grace is hard, though. My sympathies.
Dunno why you are delving deep into how missiles will get better, I dont use missiles. And yes, people still used kestrals and rifters and such postpatch, but my point is that it made gallante USEABLE. And people used kestrals more than crows because they are stupid. Crow could fit the oversized ab and the cruise while kestrals couldnt. Crow could outrun cruise and kestrals couldnt. And yes, it was a nerf, and IMO parts of it should be rolled back, namely the heavy launchers being able to fit torps part. With the missile rebalance torps would suck vs other cruisers, keeping the thorax at the top of the chain and not unbalancing the class. But it would make a ship like the caracel into an anti-BS heavy bomber, would make the rupture into a medium bomber w/ guns for defense, and stabber into a light bomber. A ship like the arbitrator would see more pvp use as a light bomber w/ defense (drones). Maller would still own cause of dual plate setup and ridiculous tank, and thorax would still own cause of the drones. You'd have cruisers from every race being actually valuable. But thats WAY off the topic now and should be discussed in another thread.
Sure, you can't get a "useable" setup with 150 IIs on an enyo. But at least you can even fit them.
Originally by: Sochin
CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
|
Alberta
|
Posted - 2005.07.28 16:55:00 -
[34]
Quick note on the history of missiles bit. Heavy launchers (non-named) were 5 cruise or 2 torps to the best of my recollection. Also I still rated the rax > other cruisers. Don't forget that heavy drones used to own any sized target without even having to get close to them at this point in the game.
My Thoughts on Game Balance |
Frank Horrigan
|
Posted - 2005.07.28 17:09:00 -
[35]
I personaly hate gallente ships, except the thorax, thats the 1 exception.
|
Will Basthard
|
Posted - 2005.07.28 17:10:00 -
[36]
Quote:
During Gemini it was possible to fit Cruise Missiles in Std. Launchers, and during this time the KESTREL was on top of the food chain, even above battleships!
<archie bunker music>Those were the Days!</archie bunker music>
I used to pwn rats in breachers w. cruise... Torp Using BBs in the Ionorax... and use a tempest to hunt 0.0 when it was only 45k cruiser spawns.
<singing>
Memories... of a game I once knew... now it is balanced... what is a guy to do... so I say good job CCP... way hellofatime... and if you give me cruise missile firing frigates that aren't crappy like stealth bombers are now... I will flip you a dime.
</singing>
|
Blind Fear
|
Posted - 2005.07.28 17:11:00 -
[37]
When you could put cruise missiles on a frig, breacher > kestrel.
A breacher could outrun incoming cruise and a kestrel couldnt.
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.07.28 17:18:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Blind Fear
When you could put cruise missiles on a frig, breacher > kestrel.
A breacher could outrun incoming cruise and a kestrel couldnt.
Dual MWD Kessie > Breacher
I used to get in close with dual mwd, web and watch them die.
________________________________________________________
|
Alberta
|
Posted - 2005.07.28 17:24:00 -
[39]
Ahhh breachers. I remember a corpmate of mine using one to attack a scorpion and a blackbird. Used the cruise that were being shot at him to kill the BB. 
My Thoughts on Game Balance |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 04:55:00 -
[40]
Edited by: j0sephine on 29/07/2005 05:04:19
"'slightly smaller range'"
Base difference in optimal between 425mm rail and mega beam is 20%
Damage difference between mega beam on Armageddon and the rail on Megathron is (rounding down) 20% or so. (actually up to 30% depending how you count it)
If the Armageddon switches to two levels 'worse' crystal, it will lose ~20% of damage output, but gain 25% optimal increase.
... leading to mega beam Armageddon actually outranging the Megathron while dealing the same damage. And turning the tables, as now each 'tracking thingie' will only increase Armageddon's advantage.
the Megathron will gain upper hand only in the farthest ranges where the Armageddon runs out of crystals to switch... i.e. at at least 140% range (tungsten or iron ammo)
edit: and for what's worth, that proves pretty much nothing -- Gallente sniper gains upper hand at extremely long ranges, while the Amarr outdamage them at 'close' end of the long gun range. Doesn't make one more valuable than the other, it's simply left to the fleet commander to capitalize on the exact advantage their fleet has...
|
Blind Fear
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 04:58:00 -
[41]
Originally by: StoreSlem
Range difference is more than 20%, thanks to falloff. Which means you can have +40% range ammo to get the same range and damage as the arma (roughly). So I ask you, how much of an advantage is it to only match railguns in damage up to a certain range then stop while the rails can go up to 30km further? How much of an advantage is it to being limited to one dmg type only?
