Things blaster needs to be changed so it works properly and without ship changes?

Massive tracking bonus on weapons: the shortest range weapon can't simply track properly in it's op range while having less issues in the fall off, you must admit this is kinda "stupid"

The shortest weapon system at BS size with 4km optimal range can't track an elephant under 1500M and the slightest lateral movement makes you loose a lot of the "EFT dps", another ridiculous point.

Imho the best thing to do about blasters is increase their optimal up to 13km at large size and 0km fall off, increase dmg modifier to make it spit nuclear warheads and that ******* weapon system should never have a single issue tracking in his full optimal from 0 to the 13km.

Ammo changes are needed, the single change about % kin or thermal for the same range/dmg type isn't enough, a third dmg type would be the most welcome even at a very small %.
T2 ammo needs serious revamp and get rid of the tracking penalty, hell you need a lot of training to use the worst ammo out there when faction one will overall be more effective, this is completely silly.

Fitting PG requirements lowered and cap use but maybe increase it significantly when overloaded if dmg modifier increased to nuclear warheads level.

Before touching the ships this would be a nice start, then go for the ships themselves and after that see if weapons still need something + or removal so they don't become tomorrow the omgfckingpowmobiles

I think the "can't choose your damage type" argument is overblown, just as it is with lazers. Both could be viewed as damage type=loads of DPS. One type of gun (blasters) pummels armor, the other pummels shields. I think that works fine and doesn't need to be tweaked in any way..

Glad to know I'm not the only one who feels this way.

PvE is easy enough that even if you're blitzing with a max skilled dedicated ship, you really aren't gaining much time.

PvP everyone buffer tanks anyway, and you will rarely encounter a resist hole big enough to actually exploit. And even if they do, how would you know?

True this, and if you do find a significant hole it's going to be either EM or EXP...both of which can also easily be the highest. I'd take Kin/Therm over most of the other types any day. It does kind a suck when firing that at a t2 ship with kin/therm resist bonuses though....


As far as the tracking goes, I'm not sure AC's should be below blasters, really. They've always seemed like a quick and nimble weapon, whereas blasters are more like a shotgun or something. Though, it'd be nice to see them upgraded to a tactical shotgun over an old SxS, if you get me. Giving some extra agility to hybrid ships would be nice, though we'll have to bear in mind what that will change when you fit them with rails, yeah? You can't look at a ship and go "oh, that's for blasters" or "oh, that's for railguns", because people will want to use both. Try to force it and you end up with the Hyperion...

Minimatar t2/3 has high EM shields resist. That said, EM/exp is definitely better than Kin/thermal. Every single ship, t1-t3, shield or armor, has decent kin/thermal resists. Add in enam/invulnerability, and it gets high. With EM/exp, it finds a resist hole at least some of the times, with kin/thermal, there won't be a hole in any competent fit.

Someone suggested making Minny less agile but keeping their high speed and making blaster boats more agile (quicker) and buffing blaster tracking. I liked this.

TBH though this topic has been done to death a few posts below.

Range is a bit different. If they buff blasters too much you'd end up seeing 1000dps neutron/tracking enhancer gank boats with 25-30km range.

they should be fixed like this