Yeah, being limited to two commonly tanked damage types sucks, right? Glad hybrids dont have that problem.
Just for the hell of it, I did a tachyon arma too - 25% more damage for 10% less range and a lost lowslot (doesnt matter. you'd have put a WCS in it anyway).
Hurry! Activate Forum-WCS and get to your Forum-Safespots! It's a red day in the forum-core!
|
Voltron
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:01:00 -
[42]
As I've climbed up the skill point ladder I've gone through 3 of the 4 races for battleships for pvp. I started with Caldari, because they were the least skill intensive, then I moved on to Amarr because I could tank like crazy in an apoc, or gank like crazy in a geddon, now that I've surpassed 5 mill sp in gunnery alone I've switched to gallente bs/ceptors/af etc. Gallente ships are definately some of the best for pvp, but they are somewhat skill intensive.
Volt
|
StoreSlem
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:03:00 -
[43]
Originally by: theRaptor
Most people who play this game don't think fighting fleet battles at close to a 100km (so you can run away easily) is fun. And megapulse still make Amarr BS godlike in most common PVP situations.
Still, those 100km battles occur rather frequently, them being fun or not.
Oh, and 'most common PVP situation'... you mean the window between 15km (where blasters and autocannons stop hitting) and 30km (where longer range guns with high damage ammo starts outdamaging them) ?
Simply put, that 15km window isn't very big, and its quite hard to maintain it because you won't be able to use a webber at that range.
|
StoreSlem
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:11:00 -
[44]
Edited by: StoreSlem on 29/07/2005 05:11:41
Originally by: j0sephine
Edited by: j0sephine on 29/07/2005 05:04:19
"'slightly smaller range'"
Base difference in optimal between 425mm rail and mega beam is 20%
You are forgetting the 10km falloff advantage for the rails, which stays the same even with the very lowest range crystals / ammos. In fact the arma will never outdamage the mega except the very short ranges, but alas will be down by like 30km or more on the longest ranges.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:17:00 -
[45]
"You are forgetting the 10km falloff advantage for the rails, which stays the same even with the very lowest range crystals / ammos."
Doesn't damage scale down the deeper you go in the falloff, making it overall just about enough to make up for the advantage Armageddon receives with the 'weaker' lens..? Could swear either someone figured the equation for that one, or it was Hammerhead himself that posted the graphs... but it's been a while. o.O;
|
StoreSlem
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:18:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Blind Fear
Hurry! Activate Forum-WCS and get to your Forum-Safespots! It's a red day in the forum-core!
Whos alt are you anyways? You dissing FA so much yet don't dare post with your main can only mean you are in a corp or alliance thats percieved even worse than FA in pvp. Although I won't hold your real alliance or corp against you, because I don't believe in the rather general assumption that your intelligence is proportional to your alliances average pvp skill. Do post with your main though, it is much more fun proving you wrong then.
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:22:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Blind Fear
Why is it that every post by someone in FA has brilliant PvP gems like 'the arma is a bad battleship' and 'if you orbit an ishtar with your MWD on, his drones wont hit you!!!1!'.
One would suspect that as an alliance, you might be slightly screwed.
rofl
You are my favorite alt Blind
________________________________________________________
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:24:00 -
[48]
Originally by: StoreSlem
You dissing FA so much yet don't dare post with your main can only mean you are in a corp or alliance thats percieved even worse than FA in pvp
I don't think thats mathematically possible.
________________________________________________________
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:24:00 -
[49]
Originally by: StoreSlem
Having armas / apocs in your fleet simply cut your operational range down by 20-30 km, unless they use multiple extra tracking enhancers in which case their DOT would drop below that of megathrons / tempests. (Apocs btw would be at lower DOT from scratch and have same ****ty range as armageddons)
So ******* what? How hoes that make Amarr ships "teh suck". Oh noes blasterthrons are useless in fleet combat stop the presses. Tempests and Megathrons are good snipers. Apoc isn't. But Amarr own in medium range combat. It seems to me that you are complaining because you only fight at stupid long ranges out of fear of being scrambled.
My alliance generally fights at under twenty km's, and we normally win using mostly Amarr ships against Gallente and Minmatar. That doesn't mean Gallente and Minmatar ships suck. They are just normally not as good in that combat environment. But unfortunately for you twenty km range engagements are the norm when you are actually using a fleet offensively rather then defensively.
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
-- Ancient "Dirt" Religious figure. |
StoreSlem
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:26:00 -
[50]
Originally by: j0sephine
"You are forgetting the 10km falloff advantage for the rails, which stays the same even with the very lowest range crystals / ammos."
Doesn't damage scale down the deeper you go in the falloff, making it overall just about enough to make up for the advantage Armageddon receives with the 'weaker' lens..? Could swear either someone figured the equation for that one, or it was Hammerhead himself that posted the graphs... but it's been a while. o.O;
It does, but it is a soft curve. It basically means that at certain windows throughout a damage over range graph it will be beneficial to have a ammo type which optimal range will fall short, but the damage increase from the ammo will be greater than the damage loss from firing into falloff.
The greater the falloff value the greater these windows. For the artilleries the windows might even be continous for the very short range ammos (I think).
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:28:00 -
[51]
"Whos alt are you anyways? You dissing FA so much yet don't dare post with your main can only mean you are in a corp or alliance thats percieved even worse than FA in pvp."
Some people got their mains banned on the forum, and revealing them would be probably "discussing the moderation" ...
(but on semi related note, methinks i saw a thread recently where someone made a guess about Blind's identity, and that guess made lot of sense... :s
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:33:00 -
[52]
Originally by: j0sephine
"Whos alt are you anyways? You dissing FA so much yet don't dare post with your main can only mean you are in a corp or alliance thats percieved even worse than FA in pvp."
Some people got their mains banned on the forum, and revealing them would be probably "discussing the moderation" ...
(but on semi related note, methinks i saw a thread recently where someone made a guess about Blind's identity, and that guess made lot of sense... :s
From what I know if they forum ban you its mean't to be all your characters. But its obvious that lots of people are getting around this.
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
-- Ancient "Dirt" Religious figure. |
Blind Fear
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:34:00 -
[53]
Originally by: StoreSlem
Originally by: Blind Fear
Hurry! Activate Forum-WCS and get to your Forum-Safespots! It's a red day in the forum-core!
Whos alt are you anyways? You dissing FA so much yet don't dare post with your main can only mean you are in a corp or alliance thats percieved even worse than FA in pvp. Although I won't hold your real alliance or corp against you, because I don't believe in the rather general assumption that your intelligence is proportional to your alliances average pvp skill. Do post with your main though, it is much more fun proving you wrong then.
I'm not dissing FA, because I'm sure if I needed to know the best way to run a serpentis complex, you guys would be able to help me out.
I just think it's adorable that you're telling me that the arma is a bad battleship. Every battleship is a bad battleship when WCS = Lowslots.
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:35:00 -
[54]
Originally by: theRaptor
From what I know if they forum ban you its mean't to be all your characters.
Not all your accounts
________________________________________________________
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:38:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Meridius
Originally by: theRaptor
From what I know if they forum ban you its mean't to be all your characters.
Not all your accounts
Thats just what I have heard. Seems kind of pointless just to ban the account when its the person behind it thats the problem.
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
-- Ancient "Dirt" Religious figure. |
StoreSlem
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:40:00 -
[56]
Originally by: theRaptor
Originally by: StoreSlem
Having armas / apocs in your fleet simply cut your operational range down by 20-30 km, unless they use multiple extra tracking enhancers in which case their DOT would drop below that of megathrons / tempests. (Apocs btw would be at lower DOT from scratch and have same ****ty range as armageddons)
So ******* what? How hoes that make Amarr ships "teh suck". Oh noes blasterthrons are useless in fleet combat stop the presses. Tempests and Megathrons are good snipers. Apoc isn't. But Amarr own in medium range combat. It seems to me that you are complaining because you only fight at stupid long ranges out of fear of being scrambled.
My alliance generally fights at under twenty km's, and we normally win using mostly Amarr ships against Gallente and Minmatar. That doesn't mean Gallente and Minmatar ships suck. They are just normally not as good in that combat environment. But unfortunately for you twenty km range engagements are the norm when you are actually using a fleet offensively rather then defensively.
I never disputed a short range fleet would decimate a long range fleet(now I don't know wether your adversaries use long or short range weapons anyways). I do however dispute your claim that pulse armageddons are superior to blaster gallentes or autocannon tempests at the ranges below 20km which your corp is fighting at. Oh and incidentally, the fact that your alliance usually fights at 20km doesn't mean
it is _the_ most common pvp range throughout the entire of eve, or however you worded it.
And I don't dispute that pvp experience and leadership and pilot numbers will as good as allways have way more weight than the differences that are argued over here. It doesn't mean the differences aren't there, and it's especially annoying when someone makes a thread 'hey gallente ships sux'. Amarr doesn't suck if you use their ships optimally. They just aren't as good as their minmatar and gallente counterparts, at least in the numerous scenarios that have been described here.
|
Pointless Vengence
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:51:00 -
[57]
We are in a world where ship stats are being constantly adjusted to create some sort of 'balance.'
With that said:
"There are no sucky ships . . . only sucky pilots."
-Pointless
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:52:00 -
[58]
Originally by: StoreSlem
I never disputed a short range fleet would decimate a long range fleet(now I don't know wether your adversaries use long or short range weapons anyways). I do however dispute your claim that pulse armageddons are superior to blaster gallentes or autocannon tempests at the ranges below 20km which your corp is fighting at.
Blaster boats can't move, thats what tacklers are for. And AC tempests aren't that great either (nosf tempests on the other hand). Im sure an all blaster fleet would be nasty but no one seems to fly them.
Originally by: StoreSlem
Oh and incidentally, the fact that your alliance usually fights at 20km doesn't mean it is _the_ most common pvp range throughout the entire of eve, or however you worded it.
20km is about gate jump in range. And so unless you are fighting in one system, you will be fighting at that range. My alliance has great fun tricking pirate sniper fleets into jumping through a gate ontop of us.
Originally by: StoreSlem
And I don't dispute that pvp experience and leadership and pilot numbers will as good as allways have way more weight than the differences that are argued over here. It doesn't mean the differences aren't there, and it's especially annoying when someone makes a thread 'hey gallente ships sux'. Amarr doesn't suck if you use their ships optimally. They just aren't as good as their minmatar and gallente counterparts, at least in the numerous scenarios that have been described here.
Nope I said that. Gallente and Minmatar are great snipers, and good for those stupid 100km range fleet fights. But if you try to move that sniper fleet between systems you will die horribly when a medium range fleet with less pilots jumps you as you come out of gate cloak.
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
-- Ancient "Dirt" Religious figure. |
StoreSlem
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 05:58:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Blind Fear
I just think it's adorable that you're telling me that the arma is a bad battleship. Every battleship is a bad battleship when WCS = Lowslots.
I am not implying that the arma is bad as such, I am just stating it is worse, relatively.
The armageddon excel at the ranges 15-30km with mega pulse and 30-40km with mega beams. No other battleships have higher dot at those ranges.
However, the Megathron excels at 0-10km with blasters and 40km+ with railguns.
The Tempest excels at 10-15km roughly thanks to autocannons, and its 1400mm howwies closely rivals the 425mm rails and probably has several small windows thanks to the huge falloff. In addition they have a super cool gadget in their huge volley damage.
Now I would gladly take either the tempest or the megathron if I had similar skills all over, because in full honesty I do not think the arma's tiny window outweighs all the other ranges where it is inferior.
As for the apoc, which is the ship that imo should rival the megathron and tempest, it really just doesn't cut it. The power grid and turret slot increase it has over the arma does not at all cover the loss of the -33% dot and the one low slot. Apoc is indeed suck when compared to the other battleships.
I asked in yz earlier tonight why the majority of BoB fleets are apocs, and I got the answer 'its so we can pvp inbetween the npcing' which is indeed the only reasonable answer lol.
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.07.29 06:03:00 -
[60]
Originally by: StoreSlem
As for the apoc, which is the ship that imo should rival the megathron and tempest, it really just doesn't cut it. The power grid and turret slot increase it has over the arma does not at all cover the loss of the -33% dot and the one low slot. Apoc is indeed suck when compared to the other battleships.
Why don't we just do away with different ships and just have one ship that we can change the skin on? 
The Apoc is supposed to be an uber tank, and it is. Its just that tanking is pointless in fleet.
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
-- Ancient "Dirt" Religious figure. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |