|
| Author | Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
 Naughty Boy    |
Posted - 2005.08.22 16:54:00 -
[1] I'm not training for an HAC, i'm training for a thorax. Battleship armor + battleship weapons + frig defense in a disposable cruiser made me win eve. \o/ Nobody fits smartbombs in empire, or please do so for the entertainement value. And shooting 8 heavy drones takes long enough not to be a realistic option, unless in a 1 vs 1 situation which is not even close to frequent. And save the: "gallente is the drone race, it should have more drones" or the "drones are a close range weapon, hence gallente should have more and bigger and nastier and...". 45km is hardly close range for cruisers, 8 heavy drones is a battle ship weapon. Yet they track like frig guns :/ Whining against the intention of ccp to adjust the drone bay to a balanced level saved the thorax once from being put in line to the other tier 3 cruisers, i believe it can save it once again, so keep up saying that the thorax is fine, pwetty pwease, and we shall win again. And yes, cruisers in general need a boost, but in the meanwhile can't we acknowledge the obvious about the drone bay ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.22 17:22:00 -
[2] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 22/08/2005 17:22:20 @darth: sound logic, everybody in the same boat 4tw. @noriath: 1. point at various killboards and laugh. 2. who said that a thorax isn't even overpowered without mwd ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.22 17:47:00 -
[3] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 22/08/2005 17:50:07 Edited by: Naughty Boy on 22/08/2005 17:49:29
Why ? Besides, nobody said "remove all the drones", why can't it use "only" 10 medium drones on top of its guns ? That thoraxes do most of their damage with 8 heavy drones is exactly the problem, like it or not. Briefly, cruisers do have to fit a plate to me somehow survivable in "battleship & ganking" world. All tier 3 cruisers can do it. They can also fit the smallest cruiser guns on top of that. Maybe not the thorax, but that doesn't matter as the thorax, unlike other tier 3 cruisers, has 8 heavy drones to do the damage. That's more than half the battleships have, in case you wonder. Now, a cruiser with close range cruiser guns might aswell fit frigate guns (exception being the dual 180mm AC because of how they track and how projectile are balanced) as they don't lose significant damage output, but gain tracking. This is at the expense of range, but cruisers do not need range in the "battleship & ganking" world. Downgrading the guns they also gain significant survivability vs frigs and interceptors. What is then completely wrong is that, fitting all tier 3 cruisers to be the most versatile on the battlefield, you have: maller: more armor resistance and a medium nos, maybe two; rupture: bonus for the guns, though the bonus are needed because that's how projectiles are balanced. Or, fitted maller-like, a nos and no extra armor resistance. A tad more speed, though not much. moa: an extra mid slot, for EW only. thorax: a battleship weapon, 8 heavy drones, that still operates when the thorax is jammed and nossed. There is no trade-off most of the time, 8 heavy drones are much better than the extra armor resistance, the nos, or the extra mid slot. Of course, that's considering that the cruiser fit a battleship plate. Now, there is basically no reason not to do so. And i am not sure at all that the same argument doesn't hold even when not taking the plates into account, as even then there wouldn't be much point in not fitting frig guns on cruisers. They are just more versatile on the battlefield. And again there, frig guns + 8 heavy drones is too good.
Not more useless than the projectile bonuses that projectile "needs" to be on par, or the laughable "shield boost" bonus of the moa or even the range bonus. The maller armor resistance bonus is awesome, but that's about it. |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.22 19:39:00 -
[4]
When a ship is overpowered, everybody ends up flying it... so much for the diversity you pretend to be defending. I know, broad thinking is overrated. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.22 19:42:00 -
[5]
[sarcasm]So, you did notice too[/sarcasm] Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.22 19:59:00 -
[6] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 22/08/2005 20:02:52
Okay. You're the one complaining that caldari HAC are sub par and not much on the pvp battlefield. You don't call for nerf, just for a boost of the HAC you can fly. It's easier to put 2 or 3 ships on par with 5 or 6 others than the other way around, isn't it ? Right, let's improve some cruisers stats across the board, hp or sig radius for instance, once this drone bay is downsized. How are other cruisers going to be more popular if one is just god-mode when compared to the others ? To improve other cruisers to the level of the thorax, they need to get 2 or 3 BS sized guns on top of their current stats... so much for balance. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.22 22:20:00 -
[7] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 22/08/2005 22:25:31
Only battleships can realistically use smartbombs against heavy drones. Only a fool would use smartbombs in empire. The fact that you can come with a setup against another doesn't change the fact that the ship is blatantly overpowered. Finally, do i have to make a gallente alt to assess this problem ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: nevermind, troll food removed. |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.22 22:51:00 -
[8] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 22/08/2005 22:51:37 Simply, not.
First, halving the drone bay of the thorax, is not incompatible with a boost to all the cruisers, including the thorax. Ok ? Secondly, heavy drones are a battleship weapon. 8 of them account for multiple battleship guns, and their tracking is awesome. In order to boost other cruisers to the same level, you would have to give the caracal some cruise launchers, or the maller should get some megapulses. How about no ?
Not very fond of those for various reasons, especially the vexor.
Ok. Other cruisers are pathetic unless against frigs. They can't possibly be pathetic against themselves, so i guess the only thing they are currently not pathetic against are the battleships and hac's.  In that quote alone, you can see very clearly where is the problem with the thorax. Thanks for proving my point.Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.22 23:12:00 -
[9]
Nobody said that, and if you are trying to make people believe that it was said... well, though it may work, the confusion you bring isn't shedding light into the debate.
I'm probably as much of a noobie as yourself. Again, you are purposefully bringing confusion in the debate. Nobody said that the thorax had to be nerfed because it is not t2 or the other things you write. That would be silly and i'm afraid, you want people to believe that the arguments are silly, on basis of the confusion that you bring.
How does it relate to the fact that the cruiser is carrying a battleship weapon, something of the kind of - as i said in a previous post - cruise launchers on a caracal or megapulses on a maller.
Look, your confusion again. How does the fact that one has an alt relate to the debate ? The thorax, with a plate, has battleship armor + battleship weapon + anti frig defense, and is only marginally affected by nos in his damage output, as opposed to other cruisers - except the rupture and caracal - and electronic warfare - except the caracal. With or without the plate, this unique combinaison make it completely overpowered, as compared to its class, and also as compared to other classes. It is completely outside of the general game design in so many ways: - no real tradeoff between damage output and tank (thanks to oversized plate, but ALSO thanks to the fact that it doesn't give up much by not carrying guns... all the fitting resources can be dedicated to tanking). - carry a weapon not designed for its class (8 heavy drones), actually equal to several battleship guns/launchers in damage output and range, and also gifted by a particulary awesome tracking. - can dedicate the gun hardpoints to frig and cruiser defense, thus in fact covering with weapons of the right size every class of ship there is in the game. And the list goes on.
Okay. The whole thread explains why, even if "cruisers right now are woefully underpowered in pvp", the thorax IS a problem. Why don't you come with an argument, rather than a bold statement of the kind ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 07:46:00 -
[10]
*gasp* It is not nice to question people's intelligence. It is not even clever to do it in a way that shows that you didn't understand most of what was said previously. Nobody said that there is no counter to a thorax. Nobody even said that another cruiser cannot win in a 1 vs 1 situation against a thorax. Get it ? The problem is not that people do not know how to fight a thorax. The problem is that the drone bay of the thorax is to big to be a cruiser weapon, it is a battleship weapon in damage and range. The tracking is more like a very good cruiser weapon or a frigate weapon than a battleship weapon. The range, 45 km, isn't close range in the frigate and cruiser world, it is not even mid range but long range in the cruiser world. The damage output of drones alone is what most battleships do at that range with all their guns, without using damage mods. And that is with much more skills dedicated to gunnery than the thorax pilot even has to have in "drone operation". Now, who does look stupid. You sir, do have a big mouth but not what it takes to back it up. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 09:46:00 -
[11]
So, basically, the thorax is not overpowered bevause a battleship can slaughter it at 45 km when it does something dumb ? You are talking about a totally hypothetical situation that you don't even bother describing, what do you expect to prove with that ? And, furthermore, nobody is talking about 10 heavy drones (maxed drones skills) but 8 heavy drones (drones to level 5, drone interfacing to level 3).
Caldari is the "missile race", so why shouldn't it have a cruiser with cruise and siege launchers ? Amarr is the "turret race", so why shouldn't it have a cruiser with megapulses or megabeams ? Besides, 4 heavy drones would more likely be 10 medium drones: a cruiser weapon for a blaster boat of a drone race, this is perfectly fine. 15 medium drones for the arbitrator and the vexor, the drone carriers of two different races. It doesn't matter than the arbitrator is not a gallente ship, it is already sub-par compared to the vexor. Cruiser weapons for dedicated drone carriers: This is fine to me. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 12:28:00 -
[12] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 12:34:01
Just for you, even though i said i was going to shut up. Why do you have this obsession about conceiving game balance only in 1 VS 1, two ships of the same class against each other, where nobody can warp out. The thorax is overpowered in his class and outside his class. As for the rest of what you write, please read again the whole thread and think about it, no need to answer yet again the same issues because you can't be bothered to read before posting. The arbitrator is not sub-par. It is, however, not worth using over a vexor as it is lacking in about every possible way compared to the vexor. See what the 'freak said here: clicky. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 12:36:00 -
[13] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 12:36:42 Nevermind. |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 15:58:00 -
[14] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 16:01:51
That is exactly what is wrong with the thorax, my standard thorax setup is versatile enough not to have to put intelligence or planning. I cannot do that with another cruiser. BS armor + BS weapon + frig defense in a disposable cruiser 4tw, no other cruiser can do that. It is the firepower and the versatility on the battlefield (non-specific setup) that makes this ship so overpowered. It is better than half of the HAC in firepower, versatility on the battlefield, survivability. That is wrong. Prove me wrong instead of throwing your textbook anti-nerf stuffs. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: Oh, yeah, as for the psycho-crap "you got beat by a thorax because you suck" i have another one for you, "you don't want your ship to be put on par with the other ships of the same class because you don't want people to see how crap you are when fighting with balanced ships."  |
 Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 15:58:00 -
[15] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 16:01:51
That is exactly what is wrong with the thorax, my standard thorax setup is versatile enough not to have to put intelligence or planning. I cannot do that with another cruiser. BS armor + BS weapon + frig defense in a disposable cruiser 4tw, no other cruiser can do that. It is the firepower and the versatility on the battlefield (non-specific setup) that makes this ship so overpowered. It is better than half of the HAC in firepower, versatility on the battlefield, survivability. That is wrong. Prove me wrong instead of throwing your textbook anti-nerf stuffs. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: Oh, yeah, as for the psycho-crap "you got beat by a thorax because you suck" i have another one for you, "you don't want your ship to be put on par with the other ships of the same class because you don't want people to see how crap you are when fighting with balanced ships." In Rust We Trust |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 19:06:00 -
[16] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 19:07:43
Thanks for proving my point. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: Holy ****, i did not know that it would be so easy. You, sir, are a genius. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 19:06:00 -
[17] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 19:07:43
Thanks for proving my point. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: Holy ****, i did not know that it would be so easy. You, sir, are a genius. In Rust We Trust |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 19:31:00 -
[18]It is not performing like a cruiser do, because it can slaughter (provided that you fit it correctly) almost anything with the SAME fitting. Who cares if there are SPECIFIC setups to counter you, as at the end of the day those setups die to more versatile fittings and thus aren't likely to be encountered. And no, the thorax is not working as cruisers should perform, or please tell me why. Because, and i'm honest, i have no idea how cruiser *should* perform as CCP ways are somewhat dark for me, sometimes. I just know that when one ship, one setup beats most of the setups out there (=versatile), and cannot be countered by other VERSATILE** setups because people whined sufficiently for the drone bay to be DOUBLED after it was rightfully nerfed, there is a problem. By the time a ship smaller than a battleship or a hac deals with the drones, it is doomed or close to be so, and the thorax is still healty. That is wrong on so many levels it is painfull to have to explain it to someone who is writing seriously.
Dude, that is not the argument and you know it. Do you hope that this confusion is helping the debate, or do you just believe that it will end it ?
Problem: The combinaison BS armor + BS weapons + frig defense in a disposable cruiser is wrong. Every tier 3 cruiser can fit frigate guns. Every tier 3 cruiser can fit a big plate (or two in the case of the maller). Only the Thorax can use BS weapons. Solution: remove the ability of the thorax to use BS weapons. Problem solved  Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. ** eve 101 is coming up with setups to beat specific setups, but if you new setup is too much specialized it is not working, as it will die to versatile setups to easily. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 19:31:00 -
[19]It is not performing like a cruiser do, because it can slaughter (provided that you fit it correctly) almost anything with the SAME fitting. Who cares if there are SPECIFIC setups to counter you, as at the end of the day those setups die to more versatile fittings and thus aren't likely to be encountered. And no, the thorax is not working as cruisers should perform, or please tell me why. Because, and i'm honest, i have no idea how cruiser *should* perform as CCP ways are somewhat dark for me, sometimes. I just know that when one ship, one setup beats most of the setups out there (=versatile), and cannot be countered by other VERSATILE** setups because people whined sufficiently for the drone bay to be DOUBLED after it was rightfully nerfed, there is a problem. By the time a ship smaller than a battleship or a hac deals with the drones, it is doomed or close to be so, and the thorax is still healty. That is wrong on so many levels it is painfull to have to explain it to someone who is writing seriously.
Dude, that is not the argument and you know it. Do you hope that this confusion is helping the debate, or do you just believe that it will end it ?
Problem: The combinaison BS armor + BS weapons + frig defense in a disposable cruiser is wrong. Every tier 3 cruiser can fit frigate guns. Every tier 3 cruiser can fit a big plate (or two in the case of the maller). Only the Thorax can use BS weapons. Solution: remove the ability of the thorax to use BS weapons. Problem solved Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. ** eve 101 is coming up with setups to beat specific setups, but if you new setup is too much specialized it is not working, as it will die to versatile setups to easily. In Rust We Trust |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 20:07:00 -
[20]
* heavy nos and cruise missiles are BS weapons. As you said, even nossed a well setup platerax has still a godly amount of hardened armor; * Drones are a counter to ECM and not the other way around; * "stay 20 km away from one" is a laughable, how do you kill/tackle it then ? Is the thorax ment to be the ultimate doom of any ship that comes within FRICKIN DISRUPTOR RANGE... Man, you got me, seriously. I give up... [ 2005.08.05 23:48:33 ] (notify) Logic has just left This thread as of 2s ago Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 20:07:00 -
[21]
* heavy nos and cruise missiles are BS weapons. As you said, even nossed a well setup platerax has still a godly amount of hardened armor; * Drones are a counter to ECM and not the other way around; * "stay 20 km away from one" is a laughable, how do you kill/tackle it then ? Is the thorax ment to be the ultimate doom of any ship that comes within FRICKIN DISRUPTOR RANGE... Man, you got me, seriously. I give up... [ 2005.08.05 23:48:33 ] (notify) Logic has just left This thread as of 2s ago Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 20:40:00 -
[22]Because that is the problem.
The drones carriers can (vexor and arbitrator). The thorax is a blaster ship not a drone ship. It should not have more drones/better drones than the drone carrier of its race. Especially since heavy drones track so good. Because that is making the vexor useless. And because, well, the moa doesn't get more missiles hardpoint than the caracal on top of it's gun, and not "BS sized" (i.e. fittings for it, as the large drone bay is the "fitting" for heavy drones) launcher hardpoints. The caracal has less slots than any other cruiser, my daredevil and my caracal both have 11 slots. The stabber and the omen have one more, yet they are also comparable tier 2 cruiser. The thorax has less slots because it has more drone, but the drones it currently gets are FAR more valuable than the slots it doesn't have. Emphasis on the FAR. Halving the drone bay would NOT make it underpowered, it would still be an awesome cruiser. That is so wrong, brutix is outclassed by the thorax partly because it only has half its drone bay. The deimos, based on the same hull, or even the vigilant, both upgrades of the thorax, have less drone space. It is possible to kill a thorax, i have a maller and a rupture setup that are quite versatile and capable of it. However, those are significantly inferior in about every way to the thorax setup (plate + heavy drones + small guns) when facing other ship types/size/fittings.
That's an easy one. The drones of the thorax do around 200 dps, that is as much as the damage output of a pre-patch torpedo raven without damage mod (not counting 6 heavy drones). A 'geddon with BS skill 3 and large energy turret 2 (surgical strike 2, rapid firing 3, gunnery 5) has, for a megapulse: rof of 5.3 sec & damage mod of 3.5. Using infrared it does 7 * 3.5 * 28 / 5.3 = 130 dps. 166 dps with ultraviolet. To be honest, i think that you are insulting me (as it is clear that you are refering to what i said by the way). Laugh all you want, you are the want looking silly because i proved you wrong with the actual numbers. As for your tip: "Get out of here with that nonsense. Lying wont win you an argument." I have also one for you. Pick a toothpick and stick it under your toenail, then kick the wall, hard. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 20:40:00 -
[23]Because that is the problem.
The drones carriers can (vexor and arbitrator). The thorax is a blaster ship not a drone ship. It should not have more drones/better drones than the drone carrier of its race. Especially since heavy drones track so good. Because that is making the vexor useless. And because, well, the moa doesn't get more missiles hardpoint than the caracal on top of it's gun, and not "BS sized" (i.e. fittings for it, as the large drone bay is the "fitting" for heavy drones) launcher hardpoints. The caracal has less slots than any other cruiser, my daredevil and my caracal both have 11 slots. The stabber and the omen have one more, yet they are also comparable tier 2 cruiser. The thorax has less slots because it has more drone, but the drones it currently gets are FAR more valuable than the slots it doesn't have. Emphasis on the FAR. Halving the drone bay would NOT make it underpowered, it would still be an awesome cruiser. That is so wrong, brutix is outclassed by the thorax partly because it only has half its drone bay. The deimos, based on the same hull, or even the vigilant, both upgrades of the thorax, have less drone space. It is possible to kill a thorax, i have a maller and a rupture setup that are quite versatile and capable of it. However, those are significantly inferior in about every way to the thorax setup (plate + heavy drones + small guns) when facing other ship types/size/fittings.
That's an easy one. The drones of the thorax do around 200 dps, that is as much as the damage output of a pre-patch torpedo raven without damage mod (not counting 6 heavy drones). A 'geddon with BS skill 3 and large energy turret 2 (surgical strike 2, rapid firing 3, gunnery 5) has, for a megapulse: rof of 5.3 sec & damage mod of 3.5. Using infrared it does 7 * 3.5 * 28 / 5.3 = 130 dps. 166 dps with ultraviolet. To be honest, i think that you are insulting me (as it is clear that you are refering to what i said by the way). Laugh all you want, you are the want looking silly because i proved you wrong with the actual numbers. As for your tip: "Get out of here with that nonsense. Lying wont win you an argument." I have also one for you. Pick a toothpick and stick it under your toenail, then kick the wall, hard. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 20:54:00 -
[24]
The fact that it is disposable is not the problem. It is far too good when fitted correctly, as it requires too specific setups to be destroyed. That is the very definition of overpowered. The fact that is disposable on top of that is icing on the cake, but is not the main argument at all. See any of the posts comparing the damage of heavy drones with BS weapons. Thanks for proving my point, thorax + frig guns + plate + 8 heavy drones is a "cookie cutter setup" and to setup against it, or even incorporating into your general setup design ways to defeat it, you will have to do something that it doesn't have to do: lose versatility. Losing versatility, you lose survivability, hence your setup is worse overall. Hence, more cookie cutter setup and we all end up in the same boring ship and setup, what is exactly what you don't want to happen, don't you ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 20:54:00 -
[25]
The fact that it is disposable is not the problem. It is far too good when fitted correctly, as it requires too specific setups to be destroyed. That is the very definition of overpowered. The fact that is disposable on top of that is icing on the cake, but is not the main argument at all. See any of the posts comparing the damage of heavy drones with BS weapons. Thanks for proving my point, thorax + frig guns + plate + 8 heavy drones is a "cookie cutter setup" and to setup against it, or even incorporating into your general setup design ways to defeat it, you will have to do something that it doesn't have to do: lose versatility. Losing versatility, you lose survivability, hence your setup is worse overall. Hence, more cookie cutter setup and we all end up in the same boring ship and setup, what is exactly what you don't want to happen, don't you ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 21:03:00 -
[26]
Telling that the one willing to nerf the thorax are willing to nerf it because it a cruiser good in pvp is something terribly wrong. Most of the people i know in game don't like flying battleship, and enjoy frigates and cruisers much more. I do believe that people want cruisers fixed. I also know that i am not flying cruisers in pvp because i would die to a thorax, and in order not to die to it i would have to fit specific setups, hence be far less versatile and easy prey for most other ships and setups. Something that the thorax doesn't have to do, to be able to be as effective against a frigate, a cruiser, or a battleship. All this thanks to the godly drone bay. See how you are in fact, fighting against your own goal ? (continued) |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 21:03:00 -
[27] (continued) |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 21:03:00 -
[28]
Telling that the one willing to nerf the thorax are willing to nerf it because it a cruiser good in pvp is something terribly wrong. Most of the people i know in game don't like flying battleship, and enjoy frigates and cruisers much more. I do believe that people want cruisers fixed. I also know that i am not flying cruisers in pvp because i would die to a thorax, and in order not to die to it i would have to fit specific setups, hence be far less versatile and easy prey for most other ships and setups. Something that the thorax doesn't have to do, to be able to be as effective against a frigate, a cruiser, or a battleship. All this thanks to the godly drone bay. See how you are in fact, fighting against your own goal ? (continued) In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 21:03:00 -
[29] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 21:22:53 Only one person complained because his tempest got owned by a thorax, and i do not agree at all with his argument. In the "nos" thread of necrologic, yesterday, i was exactly arguing that a battleship that doesn't have a specific defense against cruisers and frigates (be it setup or gang) should die to it. I'll dig the link for you later if you want. You say yes, i say no. And i tell why.
Heavy drones are a battleship weapon. Only the thorax can carry them, as other non-battleship ships are almost always better of using smaller drones. There are two exceptions: 1. The ishtar, but this is a very particular case - similar to the assault launcher case, where ccp decides that it is better to use existing stuffs to fill a role in another ship class: ccp could have given a drone damage bonus but gave drone space bonus instead. 2. You want to increase your chance to scoop your drones when they are getting smartbombed. That is not easy to do. You say it's easy, i say it's not. See electrofreak's calculations about that, i can't see how you can argue against that to be honest. Besides, once against, you are telling me to decrease my versatility and survivability, something that you don't have to do.
You said: "Right now - the Thorax gives us that chance, to be able to contribute to a fight or a battle without having a seperate alt dedicated to making isk and training for a couple years." I am completely against the "bigger = better" or "more expensive = better" logic. I have no interest in a game balanced in such a way. I have a problem with you assuming that my motivations when discussing this topic are precisely to achieve such a "logic", and that is what i said in my reply. You are wrong when you assume that the nerf of the thorax is only wanted by people who wants to kill you easily. There are much more and various motivations in our acts than you may think. Why would i want a ship that i like to be nerfed, if i did not understand how this ship is a problem for the cruiser balance in itself ? Again, you say it, but you don't give a reason why. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 21:41:00 -
[30] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 21:41:48
A. long range frig guns on a cruiser: 75 dps B. medium ions on a thorax: 175-200 dps (or more, depending on skills and fitting obviously) C. drone bay of the thorax: 175-200 dps (8 heavy drones) D. alternative drone bay: > 100 dps (10 medium drones) Currently, you can have A. and C. which is enough to break most battleship tanks. The proposed changes make you decide if you want to break 200 dps or not, aka: do you want the guarantee to be able to break the tank of a battleship or not. It should come at the expense of something, but it does not. You want to kill small stuffs ? Fit for small stuffs. You want to kill big stuffs ? Fit for big stuffs. You want to kill everything with the same setup ? Fine, that is the current thorax. And that is not balanced. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 21:41:00 -
[31] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 21:41:48
A. long range frig guns on a cruiser: 75 dps B. medium ions on a thorax: 175-200 dps (or more, depending on skills and fitting obviously) C. drone bay of the thorax: 175-200 dps (8 heavy drones) D. alternative drone bay: > 100 dps (10 medium drones) Currently, you can have A. and C. which is enough to break most battleship tanks. The proposed changes make you decide if you want to break 200 dps or not, aka: do you want the guarantee to be able to break the tank of a battleship or not. It should come at the expense of something, but it does not. You want to kill small stuffs ? Fit for small stuffs. You want to kill big stuffs ? Fit for big stuffs. You want to kill everything with the same setup ? Fine, that is the current thorax. And that is not balanced. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 21:54:00 -
[32]
Not if you include the skills and damage mod of drones into the formula, as you should. Maybe it's not exactly 100, i don't have all the numbers here, but it's not like it would make a difference.
That is the problem of all cruisers and frigates anyway. And if the problem is that a thorax has to few hp, how can you argue that the drone bay make up for it ? You are not going to make all ships more survivable by increasing the overall damage output. That is not logic. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 21:54:00 -
[33] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 21:57:52
Not if you include the skills and damage mod of drones into the formula, as you should. Maybe it's not exactly 100, i don't have all the numbers here, but it's not like it would make a difference.
That is the problem of all cruisers and frigates anyway. And if the problem is that a thorax has to few hp, how can you argue that the drone bay make up for it ? You are not going to make all ships more survivable by increasing the overall damage output. That is not logic. Edit: Hence, why the "no nerf to thorax, boost other cruisers instead" is totally missing the point. They should have more hp, better fittings and guns worth fitting, but NOT have BS-sized damage for the sake of it. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 22:49:00 -
[34] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 22:54:58 The fact that the thorax has more drone bay than the vexor makes the vexor very unappealing in comparison. You are also hidding a large part of my reply here. I did not do that with any of you arguments. See my moa analogy. There is no sence giving the moa more missile hardpoints than to the caracal. I was messing around with a plated rifter around a shield tanked mining megathron. In a fast close orbit his Ogre drones slaughtered me, and i wasn't webbed or nossed or whatever. Whatever you think, no drawback will be harsh enough to compensate for that, no matter what you think. Common! Give the moa 3 cruise launchers, it has less than the scorpion so all is fine and all. Stop that, you are not funny. So you want the thorax to have as many slots as others tier 3 cruisers, yet my caracal shall not get as many slots than other tier 2 cruisers because IT IS NOT A FRICKIN TIER 3 cruiser ? What is that for a reason. Okay, so be it, all fine to me. At least we agree on something. But what slot ? It is not THAT simple. That is an uncommon conception, seeing as they are designed to kill said classes. A battlecruiser, in my mind, was designed to kill cruisers and hence, is in a class above. Fair enough. Assault cruisers are still cruisers, ok. But to be honest i fail to see the relevance here. I didn't have the exact numbers to do the math, i stand corrected. This just doesn't prove the whole debate irrelevant by any mean, it's not like that was the only argument.
As far as i can tell we are not comparing the total damage output of the thorax with the total damage output of the raven. We are comparing the drones of the thorax (his main damage source currently, in the particular setup that is showing the problem we are discussing) VS the damage output of a pre-patch torp-raven (counting only his main damage source). That seemed fair to me, but i see how convenient it is to you to write what you write. We were comparing comparable things, you propose not to. See above. How exactly is the argument retarded ? Because you said so ? How convenient. (continued) |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 22:49:00 -
[35] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 22:54:58 The fact that the thorax has more drone bay than the vexor makes the vexor very unappealing in comparison. You are also hidding a large part of my reply here. I did not do that with any of you arguments. See my moa analogy. There is no sence giving the moa more missile hardpoints than to the caracal. I was messing around with a plated rifter around a shield tanked mining megathron. In a fast close orbit his Ogre drones slaughtered me, and i wasn't webbed or nossed or whatever. Whatever you think, no drawback will be harsh enough to compensate for that, no matter what you think. Common! Give the moa 3 cruise launchers, it has less than the scorpion so all is fine and all. Stop that, you are not funny. So you want the thorax to have as many slots as others tier 3 cruisers, yet my caracal shall not get as many slots than other tier 2 cruisers because IT IS NOT A FRICKIN TIER 3 cruiser ? What is that for a reason. Okay, so be it, all fine to me. At least we agree on something. But what slot ? It is not THAT simple. That is an uncommon conception, seeing as they are designed to kill said classes. A battlecruiser, in my mind, was designed to kill cruisers and hence, is in a class above. Fair enough. Assault cruisers are still cruisers, ok. But to be honest i fail to see the relevance here. I didn't have the exact numbers to do the math, i stand corrected. This just doesn't prove the whole debate irrelevant by any mean, it's not like that was the only argument.
As far as i can tell we are not comparing the total damage output of the thorax with the total damage output of the raven. We are comparing the drones of the thorax (his main damage source currently, in the particular setup that is showing the problem we are discussing) VS the damage output of a pre-patch torp-raven (counting only his main damage source). That seemed fair to me, but i see how convenient it is to you to write what you write. We were comparing comparable things, you propose not to. See above. How exactly is the argument retarded ? Because you said so ? How convenient. (continued) In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 22:50:00 -
[36] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 22:51:09 The only number that i had wrong was the drone damage, it was off by 13% if i account max skills and maybe 25% if you downgrade skills to similar level. This, in no way, does make you right about everything. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 22:50:00 -
[37] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 22:51:09 The only number that i had wrong was the drone damage, it was off by 13% if i account max skills and maybe 25% if you downgrade skills to similar level. This, in no way, does make you right about everything. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 23:23:00 -
[38]
And, if it fits small pulse/beams/rails instead of small blaster, you have a "i win" button. What the thorax has to do is what EVERY CRUISER HAS TO DO outside of niche role, as sniping for moa, rupture, and caracal. Well all know how that last part blows so give us a break with that. It is never funny to stay in a cruiser at the optimal of a battleship, mwd'ing to it or staying there sniping. But, to top it up, after fitting the almost necessary plate and frig guns*, you have 150 dps of drones, when other tier 3 cruiser get a nos and extra resist (maller), an extra mid and no agility to speak of (moa) or the ability to use the smallest autocannon and thus, not wasting a bonus and still having decent tracking. To bad you need the bonus to be on par with other gun types. If you think that 150 dps is as good as the other bonus, well... *By the way, fitting frigate guns on a cruiser, plates or not, is not a sacrifice unless you are sniping. See above. Tracking is much more important, and the lowest damage more than makes up for it. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 23:23:00 -
[39]
And, if it fits small pulse/beams/rails instead of small blaster, you have a "i win" button. What the thorax has to do is what EVERY CRUISER HAS TO DO outside of niche role, as sniping for moa, rupture, and caracal. Well all know how that last part blows so give us a break with that. It is never funny to stay in a cruiser at the optimal of a battleship, mwd'ing to it or staying there sniping. But, to top it up, after fitting the almost necessary plate and frig guns*, you have 150 dps of drones, when other tier 3 cruiser get a nos and extra resist (maller), an extra mid and no agility to speak of (moa) or the ability to use the smallest autocannon and thus, not wasting a bonus and still having decent tracking. To bad you need the bonus to be on par with other gun types. If you think that 150 dps is as good as the other bonus, well... *By the way, fitting frigate guns on a cruiser, plates or not, is not a sacrifice unless you are sniping. See above. Tracking is much more important, and the lowest damage more than makes up for it. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 23:25:00 -
[40]
Give me 6 missiles hardpoint and 4 gun hardpoints, plsu the fitting for it, on my moa, and there will be no problem either. God, i was almost going to type that in all caps, in hope you would see easily how wrong that is. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 23:25:00 -
[41]
Give me 6 missiles hardpoint and 4 gun hardpoints, plsu the fitting for it, on my moa, and there will be no problem either. God, i was almost going to type that in all caps, in hope you would see easily how wrong that is. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 23:30:00 -
[42] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 23:29:50
And if you add small long range guns to that, you have a monster. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 23:30:00 -
[43] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 23:29:50
And if you add small long range guns to that, you have a monster. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.23 23:35:00 -
[44] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 23:50:37 I'd like to be less ignorant. Care to explain ? Edit: Caldari are long range, that mean railguns and missiles. So it is ok to have railguns and missiles on the same ships, and it is ok if the moa, despite being primarily a gunboat, has more missiles launchers than the caracal because it is a higher thier ship. This is perfectly logic according to your own logic, so take that IGNORANCE statement back. Or, please reconsider your previous affirmation regarding the fact that the thorax has both more drones and more guns than the specialized drone carrier, and that is it perfectly fine. Thank you. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.23 23:35:00 -
[45] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 23:50:37 I'd like to be less ignorant. Care to explain ? Edit: Caldari are long range, that mean railguns and missiles. So it is ok to have railguns and missiles on the same ships, and it is ok if the moa, despite being primarily a gunboat, has more missiles launchers than the caracal because it is a higher thier ship. This is perfectly logic according to your own logic, so take that IGNORANCE statement back. Or, please reconsider your previous affirmation regarding the fact that the thorax has both more drones and more guns than the specialized drone carrier, and that is it perfectly fine. Thank you. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 00:03:00 -
[46]
Dude, don't believe everything you read, the cerberus should make "every armor tanker out there run for the hills" and we all know about this. You are the one showing ignorance here. Besides, 10 mediums drones instead of 8 heavy would not make the description of the thorax less accurate. Telling that the thorax is fine because it his how ccp designed it is a blatant provocation as we all know that only *****ing made ccp revert the change they made (halving the drone bay for balance's sake). Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 00:03:00 -
[47]
Dude, don't believe everything you read, the cerberus should make "every armor tanker out there run for the hills" and we all know about this. You are the one showing ignorance here. Besides, 10 mediums drones instead of 8 heavy would not make the description of the thorax less accurate. Telling that the thorax is fine because it his how ccp designed it is a blatant provocation as we all know that only *****ing made ccp revert the change they made (halving the drone bay for balance's sake). Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 00:14:00 -
[48]
Nothing happens, the thorax warps out. That is the very reason why t1 cruisers have nowhere to leave outside of the plate + frig guns + drones. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 00:14:00 -
[49]
Nothing happens, the thorax warps out. That is the very reason why t1 cruisers have nowhere to leave outside of the plate + frig guns + drones. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 00:15:00 -
[50] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 24/08/2005 00:15:00
That would be awesome. And complaining about what they did when other people complained is fair game. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 00:15:00 -
[51] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 24/08/2005 00:15:00
That would be awesome. And complaining about what they did when other people complained is fair game. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 00:34:00 -
[52]
I did do it, and my tanked (heresy) stabber got pwned pretty hard against a caracal in the same way. But to be honest, that is not my point at all, as "if you are tackled" or "if he is tackled" is only relevant to "close range - long range discussion", nothing particularly relevant to our case. That is only true in the blaster + drones scenario. If you are tackled, you lose anyway. If you are not, why stay there for a fight you can't win ? My problem is the ability of the thorax to use with his plate and frig guns a whole lot of drone: the unique ability to fig bs plate + 8 heavy drones + frig guns make this ship a monster, versatile and survivable, that is going to kill most of the other versatile ships+setups combo. Hence, you need a more specific, less versatile, hence less survivable setup to kill it. That is the general rule, with every ship and every possible setup i can fly. I believe that i am not a complete newbie in the fitting departement, and that according to my (limited and all) experience, this is not right. And i explained this with all the patience i had. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 00:34:00 -
[53] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 24/08/2005 00:56:51
I did do it, and my tanked (heresy) stabber got pwned pretty hard against a caracal in the same way. But to be honest, that is not my point at all, as "if you are tackled" or "if he is tackled" is only relevant to "close range - long range discussion", nothing particularly relevant to our case. That is only true in the blaster + drones scenario. If you are tackled, you lose anyway. If you are not, why stay there for a fight you can't win ? My problem is the ability of the thorax to use with his plate and frig guns a whole lot of drones: the unique ability to fig bs plate + 8 heavy drones + frig guns make this ship a monster, versatile and survivable, that is going to kill most of the other versatile ships+setups combo. Hence, you need a more specific, less versatile, hence less survivable setup to kill it. That is the general rule, with every ship and every possible setup i can fly. I believe that i am not a complete newbie in the fitting departement, and that according to my (limited and all) experience, this is not right. And i explained this with all the patience i had. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 01:45:00 -
[54]
This thread shows exactly how increasing the damage of all cruisers in a similar way than the thorax is not going to make them more survivable overall, which is exactly the current problem. Thanks for not reading the thread, totally missing the point, coming with "common misconceptions" and making it completely obvious. You sir, deserve all my gratitude for doing this is such a quick and efficient, yet "class" manner  .Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 01:45:00 -
[55]
This thread shows exactly how increasing the damage of all cruisers in a similar way than the thorax is not going to make them more survivable overall, which is exactly the current problem. Thanks for not reading the thread, totally missing the point, coming with "common misconceptions" and making it completely obvious. You sir, deserve all my gratitude for doing this is such a quick and efficient, yet "class" manner .Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 08:43:00 -
[56]I replied to people who replied to the answers i gave before. If that bothers you don't read the topic. Keep your sarcasm for your autocritic, you might need it. That is exactly the point. The thorax (plate + long range frig gun + heavy drones) with the same fitting is as effective against the smallest targets than the biggest targets. That is exactly what is said being wrong from the start of the thread. No other cruiser can do that, no other cruiser should be able to do that, and this is the exact problem. I don't care about needing to gimp my setup, especially since i can also fly the thorax, i care about the fact that the thorax doesn't have to. By the way, if i was only interested in flying a ship with a "i win" setup, i would be defending it against facts and odds as you are doing. Thus, keep the confusion in your mind if you want but get it out of this thread. See above, it is hilarious that your main argument against mine is exactly mine. You are defending something and its opposite, I'm voiceless. Ok, let me explains this to you with easy words and easy sentences. What the thorax has is too much versatility, granted especially by the drone bay. It has an extreme damage output thanks to it. The problem with cruisers is that they are not survivable enough: not enough speed, agility, hitpoints, too big signature, inability to tank outside of a plated setup. Increasing their damage output to make them on par with the thorax isn't going to make them more survivable: they are even going to die faster as the overall damage output will be higher. How can you defend such insanity for gods sake! Heavy drones are battleship weapons, medium pulse are frigate weapons. Using terminology to prove your points, in a discussion about balance, doesn't make you look wise. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 08:43:00 -
[57]I replied to people who replied to the answers i gave before. If that bothers you don't read the topic. Keep your sarcasm for your autocritic, you might need it. That is exactly the point. The thorax (plate + long range frig gun + heavy drones) with the same fitting is as effective against the smallest targets than the biggest targets. That is exactly what is said being wrong from the start of the thread. No other cruiser can do that, no other cruiser should be able to do that, and this is the exact problem. I don't care about needing to gimp my setup, especially since i can also fly the thorax, i care about the fact that the thorax doesn't have to. By the way, if i was only interested in flying a ship with a "i win" setup, i would be defending it against facts and odds as you are doing. Thus, keep the confusion in your mind if you want but get it out of this thread. See above, it is hilarious that your main argument against mine is exactly mine. You are defending something and its opposite, I'm voiceless. Ok, let me explains this to you with easy words and easy sentences. What the thorax has is too much versatility, granted especially by the drone bay. It has an extreme damage output thanks to it. The problem with cruisers is that they are not survivable enough: not enough speed, agility, hitpoints, too big signature, inability to tank outside of a plated setup. Increasing their damage output to make them on par with the thorax isn't going to make them more survivable: they are even going to die faster as the overall damage output will be higher. How can you defend such insanity for gods sake! Heavy drones are battleship weapons, medium pulse are frigate weapons. Using terminology to prove your points, in a discussion about balance, doesn't make you look wise. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 08:48:00 -
[58] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 24/08/2005 08:48:40
I refuted this point countless time, don't fit small blasters on a plated thorax, fit long range frig guns and you increase you versatility much more than you lose in damage output. Every plated cruisers fit long range frigate guns (or the smallest small range cruiser gun) so it's not like you have to do something other cruisers don't have to. Why give the thorax an advantage that no other cruiser has, as it doesn't have any more trade-off than any other cruiser ? Beside, why give other cruisers something that would make them completely overpowered against every other class. Plated cruisers with long range frig guns are already the bane of t1 and t2 frigates alike, you people who think that "don't nerf the rax, boost the others" is going to solve all problems are wrong, for all the reasons i already mentionned. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 08:48:00 -
[59] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 24/08/2005 08:48:40
I refuted this point countless time, don't fit small blasters on a plated thorax, fit long range frig guns and you increase you versatility much more than you lose in damage output. Every plated cruisers fit long range frigate guns (or the smallest small range cruiser gun) so it's not like you have to do something other cruisers don't have to. Why give the thorax an advantage that no other cruiser has, as it doesn't have any more trade-off than any other cruiser ? Beside, why give other cruisers something that would make them completely overpowered against every other class. Plated cruisers with long range frig guns are already the bane of t1 and t2 frigates alike, you people who think that "don't nerf the rax, boost the others" is going to solve all problems are wrong, for all the reasons i already mentionned. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 09:08:00 -
[60] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 24/08/2005 09:09:44 Edited by: Naughty Boy on 24/08/2005 09:09:02
Do you people cannot realise that the "1 VS 1 ship of the same class, without warp-out" scenario is no the kind of reasoning that decide the game balance ? They are designed to dodge large weapons, they die to small weapons. You can say that "claws kill assault frigates" and "taranis kills destroyers", but those are cases of short range ships that can avoid being hit by messing the tracking of long range guns. An autocannon claw is going to die to an autocannon trasher, and an artillery claw is going to die to an artillery trasher. This is working as intended. So, did you decide that by your own, or did you get help ? Faction loot is designed to be inbalanced, that is not something i like but that is the way it is, don't get me starting a crusade against that already. As for assault frigates killin cruisers, i don't know if it is intended or not. All i can say is that none of my cruiser setup should die to a lone assault frigates: plate + frig guns do take care of that possibility. Every race but the gallente has a missile frigate, even if missiles are a caldari speciality. Why can't the amarr have a ship similar to the vexor ? By the way, i would use a vexor over an arbitrator any day, so remove the arbitrator drone bonus and drone bay, and make it a ship worth flying if that bother you. As for the typhoon being overpowered, just, lol. I can fly the thorax, and fit my bs in order not to die to a plated cruiser. Why would i care then ? Wrong, and wrong. I have already replied several time to this. All cruiser fit plates and frigates guns, only the rax "fit" that many drones. All cruisers are, not fine but ok-ish, the thorax is a problem. Telling that nobody mentionned a problem with the thorax drone bay before the missile fix/nerf only show how little knowledge you have on the matter. See above. Why. Would. That. Ever. Be. Seriously. The caracal was upgraded to the cerberus and lost drone bay and turret hardpoints. The moa was upgraded to the eagle and lost its drone bay. Do you need more examples ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 09:08:00 -
[61] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 24/08/2005 09:09:44 Edited by: Naughty Boy on 24/08/2005 09:09:02
Do you people cannot realise that the "1 VS 1 ship of the same class, without warp-out" scenario is no the kind of reasoning that decide the game balance ? They are designed to dodge large weapons, they die to small weapons. You can say that "claws kill assault frigates" and "taranis kills destroyers", but those are cases of short range ships that can avoid being hit by messing the tracking of long range guns. An autocannon claw is going to die to an autocannon trasher, and an artillery claw is going to die to an artillery trasher. This is working as intended. So, did you decide that by your own, or did you get help ? Faction loot is designed to be inbalanced, that is not something i like but that is the way it is, don't get me starting a crusade against that already. As for assault frigates killin cruisers, i don't know if it is intended or not. All i can say is that none of my cruiser setup should die to a lone assault frigates: plate + frig guns do take care of that possibility. Every race but the gallente has a missile frigate, even if missiles are a caldari speciality. Why can't the amarr have a ship similar to the vexor ? By the way, i would use a vexor over an arbitrator any day, so remove the arbitrator drone bonus and drone bay, and make it a ship worth flying if that bother you. As for the typhoon being overpowered, just, lol. I can fly the thorax, and fit my bs in order not to die to a plated cruiser. Why would i care then ? Wrong, and wrong. I have already replied several time to this. All cruiser fit plates and frigates guns, only the rax "fit" that many drones. All cruisers are, not fine but ok-ish, the thorax is a problem. Telling that nobody mentionned a problem with the thorax drone bay before the missile fix/nerf only show how little knowledge you have on the matter. See above. Why. Would. That. Ever. Be. Seriously. The caracal was upgraded to the cerberus and lost drone bay and turret hardpoints. The moa was upgraded to the eagle and lost its drone bay. Do you need more examples ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 09:16:00 -
[62]
How is having one cruiser totally outclassing all the others + non plated battlecruisers any better than making all the ships similar, if at the end of the day we all end up in a similar ship ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 09:16:00 -
[63]
How is having one cruiser totally outclassing all the others + non plated battlecruisers any better than making all the ships similar, if at the end of the day we all end up in a similar ship ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 09:18:00 -
[64]
Words of wisedom Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 09:18:00 -
[65]
Words of wisedom Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 14:53:00 -
[66]
Awesome, every race has got one HAC worth flying, but gallente get 3 for the same skill  .Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 14:53:00 -
[67]
Awesome, every race has got one HAC worth flying, but gallente get 3 for the same skill .Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.24 18:48:00 -
[68]
I am not playing dumb, but i do not understand why. Reduction of damage, but no reduction of number, would be just downgrading the size of drones: 10 mediums instead of 8 heavies ? This is exactly, more drones, but less damage. Mediums are faster, track better, are more difficult to destroy with big guns/missiles. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.24 18:48:00 -
[69]
I am not playing dumb, but i do not understand why. Reduction of damage, but no reduction of number, would be just downgrading the size of drones: 10 mediums instead of 8 heavies ? This is exactly, more drones, but less damage. Mediums are faster, track better, are more difficult to destroy with big guns/missiles. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.25 10:03:00 -
[70]
The 'freak for president \o/ Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 10:03:00 -
[71]
The 'freak for president \o/ Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.25 10:04:00 -
[72]That is exactly my feeling when you don't ever bother replying to the post i made especially to prove you wrong. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 10:04:00 -
[73]That is exactly my feeling when you don't ever bother replying to the post i made especially to prove you wrong. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.25 11:27:00 -
[74]
Arguing about a nerf is fine by CCP. If you believe the thorax should not be nerfed, defeat the arguments. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 11:27:00 -
[75] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 11:33:13
Arguing about a nerf is fine by CCP. If you believe the thorax should not be nerfed, defeat the arguments given and not those that you invented.
So what, there are nerfs that don't suit you and other that do. Guess what, even if it was a valid argument (which it is not) it could be used by everyone else. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.25 12:03:00 -
[76] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 12:06:51 I agree with that. But I fail to see how this is supporting your point. See below.
I do not agree. The thorax is not the only close range cruiser, yet it is the only one that get so much rewarded in extra damage (your own argument). This is by such a margin (see numbers) that it totally defeats the point of fitting any other cruiser for close range, except for sentimental reasons. This is true with the plate, or without the plate. Now, there's the other issue with long range cruisers (aka, the other cruisers, see above). You tell that as the thorax does what it should to close the distance to a long range cruiser, it need the firepower (of guns + drones) when it get there. I do not see how exactly it need 8 heavy drones, because 10 mediums drones are not enough. I would like you to show me how exactly you draw the line, because frankly this is the exact part of you argument that is going too far. And i quote you: It is not my fault that the thorax is best not used as a blaster boat. The drone bay is the reason why it is not best used as a blaster boat. Who need blasters on the thorax when there is such a drone bay ? I am afraid that your are strugling against your own point here. Finally, there's another issue with the idea of giving other close range cruisers more damage (or all other cruisers more damage). I know that i already wrote this, but as it seems it doesn't look to be clear. You are not going to increase the survivability of cruisers by increasing their damage. This is "gank area" syndrome but it is not a reason in itself. Cruisers are not used because their are not dealing enough damage, they are not used because they are not survivable enough (hence the plate setups with even LESS damage). I believe that i challenged your affirmation well enough. Feel free to correct me. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 12:03:00 -
[77] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 12:06:51 I agree with that. But I fail to see how this is supporting your point. See below.
I do not agree. The thorax is not the only close range cruiser, yet it is the only one that get so much rewarded in extra damage (your own argument). This is by such a margin (see numbers) that it totally defeats the point of fitting any other cruiser for close range, except for sentimental reasons. This is true with the plate, or without the plate. Now, there's the other issue with long range cruisers (aka, the other cruisers, see above). You tell that as the thorax does what it should to close the distance to a long range cruiser, it need the firepower (of guns + drones) when it get there. I do not see how exactly it need 8 heavy drones, because 10 mediums drones are not enough. I would like you to show me how exactly you draw the line, because frankly this is the exact part of you argument that is going too far. And i quote you: It is not my fault that the thorax is best not used as a blaster boat. The drone bay is the reason why it is not best used as a blaster boat. Who need blasters on the thorax when there is such a drone bay ? I am afraid that your are strugling against your own point here. Finally, there's another issue with the idea of giving other close range cruisers more damage (or all other cruisers more damage). I know that i already wrote this, but as it seems it doesn't look to be clear. You are not going to increase the survivability of cruisers by increasing their damage. This is "gank area" syndrome but it is not a reason in itself. Cruisers are not used because their are not dealing enough damage, they are not used because they are not survivable enough (hence the plate setups with even LESS damage). I believe that i challenged your affirmation well enough. Feel free to correct me. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.25 12:06:00 -
[78]No. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 12:06:00 -
[79]No. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 13:22:00 -
[80] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 13:33:40 I beg to differ. The stabber has more trouble fitting 4 650mm artillery than the thorax to fit 200mm railguns. I could go on, but that example should be enough as you said "the only": one counter-example is enough to defeat this affirmation. Or, maybe, did you mean that it is the only tier 3 short-range cruiser where long-range variants are not viable. As far as i can tell, the rupture and moa are long range cruisers, so you are only comparing the thorax to the maller. How exactly is that of any relevance ? I won't comment the ignorance statement again, but i feel that you should refrain from personal insults. Fitting 650mm artillery to a stabber is hard because it is not what it was intended to do, which is fine. Fitting blasters on a moa doesn't work either (irrelevant bonus, low speed and agility, heavy mass) because it is not what it was intended to be. Fitting 200mm rails on a thorax is hard, because that is not what it was intended to be. This is a good and nobody is challenging that. I say that the thorax is a blaster boat, with drones as a secondary weapon. As the moa is a railboat, with missiles as a secondary weapon. You say that the thorax is a close range damage boat, and i'm even going to say that i agree with that. Now, please answer my question: You tell that as the thorax has to close the range to a long range cruiser, it need the firepower (of guns + drones) when it get there. How exactly do you justify that it need 8 heavy drones, and that 10 mediums drones are not enough. That is the only question that is relevant here, as i never mentionned plate or small guns. If they don't matter, why don't you want to lose them ? The 1600mm plate thorax is powerfull. The 1600mm plate rupture is powerfull. The 1600mm plate moa is powerfull. The 1600mm plate maller is powerfull. If 1600mm plate need to be nerfed, something that i never said - nor did i say the opposite, so be it. But, and that is the exact problem that is mentionned since the very beginning of this thread, only the plate-rax is versatile (with the same fitting) to an overpowered point. You keep ignoring this, whereas this is the main point. And, to be honest, with 10 mediums drones the plate-thorax would still be a far more versatile and efficient plate-cruiser than the maller so this point is moot. (continued) Edit: missing tag. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 13:22:00 -
[81] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 13:32:03 ok. It is very effective in the right hand. Whatever, don't you see that every ship in this game should be very effective in the right hand ? I'm sorry but i can't see the relevance of this. Now, you want all the argument resolving around a thorax without plate. That is equivalent to say: "CCP said that they would nerf the 1600mm plates tomorrow so that they are not worth fitting." You then want me to accept that thorax + any gun + 8 heavy drones is not overpowered. I'll give you the same argument, based on the way you want balance in this game to be considered: "1 vs 1, same class vs same class, nobody ever warp out". How is any close-range non-plated cruiser supposed to beat the thorax ? You already told me how a long range cruiser "in your 1 vs 1 dreamworld" would kill the non-plated thorax. How is a short range, non plated cruiser, supposed to do ? It cannot, and you'll say that it is normal because the thorax is the ultimate close range cruiser. Well, i told you, it is so ultimate that it totally rules out any possibility of fitting any cruiser for close range. Now, and i'm even going further, long range cruisers are not so viable in pvp because they would sit at the optimal of battleships. Hence, your passion to keep the thorax as it is because we need cruisers on the battlefield, don't we is in fact contributing a lot to removing cruisers (othr cruisers, might i add) from the battlefield. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 14:10:00 -
[82] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 14:20:14
Good idea, j0sephine. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: removed useless comment. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.25 17:46:00 -
[83] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 18:03:42
You can't jam all the drones.
a. thorax drone bay with ogres, 2 level 5 skills 1 level 3 skill (can't remember the ranks): 22 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 8 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 176 dps. b. vexor drone bay with hammerheads, 4 level 5 skills (including the cruiser skill at level 5): 9 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 15 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 135 dps. c. vexor with thorax drone bay: 3 ogres 12 hammerheads, 4 level 5 skills (including the cruiser skill at level 5): ((9 * 12) + (3 * 22)) * 1.6 * 1.25 / 2 = 174 dps. As you see, swapping the vexor and thorax drone bay makes the drone control bonus barely useful, since 8 ogres outdamage a full bay (200m¦) of 15 drones (12*10m¦ + 3*25m¦ = 195m¦). d. thorax with vexor drone bay, 1 level 5 skill 1 level 1 skill: 6 ogres: 22 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 6 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 132 dps. e. thorax with vexor drone bay (mk II), 3 level 5 skill: 10 hammerhead 5 spares: 9 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 10 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 90 dps. f. thorax with half drone bay, 3 level 5 skill: 10 hammerhead: 9 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 10 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 90 dps. This is with the most damaging t1 drones and no specialisation skills btw. I hope the calculations are right, for some reason something sounds wrong there. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: added formating, drone bay volume calculations and d., e. & f. calculations. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 17:46:00 -
[84] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 18:03:42
You can't jam all the drones.
a. thorax drone bay with ogres, 2 level 5 skills 1 level 3 skill (can't remember the ranks): 22 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 8 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 176 dps. b. vexor drone bay with hammerheads, 4 level 5 skills (including the cruiser skill at level 5): 9 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 15 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 135 dps. c. vexor with thorax drone bay: 3 ogres 12 hammerheads, 4 level 5 skills (including the cruiser skill at level 5): ((9 * 12) + (3 * 22)) * 1.6 * 1.25 / 2 = 174 dps. As you see, swapping the vexor and thorax drone bay makes the drone control bonus barely useful, since 8 ogres outdamage a full bay (200m¦) of 15 drones (12*10m¦ + 3*25m¦ = 195m¦). d. thorax with vexor drone bay, 1 level 5 skill 1 level 1 skill: 6 ogres: 22 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 6 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 132 dps. e. thorax with vexor drone bay (mk II), 3 level 5 skill: 10 hammerhead 5 spares: 9 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 10 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 90 dps. f. thorax with half drone bay, 3 level 5 skill: 10 hammerhead: 9 (drone damage) * 1.6 (damage mod) * 10 (number of drones) * 1.25 (skill) / 2 (ROF) = 90 dps. This is with the most damaging t1 drones and no specialisation skills btw. I hope the calculations are right, for some reason something sounds wrong there. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: added formating, drone bay volume calculations and d., e. & f. calculations. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.25 19:30:00 -
[85] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 19:45:40
Stats about t2 720mm: * Range: 24 km range * 0.5 (emp 50% range penalty) * 1.25 (sharpshooter to level 5) = 15 km => fight start in falloff, but let's say we don't care. * ROF: 15.75 sec * 0.75 (cruiser skill to 5) * 0.75 (rapid firing to 5) * 0.9 (gunnery to 5) = 8 seconds * damage/salvo: 4 * 6.9 (damage mod) * 1.25 (med projectile to 5) * 1.15 (surgical strike to 5) * 22 (emp damage) * 1.10 (specialization to 5) * 1.25 (cruiser skill to 5) = 1200 damage (546/0/218/436) * dps = 150 hp/s. Stats about the thorax: Thorax with a stock t1 800mm plate and 2 energized nano membranes t2, hull upgrades 5: 2250 (i think) * 1.25 = 2800. Resists : 72/55/55/38. Let's assume 1000 shield (975 base shield, up to 25% higher with skill). Simulation: Effect of the first salvo (0s): 1000 - (546 - 0.6 * 218 - 0.4 * 436) = 148 shield hp remaining. Effect of the second salvo (8s): 2800 - (0.38 * 450 - 0.45 * 180 - 0.62 * 360) = 2800 - 475 = 2325 armor hp remaining. Effect of the third salvo (16s): 2325 - (0.38 * 546 - 0.45 * 218 - 0.62 * 436) = 2325 - 575 = 1750 hp remaining. Note that at this point of time the total armor destroyed is 1050 hp (the base armor of a thorax without skill): 25% of a non plated thorax with hull upgrades 5 are still there at that moment and up to 23 seconds. And that is assuming that the fight start at the first salvo of the rupture. You could argue that at that time, the thorax can dodge the turrets (720mm artillery aren't exactly tracking good) and all various stuffs can happen from there. The rupture isn't tanked in a meaningfull way, and at best light missiles (?) and 6 meds drones are still doing some damage. Without big plates, gank > tank anyway. With big plates, well... we know :/ And yes, i know, this is not the real/test server... Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: some more numbers: 0s: 148 shield; 8s: 2325 armor; 16s: 1750 armor; 24s: 1175 armor; 32s: 600 armor; 40s: 25 armor; ... and that is not accounting a med rep t2, misses/wreckings, weather and all. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 19:30:00 -
[86] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 12:49:02 Edited by: Naughty Boy on 25/08/2005 19:45:40
Stats about t2 720mm: * Range: 24 km range * 0.5 (emp 50% range penalty) * 1.25 (sharpshooter to level 5) = 15 km => fight start in falloff, but let's say we don't care. * ROF: 15.75 sec * 0.75 (cruiser skill to 5) * 0.75 (rapid firing to 5) * 0.9 (gunnery to 5) = 8 seconds * damage/salvo: 4 * 6.9 (damage mod) * 1.25 (med projectile to 5) * 1.15 (surgical strike to 5) * 22 (emp damage) * 1.10 (specialization to 5) * 1.25 (cruiser skill to 5) = 1200 damage (546/0/218/436) * dps = 150 hp/s. Stats about the thorax: Thorax with a stock t1 800mm plate and 2 energized nano membranes t2, hull upgrades 5: 2250 (i think) * 1.25 = 2800. Resists : 72/55/55/38. Let's assume 1000 shield (975 base shield, up to 25% higher with skill). Simulation: Effect of the first salvo (0s): 1000 - (546 - 0.6 * 218 - 0.4 * 436) = 148 shield hp remaining. Effect of the second salvo (8s): 2800 - (0.38 * 450 - 0.45 * 180 - 0.62 * 360) = 2800 - 475 = 2325 armor hp remaining. Effect of the third salvo (16s): 2325 - (0.38 * 546 - 0.45 * 218 - 0.62 * 436) = 2325 - 575 = 1750 hp remaining. Note that at this point of time the total armor destroyed is 1050 hp (the base armor of a thorax without skill): 25% of a non plated thorax with hull upgrades 5 are still there at that moment and up to 23 seconds. And that is assuming that the fight start at the first salvo of the rupture. You could argue that at that time, the thorax can dodge the turrets (720mm artillery aren't exactly tracking good) and all various stuffs can happen from there. The rupture isn't tanked in a meaningfull way, and at best light missiles (?) and 6 meds drones are still doing some damage. Without big plates, gank > tank anyway. With big plates, well... we know :/ And yes, i know, this is not the real/test server... Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: some more numbers: 0s: 148 shield; 8s: 2325 armor; 16s: 1750 armor; 24s: 1175 armor; 32s: 600 armor; 40s: 25 armor; ... and that is not accounting a med rep t2, misses/wreckings, weather and all. Edit2: I forgot to take the effect of gyro stabs t2 into account, dps should be multiplied by 1.79. See correction later in the thread. Sorry again  In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.25 19:55:00 -
[87] Oh, and just to add: 720mm t2 + 4 gyro t2 = 1104 pg; rupture with engineering 5 & RCU 2 = 1042 pg. That means that the advanced weapon upgrade skill is trained on top of all the level 5 skills to a high level and that there are still 3 mids & 2 high to fit.  Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 19:55:00 -
[88] Oh, and just to add: 720mm t2 + 4 gyro t2 = 1104 pg; rupture with engineering 5 & RCU 2 = 1042 pg. That means that the advanced weapon upgrade skill is trained on top of all the level 5 skills to a high level and that there are still 3 mids & 2 high to fit. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.25 20:36:00 -
[89]You know, mediums drones would be twice as fast, and bringing the drones into range is about as fast when mwd'ing. Besides, i believe that this very specific case would be yet another example of gank > tank when there is no plate involved, which isn't surprizing to me. Finally, in this example, the t2 rupture has more than 6 months of training, can't tank, has two empty high (i need confirmation on this), still aweful tracking... The thorax need 2 skills at level 5 (hull upgrades and drones) and a few level 4 (frig, ab, navigation, stuffs like that). to fit a mwd t1 you need 1 more rcu t2 & 1 rcu t1, you lose about 40% damage plus you end up with a setup that can't fight anything else at any range, or close to that.
As long as the right conclusion is made on the basis of the right experiment, i'm all for it. Now, i have no idea how to do that, the number of parameters, tactical decisions, and other factors involved (gank > tank when no plate involved, starting distance > 20 km = warp out, difference in skill...) is simply enormous. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.25 20:36:00 -
[90]You know, mediums drones would be twice as fast, and bringing the drones into range is about as fast when mwd'ing. Besides, i believe that this very specific case would be yet another example of gank > tank when there is no plate involved, which isn't surprizing to me. Finally, in this example, the t2 rupture has more than 6 months of training, can't tank, has two empty high (i need confirmation on this), still aweful tracking... The thorax need 2 skills at level 5 (hull upgrades and drones) and a few level 4 (frig, ab, navigation, stuffs like that). to fit a mwd t1 you need 1 more rcu t2 & 1 rcu t1, you lose about 40% damage plus you end up with a setup that can't fight anything else at any range, or close to that.
As long as the right conclusion is made on the basis of the right experiment, i'm all for it. Now, i have no idea how to do that, the number of parameters, tactical decisions, and other factors involved (gank > tank when no plate involved, starting distance > 20 km = warp out, difference in skill...) is simply enormous. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 05:57:00 -
[91]
They need it in my humble opinion too. I have a lot of answers to what was written since my last post, but have absolutely no time to do so now. The main idea is still that the "awesomeness" of the drones rules out other close range cruisers and that once the thorax is at close range of a long range cruiser, it doesn't need all its drones as it is already "under the guns". That, in my book, is a reason why we don't see (other) cruisers. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 05:57:00 -
[92]
They need it in my humble opinion too. I have a lot of answers to what was written since my last post, but have absolutely no time to do so now. The main idea is still that the "awesomeness" of the drones rules out other close range cruisers and that once the thorax is at close range of a long range cruiser, it doesn't need all its drones as it is already "under the guns". That, in my book, is a reason why we don't see (other) cruisers. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 06:06:00 -
[93] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 06:10:30
Dude, check my calculations. A non-plated thorax with hull upgrades 5 facing a full t2 artillery gank rupture with maxed gunnery skills, fitting skills and cruiser skill has 23 seconds (provided that he fitted 2 t2 energized nano membranes or even better, 3 hardeners) to be under the tracking of the rupture, more if he fits a 400mm or 800mm plate and/or use a med armor rep. Any distance above the distance that can be closed during 23s is outside disruptor range, so the thorax can just warp out and warp in closer at will. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 06:06:00 -
[94] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 13:03:05 Edit: Nevermind. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 12:17:00 -
[95]
Nobody is going to "win" such an argument, because only CCP knows if they want the all cruisers of one race to be different or if they want some cruisers to be cheaper and a less powerfull version of another cruiser. Only 4 cruisers of two races are in the former case though - amarr (maller > omen in about every way) and gallente (thorax > vexor in about every way) - and this seems to me a very good reason to support the idea that CCP wants no cruiser to be totally outclassed by another. People not convinced by this argument cannot expect to convince others with their simply because there is no decisive reason until CCP says what they want. Firstly, I'd like to point out that according to my calculations (which might be wrong) show a top damage/second of 150 dps (artillery setup). That is for a pilot with all relevant skills trained to 5, including fittings skills and including the advanced weapon upgrades skills (give or take one level on this one, depending on what is supposed to be used in 2 high and 3 mids). I do not know how the 200dps figure was obtained. Secondly, long range and short range guns are balanced by damage and by tracking (exception being missiles, not concerned by the problem of tracking). It is very misleading to say that "the thorax can do more damage over time than any other cruiser [because] it has less time to do that damage in." Once the thorax is close enough to mess up the tracking of artillery, the damage of artillery is null and thus irrelevant. If the fight lass 40 seconds, the artillery do damage during the first 20 seconds and the drones do damage during the 20 next seconds, it is simply wrong to say that "it has less time to do that damage in." Including flight time in the damage / time ratio, but not including tracking of gun is in my opinion a biased way of looking at the whole problem. It is also were actual piloting skills are taken into account and thus the outcome of the fight is not solely dictated by ships, skill points and setups. (continued) --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 12:17:00 -
[96] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 12:26:13 I fail once again which reasoning made you come to this conclusion. Especially since you cannot realistically say that the thorax is the only ship likely to be fitted for close range. The thorax is not going to be "half dead" when it start to do damage in a close range duel, yet it has the advantage you describe. How, except the fact that it is an inferior tier cruiser (which is bad reason to me), do you expect to "boost the damage" of the stabber so that it stand a decent chance, or at least a chance, against a thorax in a world were there is no oversized plate. Currently, it is the oversized plate that allows AC rupture and medium-pulse maller to be a challenge to the thorax. Without the plate, those ships cannot tank the drones long enough to kill them and are a bigger disadvantage against the thorax than they are when oversized plates are allowed. No non-plated close range ship can tank for any amount of time the drones of a thorax, especially since they they have to get close themselves. The delay of damage due to drones flight is very small in a close range duel. Finally, the current drone bays allow the thorax not to use blasters specifically (for various reasons already mentionned many times) and thus, the ability to keep the enemy at your short-range optimal but not at his short-range optimal - by webbing, ab'ing, mwd'ing) that is specifically deciding the outcome of a close range duel between pulse/autocannon/blasters is not important for the thorax, as the drones will get at their optimal within seconds. During all the close range duel, the thorax will out-tank and out-damage any close range cruiser. I am totally convinced that the thorax, being the highest tier gallente cruiser, should be the king of close-range combat. I however, do not agree that his superior tank + damage rules out totally every close range cruisers from the game. If i may compare this to another situation we know, it is totally similar of what was said by blasterthron pilots in regard to ravens before the patch that "fixed" missiles. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 12:17:00 -
[97] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 12:39:48
Nobody is going to "win" such an argument, because only CCP knows if they want the all cruisers of one race to be different or if they want some cruisers to be cheaper and a less powerfull version of another cruiser. Only 4 cruisers of two races are in the former case though - amarr (maller > omen in about every way) and gallente (thorax > vexor in about every way) - and this seems to me a very good reason to support the idea that CCP wants no cruiser to be totally outclassed by another. People not convinced by this argument cannot expect to convince others with their simply because there is no decisive reason until CCP says what they want. Firstly, my last calculations about the dps of a rupture were wrong as i totally forgot to include the effect of damage mods. I am sorry about that and will repost a corrected version. Secondly, long range and short range guns are balanced by damage and by tracking (exception being missiles, not concerned by the problem of tracking). It is very misleading to say that "the thorax can do more damage over time than any other cruiser [because] it has less time to do that damage in." Once the thorax is close enough to mess up the tracking of artillery, the damage of artillery is null and thus irrelevant. If the fight lass 40 seconds, the artillery do damage during the first 20 seconds and the drones do damage during the 20 next seconds, it is simply wrong to say that "it has less time to do that damage in." Including flight time in the damage / time ratio, but not including tracking of gun is in my opinion a biased way of looking at the whole problem. It is also were actual piloting skills are taken into account and thus the outcome of the fight is not solely dictated by ships, skill points and setups. (continued) In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 12:17:00 -
[98] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 12:31:14 Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 12:30:21 I fail once again to understand which reasoning made you come to this conclusion. Especially since you cannot realistically say that the thorax is the only ship likely to be fitted for close range. The thorax is not going to be "half dead" when it start to do damage in a close range duel, yet it has the advantage you describe. How, except the fact that it is an inferior tier cruiser (which is bad reason to me), do you expect to "boost the damage" of the stabber so that it stand a decent chance, or at least a chance, against a thorax in a world were there is no oversized plate. Currently, it is the oversized plate that allows AC rupture and medium-pulse maller to be a challenge to the thorax. Without the plate, those ships cannot tank the drones long enough to kill them and are at a bigger disadvantage against the thorax than they are when oversized plates are allowed. No non-plated close range cruiser can tank for any relevant amount of time the drones of a thorax, especially since they have to get close themselves. The delay of damage due to drones flight is very small in a close range duel. Finally, the current drone bays allow the thorax not to use blasters specifically (for various reasons already mentionned many times) and thus, the ability to keep the enemy at your short-range optimal but not at his short-range optimal - by webbing, ab'ing, mwd'ing) that is specifically deciding the outcome of a close range duel between pulse/autocannon/blasters is not important for the thorax, as the drones will get at their optimal within seconds. During all the close range duel, the thorax will out-tank and out-damage any close range cruiser. I am totally convinced that the thorax, being the highest tier gallente cruiser, should be the king of close-range combat. I however, do not agree that his superior tank + damage rules out totally every close range cruisers from the game. If i may compare this to another situation we know, it is totally similar of what was said by blasterthron pilots in regard to ravens before the patch that "fixed" missiles. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 13:19:00 -
[99]
Let's to the math about that. As i mentionned above, i totally forgot to include the effect of damage mods into the dps of the gank rupture, showing my 150 dps figure. First approximation of the damage would be 150 dps * 1.79 = 269 dps. The artillery setup of the rupture totally gimped it as it cannot even fit the guns without the advanced weapons upgrade skil trained to a high level. The thorax, fitted in a similar way, would be using 5 * 200mm railguns t2, 4 mag stab t2 and a rcu t2. Please note that this setup is less gimping than the artillery setup of the rupture, since it can be fitted without the advanced weapon upgrade trained and has 1 more gun fitted. To compare the damage without comparing the range, i'll make sure to chose the right ammo for the thorax, so that they have the same optimal. The ammo that should be used for comparison should have a -45% range modifier. Antimatter has -50% and plutonium -37.5%. The logical choice should be to use antimatter as it is closer, however projectile have low optimum and higher falloff so plutonium is probably more justified. damage calculation: thorax = 1.79 (4 damage mod) * 5 (number of guns) * 22 (ammo damage) * 1.25 (hybrid skill) * 2.4 (damage mod) * 1.25 (cruiser skill) * 1.10 (specialization skill) * 1.15 (surgical strike) / (4.875 (base rof) * 0.75 (rapid firing) * 0.9 (gunnery skill)) = 283 dps. rupture = 1.79 (4 damage mod) * 4 (number of guns) * 22 (ammo damage) * 1.25 (projectile skill) * 6.9 (damage mod) * 1.25 (cruiser skill) * 1.10 (specialization skill) * 1.15 (surgical strike) / (15.75 (base rof) * 0.75 (cruiser skill to 5) * 0.75 (rapid firing) * 0.9 (gunnery skill)) = 269 dps. As you can see, at the range that was considered in the last calculations i did, with that scenario of a thorax closing on a gank-rupture, the thorax with rail outdamage (by a little margin, but outdamage) the gank rupture (and is easier to fit, and track better, but has a little less falloff to play with). So, if anything, this example didn't show anything about the thorax and his drone bay, just that the manoeuvring in the "gank world" isn't exactly rewarding. So let's me sum this up: the experiment with a thorax trying to catch a long range rupture doesn't prove anything about the thorax needing his drones or not, as the close range thorax would die to a rail-thorax as easily as it would die to an artillery-rupture. This is thus not, in any possible way, a mean to determine if the thorax drone bay is needed or not. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 13:19:00 -
[100]
Let's to the math about that. As i mentionned above, i totally forgot to include the effect of damage mods into the dps of the gank rupture, showing my 150 dps figure. First approximation of the damage would be 150 dps * 1.79 = 269 dps. The artillery setup of the rupture totally gimped it as it cannot even fit the guns without the advanced weapons upgrade skil trained to a high level. The thorax, fitted in a similar way, would be using 5 * 200mm railguns t2, 4 mag stab t2 and a rcu t2. Please note that this setup is less gimping than the artillery setup of the rupture, since it can be fitted without the advanced weapon upgrade trained and has 1 more gun fitted. To compare the damage without comparing the range, i'll make sure to chose the right ammo for the thorax, so that they have the same optimal. The ammo that should be used for comparison should have a -45% range modifier. Antimatter has -50% and plutonium -37.5%. The logical choice should be to use antimatter as it is closer, however projectile have low optimum and higher falloff so plutonium is probably more justified. damage calculation: thorax = 1.79 (4 damage mod) * 5 (number of guns) * 22 (ammo damage) * 1.25 (hybrid skill) * 2.4 (damage mod) * 1.25 (cruiser skill) * 1.10 (specialization skill) * 1.15 (surgical strike) / (4.875 (base rof) * 0.75 (rapid firing) * 0.9 (gunnery skill)) = 283 dps. rupture = 1.79 (4 damage mod) * 4 (number of guns) * 22 (ammo damage) * 1.25 (projectile skill) * 6.9 (damage mod) * 1.25 (cruiser skill) * 1.10 (specialization skill) * 1.15 (surgical strike) / (15.75 (base rof) * 0.75 (cruiser skill to 5) * 0.75 (rapid firing) * 0.9 (gunnery skill)) = 269 dps. As you can see, at the range that was considered in the last calculations i did, with that scenario of a thorax closing on a gank-rupture, the thorax with rail outdamage (by a little margin, but outdamage) the gank rupture (and is easier to fit, and track better, but has a little less falloff to play with). So, if anything, this example didn't show anything about the thorax and his drone bay, just that the manoeuvring in the "gank world" isn't exactly rewarding. So let's me sum this up: the experiment with a thorax trying to catch a long range rupture doesn't prove anything about the thorax needing his drones or not, as the close range thorax would die to a rail-thorax as easily as it would die to an artillery-rupture. This is thus not, in any possible way, a mean to determine if the thorax drone bay is needed or not. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 13:29:00 -
[101] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 13:35:04
As i just the did the calculations, i will comment on this. The thorax can be fitted to do 200 dps at the ranges of a rupture (being between 15000 and 17000m in the calculations mentionned above), it will just be outdamaged at extremely high ranges, due to higher falloff and different ammo range modifiers of projectiles. But, in fact, the rupture and not the thorax will likely be dead before the drones arrives at their target. I'd like you to reassess yourself on that basis the viability of how removing oversized plates will fix the thorax, as at this point i am convinced that removing the plates without halving the drone bay will break the blaster thorax, and halving the drone bay without removing plates will increase the incentive to use blasters. Let me explain this, to be sure we get this right. Removing the plates will remove the ability of the thorax to close on gank ship (and gank cruisers, because no plate will mean gank-area again) from a long range (thorax with 200 railguns included in the "gank-ship category btw). This will mean the dead of blaster setups on thorax (when the oversized drone bay already allows the thorax not to fit blasters). Halving the drone bay will encourage blaster setups as, as you said, the thorax up close need damage. The ability to fit long range frig guns will still be possible but more difficult. More survivable with a plate (not necessarly 1600mm, but 800mm or even 400mm), the thorax can be used close-range as it was intended, using its armor as a buffer. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 13:29:00 -
[102] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 15:43:50
As i just the did the calculations, i will comment on this. The thorax can be fitted to do 200 dps at the ranges of a rupture (being between 15000 and 17000m in the calculations mentionned above), it will just be outdamaged at extremely high ranges, due to higher falloff and different ammo range modifiers of projectiles. But, in fact, the rupture and not the thorax will likely be dead before the drones reach their target. I'd like you to reassess yourself on that basis the viability of how removing oversized plates will fix the thorax, as at this point i am convinced that removing the plates without halving the drone bay will break the blaster thorax, and halving the drone bay without removing plates will increase the incentive to use blasters. Let me explain this, to be sure we get this right. Removing the plates will remove the ability of the thorax to close on gank ship (and gank cruisers, because no plate will mean gank-area again) from a long range (thorax with 200 railguns included in the "gank-ship category btw). This will mean the dead of blaster setups on thorax (when the oversized drone bay already allows the thorax not to fit blasters). Halving the drone bay will encourage blaster setups as, as you said, the thorax up close need damage. The ability to fit long range frig guns will still be possible but more difficult. More survivable with a plate (not necessarly 1600mm, but 800mm or 400mm), the thorax can be used close-range as it was intended, using its armor as a buffer. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:07:00 -
[103] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 14:08:18
The comparison above is 4 720mm t2 VS 5 200mm t2 at 15000-17000m, 4 damage mod t2 each. Comparing the moa with that isn't difficult but is necessarily inferior to the thorax, with 1 less gun, the same amound of damage mods, no ship skill damage bonus, and a slightly more damaging ammo because of the range bonus. Spare grid to fit launchers in the two remaining high slots will not change much. The problem of the maller is that 15000 m is still a working range for pulses, i'll do the math in a few with beams to. That being said, my point was that a non-plated thorax closing on a gank cruisers from 20km will die because there is not much place for manoeuvring in the "gank world". I see little relevance in comparing dps of gank setups at 20km to prove something about the drone bay of the thorax, as a non plated thorax (or whatever cruiser) will die to a gank-cruiser in less time than the flight time of the drones anyway. People suggesting to remove oversized plates but keeping the drone bay are fighting against their own goal, this will definetly kill the thorax as a close range ship and make their drones worthless. Sounds logical to me. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:07:00 -
[104] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 15:44:55
The comparison above is 4 720mm t2 VS 5 200mm t2 at 15000-17000m, 4 damage mod t2 each. Comparing the moa with that isn't difficult but is necessarily inferior to the thorax, with 1 less gun, the same amount of damage mods, no ship skill damage bonus, and a slightly more damaging ammo because of the range bonus. Spare grid to fit launchers in the two remaining high slots will not change much. The problem of the maller is that 15000 m is still a working range for pulses, i'll do the math in a few with beams to. That being said, my point was that a non-plated thorax closing on a gank cruisers from 20km will die because there is not much place for manoeuvring in the "gank world". I see little relevance in comparing dps of gank setups at 20km to prove something about the drone bay of the thorax, as a non plated thorax (or whatever cruiser) will die to a gank-cruiser in less time than the flight time of the drones anyway. People suggesting to remove oversized plates but keeping the drone bay are fighting against their own goal, this will definetly kill the thorax as a close range ship and make their drones worthless. Sounds logical to me. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:23:00 -
[105]Honestly dude, i proved that point so nicely it could be a theorem. What you said wasn't ever proved, at any rate. Hint: see 6 posts above. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:23:00 -
[106]Honestly dude, i proved that point so nicely it could be a theorem. What you said wasn't ever proved, at any rate. Hint: see 6 posts above. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:29:00 -
[107]
I was thinking about 4 * 200mm t2, 4 damage mods and worthless launchers at the cost of training advanced weapon upgrade to high level. No idea if it would be better (dps wise) than what you get though. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:29:00 -
[108]
I was thinking about 4 * 200mm t2, 4 damage mods and worthless launchers at the cost of training advanced weapon upgrade to high level. No idea if it would be better (dps wise) than what you get though. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:30:00 -
[109] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 14:35:41 Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 14:31:43
And that is exactly why there is not hope whatsoever to defeat a tanked thorax in any close range cruiser in a world without plates. The close range thorax will die to any long range gank fitting, and kill other close range cruisers. Hence, nobody will ever fit a cruiser for close range except to fight other classes. Most cruiser cannot catch frigs, and cannot be a threat to BS without a plate, hence cruisers are ruled out of the game. Then we go play WOW and ask Blizzard for bigger helmets. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:30:00 -
[110] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 14:37:25 Edit: Nevermind. Aborted joke. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:51:00 -
[111]You cannot outdamage 4 720 t2 & 4 damage mods t2 with any amount of 650mm + heavy launchers, and i am not even sure that rupture with 4 720 t2 & 4 damage mods t2 + RCU 2 can fit 2 rocket launchers in the spare high slots. No. There is just a need for people to acknowledge this simple logic: * remove the plates, keep the drone bay: Tanking becomes useless against, back to ganking area. Blaster range is doomed, navigation is useless as when you are moving, you are not doing damage and you die. The heavy drones are useless for a thorax that will die in 20 seconds, when getting hammered from outside 15km. Thorax is doomed, and that's with its drone bay untouched. * keep the plates, remove the drone bay: The blaster-thorax becomes viable and desirableagain as it has to fit blasters to be a close range boat (needing damage and not able to rely only on the drone bay). Plate setup still beat gank setup, which mean longer and more enjoyable fight. Thorax can still heavily outdamage any cruiser at close range and even break a dual rep apoc tank alone.
If you remove the plates, no close range cruiser will ever be able to shoot 8 heavy drones, do you understand that ? Close range thorax in a plate-free world will beat any close range cruiser. incidentally, it will die to gank setups, as every other close range cruiser. We will only see cruisers in mid range gank setup. I *think* that you didn't factor in the equation that other cruisers *also* would lose the plate. Ok ?
As i showed in another post at your request, swapping the vexor and the thorax drone bay will make the vexor bonus useless and the thorax will lose around 25% of its drone damage, which isn't very much (but still something). Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:51:00 -
[112]You cannot outdamage 4 720 t2 & 4 damage mods t2 with any amount of 650mm + heavy launchers, and i am not even sure that rupture with 4 720 t2 & 4 damage mods t2 + RCU 2 can fit 2 rocket launchers in the spare high slots. No. There is just a need for people to acknowledge this simple logic: * remove the plates, keep the drone bay: Tanking becomes useless against, back to ganking area. Blaster range is doomed, navigation is useless as when you are moving, you are not doing damage and you die. The heavy drones are useless for a thorax that will die in 20 seconds, when getting hammered from outside 15km. Thorax is doomed, and that's with its drone bay untouched. * keep the plates, remove the drone bay: The blaster-thorax becomes viable and desirableagain as it has to fit blasters to be a close range boat (needing damage and not able to rely only on the drone bay). Plate setup still beat gank setup, which mean longer and more enjoyable fight. Thorax can still heavily outdamage any cruiser at close range and even break a dual rep apoc tank alone.
If you remove the plates, no close range cruiser will ever be able to shoot 8 heavy drones, do you understand that ? Close range thorax in a plate-free world will beat any close range cruiser. incidentally, it will die to gank setups, as every other close range cruiser. We will only see cruisers in mid range gank setup. I *think* that you didn't factor in the equation that other cruisers *also* would lose the plate. Ok ?
As i showed in another post at your request, swapping the vexor and the thorax drone bay will make the vexor bonus useless and the thorax will lose around 25% of its drone damage, which isn't very much (but still something). Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 15:01:00 -
[113]
Congrats, you took something that was already removed before you posted, and got it all wrong. I removed it, but as i believe that you aren't going to remove what you posted, here's what i wanted to write and decided not to: And that is exactly why there is not hope whatsoever to defeat a tanked thorax in any close range cruiser in a world without plates. The close range thorax will die to any long range gank fitting, and kill other close range cruisers with its massive damage advantage coming from drones. Hence, nobody will ever fit a cruiser for close range except to fight other classes. Most cruiser cannot catch frigs, and cannot be a threat to BS without a plate, hence short range cruisers are ruled out of the game. Long range cruisers still die to bs in a painful death. Trying to make a point when quoting something before it gets edited isn't working good, ok ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 15:01:00 -
[114]
Congrats, you took something that was already removed before you posted, and got it all wrong. I removed it, but as i believe that you aren't going to remove what you posted, here's what i wanted to write and decided not to: And that is exactly why there is not hope whatsoever to defeat a tanked thorax in any close range cruiser in a world without plates. The close range thorax will die to any long range gank fitting, and kill other close range cruisers with its massive damage advantage coming from drones. Hence, nobody will ever fit a cruiser for close range except to fight other classes. Most cruiser cannot catch frigs, and cannot be a threat to BS without a plate, hence short range cruisers are ruled out of the game. Long range cruisers still die to bs in a painful death. Trying to make a point when quoting something before it gets edited isn't working good, ok ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 15:06:00 -
[115]That is not a problem, that is a solution of cruiser users for cruiser users. And fyi, frigates are much more hurt by this than battleships, exception being the thorax. Ok ? It does not LEVEL it out, it RULES it out. Ok ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 15:06:00 -
[116]That is not a problem, that is a solution of cruiser users for cruiser users. And fyi, frigates are much more hurt by this than battleships, exception being the thorax. Ok ? It does not LEVEL it out, it RULES it out. Ok ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 15:09:00 -
[117] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 15:09:19 Small blasters dude, small neutron are the 1600mm plate alternative to med electron. Or fit a smaller plate and bigger weapons. Seriously, you make me want to cry. Why don't you give a reason, ONCE, instead of hammering this thread with this affirmation. Prove IT damnit! Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 15:09:00 -
[118] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 15:09:19 Small blasters dude, small neutron are the 1600mm plate alternative to med electron. Or fit a smaller plate and bigger weapons. Seriously, you make me want to cry. Why don't you give a reason, ONCE, instead of hammering this thread with this affirmation. Prove IT damnit! Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 15:19:00 -
[119]cruisers mounting frigates guns are the bane of frigates, t1 and t2 alike, much more than cruisers mounting cruiser guns. Does this make sense to you ? That is where i stop replying to you. I tried enough, believe what you want. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 15:19:00 -
[120]cruisers mounting frigates guns are the bane of frigates, t1 and t2 alike, much more than cruisers mounting cruiser guns. Does this make sense to you ? That is where i stop replying to you. I tried enough, believe what you want. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 20:23:00 -
[121] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 20:25:14 Garreck, answer my questions pretty please. The one about how exactly 8 heavy drones are needed and ten mediums are not enough, and the few others you didn't reply to. Thanks. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 20:23:00 -
[122] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 20:25:14 Garreck, answer my questions pretty please. The one about how exactly 8 heavy drones are needed and ten mediums are not enough, and the few others you didn't reply to. Thanks. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 20:30:00 -
[123] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 20:30:09
That is so wrong, getting rid of the possibility to warp out while testing something is not, ever, going to give an evidence about anything. You just can't assume that at all. Reason ? Because in pvp you have to make sure that you target don't run away, no thorax pilot is going to be kitted to death running after a mwd rupture, which is your argument about the weakness of the thorax. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 20:30:00 -
[124] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 20:30:09
That is so wrong, getting rid of the possibility to warp out while testing something is not, ever, going to give an evidence about anything. You just can't assume that at all. Reason ? Because in pvp you have to make sure that you target don't run away, no thorax pilot is going to be kitted to death running after a mwd rupture, which is your argument about the weakness of the thorax. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:12:00 -
[125]That still doesn't tell me why my stabber has only 2 scouts drones. But i guess that i'll get that when i get more sleep. Long day today... Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:12:00 -
[126]That still doesn't tell me why my stabber has only 2 scouts drones. But i guess that i'll get that when i get more sleep. Long day today... Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:26:00 -
[127]
Erm, no. I didn't change logic at all. I am trying to prove that it is better for a thorax to keep the plate and lose half the drones than the other way around. I believe i did it. As for you being succesful with your non plate thorax, i'd say go face some gank rupture without your plate and die... wait. No. People do not fit gank rupture because AC + plates makes it better overall, currently. Lose the plate on anything, you'll face the kind of rupture that does 200+ dps and you will not like it. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:26:00 -
[128]
Erm, no. I didn't change logic at all. I am trying to prove that it is better for a thorax to keep the plate and lose half the drones than the other way around. I believe i did it. As for you being succesful with your non plate thorax, i'd say go face some gank rupture without your plate and die... wait. No. People do not fit gank rupture because AC + plates makes it better overall, currently. Lose the plate on anything, you'll face the kind of rupture that does 200+ dps and you will not like it. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:29:00 -
[129]A blaster thorax without plate is vulnerable... to "gank setups", even to a gank-thorax with 200mm railguns. No point made about the drone bay here, it's a totally different rule of the game that you point out. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:29:00 -
[130]A blaster thorax without plate is vulnerable... to "gank setups", even to a gank-thorax with 200mm railguns. No point made about the drone bay here, it's a totally different rule of the game that you point out. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:32:00 -
[131]
How so ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:32:00 -
[132]
How so ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:35:00 -
[133]
Congratulation, you find a specific theoretical setup (that isn't viable either) that would beat a thorax in a 1 vs 1. Now, nobody said that the thorax was overpowered by such a margin that you couldn't find a specific to kill it. Kinda ruins that to be honest, nobody fit 4 * 720 or even 4 * 650 artillery and a mwd, that things doesn't hold a fight against anything. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:35:00 -
[134]
Congratulation, you find a specific theoretical setup (that isn't viable either) that would beat a thorax in a 1 vs 1. Now, nobody said that the thorax was overpowered by such a margin that you couldn't find a specific to kill it. Kinda ruins that to be honest, nobody fit 4 * 720 or even 4 * 650 artillery and a mwd, that things doesn't hold a fight against anything. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:49:00 -
[135] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 21:57:47 I'll actually do the setups for you: Thorax: 5 * 200mm t2 2 tracking comp t2 & 1 sensor booster 4 damage mod t2 & 1 rcu t2 Not all of the 375 cpu is used (weapon upgrades 5 required on top of electronic 5) Not all of the 1006.2 pg used (engineering 5 needed, no adv. weap. upgrades needed) Rupture: (650mm fit) 4 * 650 t2 & 2 heavy t2 1 tracking comp t2 & 1 sensor booster & 1 empty slot 4 damage mod t2 & 1 rcu t2 Not enough cpu to fit the last mid slot, not enough pg with engineering 5 to fit everything but it'll do with advanced weapon upgrade trained a few levels Outdamaged by the thorax inside 30 - 40 km, i'll do the precise math tomorrow. Rupture: (720mm fit) 4 * 720mm t2 & 2 rocket launcher t2 2 tracking comp t2 & 1 sensor booster 4 damage mod t2 & 1 rcu t2 Enough cpu, but require advanced weapon upgrade trained a lot (71 pg lacking without the skill, 1042 pg with the rcu2 and it need 1113 to fit) Outdamaged by the thorax inside 30 km, i'll do the precise math tomorrow. Ok, i did my best to come with comparable setups. I hope that i did that right, as i said i'll have to check it tomorrow. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:49:00 -
[136] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 21:57:47 I'll actually do the setups for you: Thorax: 5 * 200mm t2 2 tracking comp t2 & 1 sensor booster 4 damage mod t2 & 1 rcu t2 Not all of the 375 cpu is used (weapon upgrades 5 required on top of electronic 5) Not all of the 1006.2 pg used (engineering 5 needed, no adv. weap. upgrades needed) Rupture: (650mm fit) 4 * 650 t2 & 2 heavy t2 1 tracking comp t2 & 1 sensor booster & 1 empty slot 4 damage mod t2 & 1 rcu t2 Not enough cpu to fit the last mid slot, not enough pg with engineering 5 to fit everything but it'll do with advanced weapon upgrade trained a few levels Outdamaged by the thorax inside 30 - 40 km, i'll do the precise math tomorrow. Rupture: (720mm fit) 4 * 720mm t2 & 2 rocket launcher t2 2 tracking comp t2 & 1 sensor booster 4 damage mod t2 & 1 rcu t2 Enough cpu, but require advanced weapon upgrade trained a lot (71 pg lacking without the skill, 1042 pg with the rcu2 and it need 1113 to fit) Outdamaged by the thorax inside 30 km, i'll do the precise math tomorrow. Ok, i did my best to come with comparable setups. I hope that i did that right, as i said i'll have to check it tomorrow. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:50:00 -
[137]
I know, i find all this quite annoying to be honest. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 21:50:00 -
[138]
I know, i find all this quite annoying to be honest. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 22:07:00 -
[139]
You accept ship flight time/drone flight time as a reduction of damage accross the fight, but forget about the tracking problems of long range guns at close range as a reduction of damage over time. Why is that ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 22:07:00 -
[140]
You accept ship flight time/drone flight time as a reduction of damage accross the fight, but forget about the tracking problems of long range guns at close range as a reduction of damage over time. Why is that ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 22:30:00 -
[141] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 22:36:20
So why exactly does it needs so much damage at that point ? That's the thing that is puzzling me really, if you get inside the long range guns, 3, 8 or 28 drones won't make a difference except how fast the other ship (the other cruiser, say) is going to die. But it will make a difference in you meet another close range ship, say my poor stabber, because it need as much damage up close as you do. For me, the issue about balance is more related to close range ship that long range ship, hence why i don't get this stuffs about 720mm artillery rupture and 200mm railgun thorax. I just did the math "if it helps" but can't see futher than that. Now, that's for inter-class combat. How about, say, assault ship (frigates) or even battleship ? Isn't the "much needed firepower" you speak off a bit to much ? That why i rest my case, about an inbalance "inside the class" and "outside a class". I would still love the thorax with 10 mediums, but that would give me a reason to use my stabber sometimes  Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: Oh, yeah, i'll just add that. I'm not randomly getting from a "nerf the thorax drones bay" to a "give me more drone bay on my stabber". That example was to try to get a point more clear, i already said why i don't think that "boost *damage* of every cruiser will be better than nerf the rax" is going to be an improvement. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 22:30:00 -
[142] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 22:42:20
So why exactly does it needs so much damage at that point ? That's the thing that is puzzling me really, if you get inside the long range guns, 3, 8 or 28 drones won't make a difference except how fast the other ship (the other cruiser, say) is going to die. But it will make a difference if you meet another close range ship, say my poor stabber, because it need as much damage up close as you do. For me, the issue about balance is more related to close range ship that long range ship, hence why i don't get this stuffs about 720mm artillery rupture and 200mm railgun thorax. I just did the math "if it helps" but can't see futher than that. Now, that's for inter-class combat. How about, say, assault ship (frigates) or even battleship ? Isn't the "much needed firepower" you speak of a bit too much ? That's why i rest my case, about an inbalance "inside the class" and "outside a class". I would still love the thorax with 10 mediums, but that would give me a reason to use my stabber sometimes as it would no shamefully die to another close range cruiser, for the sake of the argument you bring about the "much needed damage". Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: Oh, yeah, i'll just add that. I'm not randomly getting from a "nerf the thorax drones bay" to a "give me more drone bay on my stabber". That example was to try to get a point more clear, i already said why i don't think that "boost *damage* of every cruiser will be better than nerf the rax" is going to be an improvement. Edit2,3,4: spelling errors 4tw. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 23:00:00 -
[143] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 23:05:24 Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 23:00:30
The stabber is a weird ship, it is an awesome design yet it is very hard to get it working good. Yes, you can do nasty tricks with 650mm, including some kiting, but you will never do decent damage. Stabber get only one damage bonus (instead of the two it should get for projectiles to perform ok), 650mm are hard to fit for pants damage, and you will need 3 pds in the low so say bye to damage mods. On top of that you can't tank it, 3/3 mid/low don't cut it. 425mm aren't worth fitting and can't be fitted, 220mm are nice as are dual180mm. Only problem is that web range is exactly your falloff, so unless you want to be webbed in a ship that only relies on speed to survive this is going to be though to scratch some paint. You can ditch projectile for lasers, then you think about it and say, screw that, i'll fit pulse on a nano maller or a nano thorax... :/ All that to say, yes it is a nice ship, but to some extent telling that thorax needs its drones to work correctly is as if i were saying, the stabber needs 3 times its current falloff because it just cannot afford to be webbed. Sure, it would be nice to have, and would make it much better, but i guess we can't all have whatever our ship *needs* to work correctly. What j0sephine said. And, besides, that's just my problem, with so much drones there is little incentive to fit blasters even on a close range thorax, so fitting frig guns on a non-plated thorax is still something that can be done. And then, you have a ship that still work correctly at close range and is a serious threat to frigs. But that's an old point, yet again, so disregard this. I still think that it would be nice to make thorax pilots have to do a real sacrifice when not fitting blasters. That is something i agree with. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 23:00:00 -
[144] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 26/08/2005 23:13:43
The stabber is a weird ship, it is an awesome design yet it is very hard to get it working good. Yes, you can do nasty tricks with 650mm, including some kiting, but you will never do decent damage. Stabber get only one damage bonus (instead of the two it should get for projectiles to perform ok), 650mm are hard to fit for pants damage, and you will need 3 pds in the low so say bye to damage mods. On top of that you can't tank it, 3/3 mid/low don't cut it. 425mm aren't worth fitting and can't be fitted, 220mm are nice as are dual180mm. Only problem is that web range is exactly your falloff, so unless you want to be webbed in a ship that only relies on speed to survive this is going to be though to scratch some paint. You can ditch projectile for lasers, then you think about it and say, screw that, i'll fit pulse on a nano maller or a nano thorax... :/ All that to say, yes it is a nice ship, but to some extent telling that thorax needs its drones to work correctly is as if i were saying, the stabber needs 3 times its current falloff because it just cannot afford to be webbed. Sure, it would be nice to have, and would make it much better, but i guess we can't all have whatever our ship *needs* to work correctly. What j0sephine said. And, besides, that's just my problem, with so much drones there is little incentive to fit blasters even on a close range thorax, so fitting frig guns on a non-plated thorax is still something that can be done. And then, you have a ship that still work correctly at close range and is a serious threat to frigs. But that's an old point, yet again, so disregard this. I still think that it would be nice to make thorax pilots have to do a real sacrifice when not fitting blasters. That is something i agree with. Edit: But the thorax don't *need* its drones there. So, against which ships/ classes of ship does it (finally) needs its drones ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 23:03:00 -
[145]
Not every frig can afford to fit an mwd, especially assault frig. For them heavy drones are a serious problem. As i said previously, an bunch of ogres will slaughter a close range rifter, not webbed, not nossed. Simply because it is not possible to run a mwd at close range and do damage. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.26 23:03:00 -
[146]
Not every frig can afford to fit an mwd, especially assault frig. For them heavy drones are a serious problem. As i said previously, an bunch of ogres will slaughter a close range rifter, not webbed, not nossed. Simply because it is not possible to run a mwd at close range and do damage. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.29 18:36:00 -
[147] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 29/08/2005 18:37:28 Edited by: Naughty Boy on 29/08/2005 18:36:32
I though that i was done with the topic, I guess not. I can adapt and have never really called for a nerf before. I think that plates are fine as they make tanking an option and make fight last longer. I would have no problem to adapt to a harsher penalty to fit oversized plates as about all my setup would trade an oversized plate + power mod for two smaller plates, so anything changed there would not really affect me. I have no problem with the thorax being an awesome cruiser, because i fly it, i enjoy it and would hate to see it nerfed to a point where i wouldn't have a reason to fly it. That being said, for all the reasons i mentioned, the drone bay of the thorax is something that doesn't fit in the game and should be balanced. I know that many people didn't like my positions, and the way i defended them. I am fine with that. Thanks j0sephine for proving what was not realistic in your point, and overall to all people who can defend a position for the game and not for their own advantage, whatever were their opinions in this thread. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.08.29 18:36:00 -
[148] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 29/08/2005 18:37:28 Edited by: Naughty Boy on 29/08/2005 18:36:32
I though that i was done with the topic, I guess not. I can adapt and have never really called for a nerf before. I think that plates are fine as they make tanking an option and make fight last longer. I would have no problem to adapt to a harsher penalty to fit oversized plates as about all my setup would trade an oversized plate + power mod for two smaller plates, so anything changed there would not really affect me. I have no problem with the thorax being an awesome cruiser, because i fly it, i enjoy it and would hate to see it nerfed to a point where i wouldn't have a reason to fly it. That being said, for all the reasons i mentioned, the drone bay of the thorax is something that doesn't fit in the game and should be balanced. I know that many people didn't like my positions, and the way i defended them. I am fine with that. Thanks j0sephine for proving what was not realistic in your point, and overall to all people who can defend a position for the game and not for their own advantage, whatever were their opinions in this thread. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.04 03:03:00 -
[149] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/09/2005 03:07:24
I am also interested in the number, and even started computing them, but I gave up for a very simple reason. They are nice to have, but most of them do not help to determine if the drone bay is too big or not. [comparison of gank setups (most damaging setups at 20km with highest damaging ammo at that range)] Thorax: 5 * 200mm railguns t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 4 mag stabs t2 & 1 RCU t2 * max gun damage with max skills: 283 dps (plutonium ammo to have similar range, though with 2 tracking comp t2 antimatter would work too. 308 dps with AM). Rupture: 4 * 720mm artillery t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 4 gyro stabs t2 & 1 RCU t2 Note that this setup is easier to fit (cpu wise) and more damaging than a 650mm artillery setup with heavy missiles t2. * max gun damage with max skills: 269 dps (emp ammo). Moa: 4 * 200mm railguns t2 & 2 heavy launcher t2 (they fit both with advanced weapon upgrades 4, i think) 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 & 1 something (how could we ever control this variable) 4 mag stabs t2 Note that this setup is more damaging than a 250mm railgun setup without heavy missiles t2, or a 250mm railgun setup with a RCU instead of one mag stab t2. * max gun damage with max skills: 198 dps (antimatter ammo). * max missile damage with max skills: 2 (number of launchers) * 150 (ammo damage) * 1.25 (heavies skill) * 1.10 (specialization skill) * 1.10 (warhead upgrades) / (14.4 (base rof) * 0.85 (rapid launch) * 0.9 (missile launcher operation skill)) = 41 dps. Not sure about this, i'm not used to the new missiles skills but i think that i got it right. * sum: 239 dps. Maller: (a) 5 * heavy beams t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 (actually, it's a tad to short on cpu with maxed skills, but who cares) 4 * heat sink t2 & 2 * RCU t2 * damage with max skills: 302 dps (multifreq). (b) 5 * medium focused beams t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 6 * heat sink t2 * damage with max skills: 309 dps (multifreq, slightly outranged by other guns in the comparison though). (c)There is a mix of beams that does slightly more damage, 4 heavy & 1 med focused with 5 damage mods. Damage < 330 dps though. And, erm, we know about how good amarr ships are at stacking damage mods, don't we... As was already known before the calculations, this doesn't help in telling how much drone bay should have the thorax :/
I have gallente cruiser 3, heavy drones 2 and do not use t2 guns on my thorax, but each his own preference. t2 guns are not a must have, neither are the cruiser bonus. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 03:03:00 -
[150] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/09/2005 03:29:38
I am also interested in the numbers, and even started computing them, but I gave up for a very simple reason. They are nice to have, but most of them do not help to determine if the drone bay is too big or not. [comparison of gank setups (most damaging setups at 20km with highest damaging ammo at that range)] Thorax: 5 * 200mm railguns t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 4 mag stabs t2 & 1 RCU t2 * max gun damage with max skills: 283 dps (plutonium to have similar range, though with 2 tracking comp t2 antimatter would work too. 308 dps with AM). Rupture: 4 * 720mm artillery t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 4 gyro stabs t2 & 1 RCU t2 Note that this setup is easier to fit (cpu wise) and more damaging than a 650mm artillery setup with heavy missiles t2. * max gun damage with max skills: 269 dps (emp). Moa: 4 * 200mm railguns t2 & 2 heavy launcher t2 (they fit both with advanced weapon upgrades 4, i think) 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 & 1 something (how could we ever control this variable) 4 mag stabs t2 Note that this setup is more damaging than a 250mm railgun setup without heavy missiles t2, or a 250mm railgun setup with a RCU instead of one mag stab t2. * max gun damage with max skills: 198 dps (antimatter). * max missile damage with max skills: 2 (number of launchers) * 150 (ammo damage) * 1.25 (heavies skill) * 1.10 (specialization skill) * 1.10 (warhead upgrades) / (14.4 (base rof) * 0.85 (rapid launch) * 0.9 (missile launcher operation skill)) = 41 dps. Not sure about this, i'm not used to the new missiles skills but i think that i got it right. * sum: 239 dps. Maller: (a) 5 * heavy beams t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 (actually, it's a tad to short on cpu with maxed skills, but who cares) 4 * heat sink t2 & 2 * RCU t2 * damage with max skills: 302 dps (multifreq). (b) 5 * medium focused beams t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 6 * heat sink t2 * damage with max skills: 309 dps (multifreq, slightly outranged by other guns in the comparison though). (c)There is a mix of beams that does slightly more damage, 4 heavy & 1 med focused with 5 damage mods. Damage < 330 dps though. And, erm, we know about how good amarr ships are at stacking damage mods, don't we... As was already known before the calculations, this doesn't help in telling how much drone bay should have the thorax :/ Edit: the reason is simple, with that kind of setup the fight is over before any amount or kind of drones can make a difference.
I have gallente cruiser 3, heavy drones 2 and do not use t2 guns on my thorax, but each his own preference. t2 guns are not a must have, neither are the cruiser bonus. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 03:03:00 -
[151] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/09/2005 03:29:38
I am also interested in the numbers, and even started computing them, but I gave up for a very simple reason. They are nice to have, but most of them do not help to determine if the drone bay is too big or not. [comparison of gank setups (most damaging setups at 20km with highest damaging ammo at that range)] Thorax: 5 * 200mm railguns t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 4 mag stabs t2 & 1 RCU t2 * max gun damage with max skills: 283 dps (plutonium to have similar range, though with 2 tracking comp t2 antimatter would work too. 308 dps with AM). Rupture: 4 * 720mm artillery t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 4 gyro stabs t2 & 1 RCU t2 Note that this setup is easier to fit (cpu wise) and more damaging than a 650mm artillery setup with heavy missiles t2. * max gun damage with max skills: 269 dps (emp). Moa: 4 * 200mm railguns t2 & 2 heavy launcher t2 (they fit both with advanced weapon upgrades 4, i think) 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 & 1 something (how could we ever control this variable) 4 mag stabs t2 Note that this setup is more damaging than a 250mm railgun setup without heavy missiles t2, or a 250mm railgun setup with a RCU instead of one mag stab t2. * max gun damage with max skills: 198 dps (antimatter). * max missile damage with max skills: 2 (number of launchers) * 150 (ammo damage) * 1.25 (heavies skill) * 1.10 (specialization skill) * 1.10 (warhead upgrades) / (14.4 (base rof) * 0.85 (rapid launch) * 0.9 (missile launcher operation skill)) = 41 dps. Not sure about this, i'm not used to the new missiles skills but i think that i got it right. * sum: 239 dps. Maller: (a) 5 * heavy beams t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 (actually, it's a tad to short on cpu with maxed skills, but who cares) 4 * heat sink t2 & 2 * RCU t2 * damage with max skills: 302 dps (multifreq). (b) 5 * medium focused beams t2 1 sensor booster t2 & 2 tracking computer t2 6 * heat sink t2 * damage with max skills: 309 dps (multifreq, slightly outranged by other guns in the comparison though). (c)There is a mix of beams that does slightly more damage, 4 heavy & 1 med focused with 5 damage mods. Damage < 330 dps though. And, erm, we know about how good amarr ships are at stacking damage mods, don't we... As was already known before the calculations, this doesn't help in telling how much drone bay should have the thorax :/ Edit: the reason is simple, with that kind of setup the fight is over before any amount or kind of drones can make a difference.
I have gallente cruiser 3, heavy drones 2 and do not use t2 guns on my thorax, but each his own preference. t2 guns are not a must have, neither are the cruiser bonus. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.04 12:56:00 -
[152] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/09/2005 13:11:56
Rupture pg with 1 RCU t2: 725*1.15*1.25=1042.1875 MW (engineering 5) 4* 720mm artillery t2: 4*275*0.9 = 990 MW (advanced weapon upgrades 5) 4 damage mods + sensor booster + 2 tracking comps: 7 MW Free pg for the 2 remaining high slots: 45 MW which isn't enough for a single t1 assault launcher. At best, you can get there two standard missile launchers. With advanced weapons upgrade 3, only 1 MW is free for the two high slots. I understand your concern as I didn't mention what to do with the 2 remaining high slots. To be honest, i didn't even compute it, though i should have. Indeed, the maller does really good, and far better than one could have expected considering the fitting requirements of beam lasers. Sure, but as is said i don't think that there is a way to control that variable. I showed the calculations mostly to show that this kind of parameters is very hard to control. There was no tanking involved, no "navigation" needed, no flight time for missiles, so it should have been an easy comparison. However, it is not easy, as the 4th mid of the moa shows here. Adding tanking, manoeuvring to get in range, and variations in setup in a comparison of numbers would leave you with things impossible to compare, due to the excessive number of parameters. Indeed, the results are really close. Though, half of the setups would have been impossible before the introduction of the "advanced weapon upgrades" skill: the moa need it to fit heavy launchers, accounting for 20% extra damage, and the rupture need it to fit it's 4th gun (instead of 650mm doing far less damage). They should have traded a damage mod for a power mod, decreasing further their already lower damage. In comparison, the long range thorax fitting is an easy fit. The maller is a different case, for various reasons (working mix of guns, stacking of damage mods). (continued) --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.04 12:56:00 -
[153] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/09/2005 13:09:52 There is indeed an issue there, though i would add that gallente bonus are in general far more versatile than the caldari bonus. A damage bonus, or even a tracking bonus, is something that helps railguns more than a range bonus helps blasters. There are also other factors to compare, than a blaster-moa pilot would point easily: high mass, low speed, low agility, are problems for short range. If anything, the moa has it worse than any other cruiser in the comparison if you overlook the 4th mid slot. I can see some people fitting 425mm railgun on their mega be somehow angry about such a change As a general note about the calculations, i think that they are not going to show us something that we don't know already. The most interesting number that i saw, in this thread, in relation to this issue, is the total hp of 8 heavy drones. The number clearly show how 8 heavy drones don't belong to the cruiser world. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 12:56:00 -
[154] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/09/2005 13:11:56
Rupture pg with 1 RCU t2: 725*1.15*1.25=1042.1875 MW (engineering 5) 4* 720mm artillery t2: 4*275*0.9 = 990 MW (advanced weapon upgrades 5) 4 damage mods + sensor booster + 2 tracking comps: 7 MW Free pg for the 2 remaining high slots: 45 MW which isn't enough for a single t1 assault launcher. At best, you can get there two standard missile launchers. With advanced weapons upgrade 3, only 1 MW is free for the two high slots. I understand your concern as I didn't mention what to do with the 2 remaining high slots. To be honest, i didn't even compute it, though i should have. Indeed, the maller does really good, and far better than one could have expected considering the fitting requirements of beam lasers. Sure, but as is said i don't think that there is a way to control that variable. I showed the calculations mostly to show that this kind of parameters is very hard to control. There was no tanking involved, no "navigation" needed, no flight time for missiles, so it should have been an easy comparison. However, it is not easy, as the 4th mid of the moa shows here. Adding tanking, manoeuvring to get in range, and variations in setup in a comparison of numbers would leave you with things impossible to compare, due to the excessive number of parameters. Indeed, the results are really close. Though, half of the setups would have been impossible before the introduction of the "advanced weapon upgrades" skill: the moa need it to fit heavy launchers, accounting for 20% extra damage, and the rupture need it to fit it's 4th gun (instead of 650mm doing far less damage). They should have traded a damage mod for a power mod, decreasing further their already lower damage. In comparison, the long range thorax fitting is an easy fit. The maller is a different case, for various reasons (working mix of guns, stacking of damage mods). (continued) In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 12:56:00 -
[155] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/09/2005 13:09:52 There is indeed an issue there, though i would add that gallente bonus are in general far more versatile than the caldari bonus. A damage bonus, or even a tracking bonus, is something that helps railguns more than a range bonus helps blasters. There are also other factors to compare, than a blaster-moa pilot would point easily: high mass, low speed, low agility, are problems for short range. If anything, the moa has it worse than any other cruiser in the comparison if you overlook the 4th mid slot. I can see some people fitting 425mm railgun on their mega be somehow angry about such a change As a general note about the calculations, i think that they are not going to show us something that we don't know already. The most interesting number that i saw, in this thread, in relation to this issue, is the total hp of 8 heavy drones. The number clearly show how 8 heavy drones don't belong to the cruiser world. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 12:56:00 -
[156] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/09/2005 13:11:56
Rupture pg with 1 RCU t2: 725*1.15*1.25=1042.1875 MW (engineering 5) 4* 720mm artillery t2: 4*275*0.9 = 990 MW (advanced weapon upgrades 5) 4 damage mods + sensor booster + 2 tracking comps: 7 MW Free pg for the 2 remaining high slots: 45 MW which isn't enough for a single t1 assault launcher. At best, you can get there two standard missile launchers. With advanced weapons upgrade 3, only 1 MW is free for the two high slots. I understand your concern as I didn't mention what to do with the 2 remaining high slots. To be honest, i didn't even compute it, though i should have. Indeed, the maller does really good, and far better than one could have expected considering the fitting requirements of beam lasers. Sure, but as is said i don't think that there is a way to control that variable. I showed the calculations mostly to show that this kind of parameters is very hard to control. There was no tanking involved, no "navigation" needed, no flight time for missiles, so it should have been an easy comparison. However, it is not easy, as the 4th mid of the moa shows here. Adding tanking, manoeuvring to get in range, and variations in setup in a comparison of numbers would leave you with things impossible to compare, due to the excessive number of parameters. Indeed, the results are really close. Though, half of the setups would have been impossible before the introduction of the "advanced weapon upgrades" skill: the moa need it to fit heavy launchers, accounting for 20% extra damage, and the rupture need it to fit it's 4th gun (instead of 650mm doing far less damage). They should have traded a damage mod for a power mod, decreasing further their already lower damage. In comparison, the long range thorax fitting is an easy fit. The maller is a different case, for various reasons (working mix of guns, stacking of damage mods). (continued) In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 12:56:00 -
[157] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 04/09/2005 13:09:52 There is indeed an issue there, though i would add that gallente bonus are in general far more versatile than the caldari bonus. A damage bonus, or even a tracking bonus, is something that helps railguns more than a range bonus helps blasters. There are also other factors to compare, than a blaster-moa pilot would point easily: high mass, low speed, low agility, are problems for short range. If anything, the moa has it worse than any other cruiser in the comparison if you overlook the 4th mid slot. I can see some people fitting 425mm railgun on their mega be somehow angry about such a change As a general note about the calculations, i think that they are not going to show us something that we don't know already. The most interesting number that i saw, in this thread, in relation to this issue, is the total hp of 8 heavy drones. The number clearly show how 8 heavy drones don't belong to the cruiser world. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.04 18:14:00 -
[158]
Maybe, because 6-10 heavy drones are fine on a BS ? Maybe because 6 heavy drones / 15 mediums drones are fine on a vexor/arbitrator ? Why change the drones when the thorax is the problem ? It's amazing, from the start of the thread some people are trying to make everybody believe that the drone bay of the thorax is fine, but everything else should be changed so that it actually make sense for the thorax drone bay to be that big. Here's one for you, double the size of every drone and every drone bay bar the thorax, and you can keep you drone bay volume. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 18:14:00 -
[159]
Maybe, because 6-10 heavy drones are fine on a BS ? Maybe because 6 heavy drones / 15 mediums drones are fine on a vexor/arbitrator ? Why change the drones when the thorax is the problem ? It's amazing, from the start of the thread some people are trying to make everybody believe that the drone bay of the thorax is fine, but everything else should be changed so that it actually make sense for the thorax drone bay to be that big. Here's one for you, double the size of every drone and every drone bay bar the thorax, and you can keep you drone bay volume. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 18:14:00 -
[160]
Maybe, because 6-10 heavy drones are fine on a BS ? Maybe because 6 heavy drones / 15 mediums drones are fine on a vexor/arbitrator ? Why change the drones when the thorax is the problem ? It's amazing, from the start of the thread some people are trying to make everybody believe that the drone bay of the thorax is fine, but everything else should be changed so that it actually make sense for the thorax drone bay to be that big. Here's one for you, double the size of every drone and every drone bay bar the thorax, and you can keep you drone bay volume. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.05 02:21:00 -
[161] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 02:47:26 I *think* that there is a fair share of provocation in this. Fair enough, i'll play your game. The thorax does as much damage at long range than the other tier 3 cruisers, with one less slot. Therefore, it doesn't need anymore drone bay than any of them, so at most 60m¦ as the rupture. It should also lose some powergrid as it is not fair that moa and rupture pilots do have to train the advanced weapon upgrade skill to 3 to match the damage of the thorax, whereas the thorax do not even have to max the weapon upgrade skill. It can only have another low slot if it is compensated by a loss of 15% of powergrid, or the loss of its damage bonus, since another "free" low slot would allow it to outdamage all the other tier 3 cruisers at long range. Disclaimer: all what i wrote above can be shown using calculations but is in no way something that i support. This is only an illustration that balance does not mean "everybody should get as many slots as the others". Bonuses, slots, pg, cpu, drone bay, speed, agility, sensor strenght, sig radius, and basically every possible attribute is also a balancing factor. See above. What would be the point to nerf something blatantly overpowered if it was to replace it by something equally stupidly overpowered. Aye, you got it all right. If we "sort out" ( ) the (oversized) plates, cruisers will be poor again. I totally agree with you. Hence, why i don't see why so many people want them to get "nerfed". Oh, noes, plates made us all "rethink" (yeah, right, that was deep thinking) our gank-setups.There is some tweaking needed for plates, however bringing confusion about that into this issue makes you look desesperate. In case you didn't notice (yet), bringing confusion didn't work well so far and probably won't work any better in the future. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: removed unfriendly comment, sorry. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 02:21:00 -
[162] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 02:47:26 I *think* that there is a fair share of provocation in this. Fair enough, i'll play your game. The thorax does as much damage at long range than the other tier 3 cruisers, with one less slot. Therefore, it doesn't need anymore drone bay than any of them, so at most 60m¦ as the rupture. It should also lose some powergrid as it is not fair that moa and rupture pilots do have to train the advanced weapon upgrade skill to 3 to match the damage of the thorax, whereas the thorax do not even have to max the weapon upgrade skill. It can only have another low slot if it is compensated by a loss of 15% of powergrid, or the loss of its damage bonus, since another "free" low slot would allow it to outdamage all the other tier 3 cruisers at long range. Disclaimer: all what i wrote above can be shown using calculations but is in no way something that i support. This is only an illustration that balance does not mean "everybody should get as many slots as the others". Bonuses, slots, pg, cpu, drone bay, speed, agility, sensor strenght, sig radius, and basically every possible attribute is also a balancing factor. See above. What would be the point to nerf something blatantly overpowered if it was to replace it by something equally stupidly overpowered. Aye, you got it all right. If we "sort out" ( ) the (oversized) plates, cruisers will be poor again. I totally agree with you. Hence, why i don't see why so many people want them to get "nerfed". Oh, noes, plates made us all "rethink" (yeah, right, that was deep thinking) our gank-setups.There is some tweaking needed for plates, however bringing confusion about that into this issue makes you look desesperate. In case you didn't notice (yet), bringing confusion didn't work well so far and probably won't work any better in the future. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: removed unfriendly comment, sorry. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 02:21:00 -
[163] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 02:47:26 I *think* that there is a fair share of provocation in this. Fair enough, i'll play your game. The thorax does as much damage at long range than the other tier 3 cruisers, with one less slot. Therefore, it doesn't need anymore drone bay than any of them, so at most 60m¦ as the rupture. It should also lose some powergrid as it is not fair that moa and rupture pilots do have to train the advanced weapon upgrade skill to 3 to match the damage of the thorax, whereas the thorax do not even have to max the weapon upgrade skill. It can only have another low slot if it is compensated by a loss of 15% of powergrid, or the loss of its damage bonus, since another "free" low slot would allow it to outdamage all the other tier 3 cruisers at long range. Disclaimer: all what i wrote above can be shown using calculations but is in no way something that i support. This is only an illustration that balance does not mean "everybody should get as many slots as the others". Bonuses, slots, pg, cpu, drone bay, speed, agility, sensor strenght, sig radius, and basically every possible attribute is also a balancing factor. See above. What would be the point to nerf something blatantly overpowered if it was to replace it by something equally stupidly overpowered. Aye, you got it all right. If we "sort out" ( ) the (oversized) plates, cruisers will be poor again. I totally agree with you. Hence, why i don't see why so many people want them to get "nerfed". Oh, noes, plates made us all "rethink" (yeah, right, that was deep thinking) our gank-setups.There is some tweaking needed for plates, however bringing confusion about that into this issue makes you look desesperate. In case you didn't notice (yet), bringing confusion didn't work well so far and probably won't work any better in the future. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. Edit: removed unfriendly comment, sorry. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.05 02:36:00 -
[164] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 02:44:24
I don't know if you know about the "falsifiability" principle of Popper. I'm not willing to lecture people about it, but it would be something really interesting to use in this case. I'd like you to admit that you are wrong, but i can't find a way to do it. It is, either, because you are right, either, because you do not admit being wrong despite being wrong. Either, do i have to admit that you are right, either, i have to ask you which experiment would actually be able to determine that the drone bay is of adequate/inadequate size. Popper's principle says (sorry for the approximation, english is not my mother language) that if something cannot hypothetically be proven wrong, then it is not true either. I am ready to make the calculations, including reasonable random factors, on basis of an experiment that will be able to show which theory about the thorax (drone bay, plates) is actually the right one. You just have to describe the experiment. The catch is, and that's where things gets interesting, the issue of your experiment cannot be determined by another factor(s) that what we are discussing. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 02:36:00 -
[165] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 02:44:24
I don't know if you know about the "falsifiability" principle of Popper. I'm not willing to lecture people about it, but it would be something really interesting to use in this case. I'd like you to admit that you are wrong, but i can't find a way to do it. It is, either, because you are right, either, because you do not admit being wrong despite being wrong. Either, do i have to admit that you are right, either, i have to ask you which experiment would actually be able to determine that the drone bay is of adequate/inadequate size. Popper's principle says (sorry for the approximation, english is not my mother language) that if something cannot hypothetically be proven wrong, then it is not true either. I am ready to make the calculations, including reasonable random factors, on basis of an experiment that will be able to show which theory about the thorax (drone bay, plates) is actually the right one. You just have to describe the experiment. The catch is, and that's where things gets interesting, the issue of your experiment cannot be determined by another factor(s) that what we are discussing. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 02:36:00 -
[166] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 02:44:24
I don't know if you know about the "falsifiability" principle of Popper. I'm not willing to lecture people about it, but it would be something really interesting to use in this case. I'd like you to admit that you are wrong, but i can't find a way to do it. It is, either, because you are right, either, because you do not admit being wrong despite being wrong. Either, do i have to admit that you are right, either, i have to ask you which experiment would actually be able to determine that the drone bay is of adequate/inadequate size. Popper's principle says (sorry for the approximation, english is not my mother language) that if something cannot hypothetically be proven wrong, then it is not true either. I am ready to make the calculations, including reasonable random factors, on basis of an experiment that will be able to show which theory about the thorax (drone bay, plates) is actually the right one. You just have to describe the experiment. The catch is, and that's where things gets interesting, the issue of your experiment cannot be determined by another factor(s) that what we are discussing. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.05 02:43:00 -
[167]
You didn't actually do anything to convince anybody, how could we be convinced ? I'm sorry, but jou just keep repeating that without any kind of reasoning to back you up, and i find this highly disturbing. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 02:43:00 -
[168]
You didn't actually do anything to convince anybody, how could we be convinced ? I'm sorry, but jou just keep repeating that without any kind of reasoning to back you up, and i find this highly disturbing. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 02:43:00 -
[169]
You didn't actually do anything to convince anybody, how could we be convinced ? I'm sorry, but jou just keep repeating that without any kind of reasoning to back you up, and i find this highly disturbing. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.05 03:27:00 -
[170]
What exactly do i have to read, or where exactly do you prove your point ? A link, or even a post number will be enough, thank you. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 03:27:00 -
[171]
What exactly do i have to read, or where exactly do you prove your point ? A link, or even a post number will be enough, thank you. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 03:27:00 -
[172]
What exactly do i have to read, or where exactly do you prove your point ? A link, or even a post number will be enough, thank you. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 16:03:00 -
[173] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 16:05:17
When you've got a hammer in the head, every problem looks like a nail. You decided that the problem is the plate and you see evidence of it everywhere, that doesn't make it true. You are the one ignoring every argument, every calculation, proving you wrong. My current Thorax setup: * 5 * 150mm railguns, * mwd, web, disruptor, * 1600mm plate t2, 2 energized nano t2, RCU t1, med rep t2 speed: 208m/s with navigation 5 & cheapo +3% speed implant armor: 5512hp with hull upgrades 5 My next thorax setup (without oversized plate): * 5 * 150mm railguns, * mwd, web, disruptor, * 2 * 800mm plate t2, 2 energized nano t2, med rep t2 speed: 187m/s with navigation 5 & cheapo +3% speed implant armor: 5517hp with hull upgrades 5 (like 21m/s are going to matter) Don't give me the bull "800mm is oversized too", the t2 version takes 230 pg and fit on a stabber without pg mod, while still fitting a AB2 and medium guns.
Selective reading 4tw. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 16:03:00 -
[174] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 16:05:17
When you've got a hammer in the head, every problem looks like a nail. You decided that the problem is the plate and you see evidence of it everywhere, that doesn't make it true. You are the one ignoring every argument, every calculation, proving you wrong. My current Thorax setup: * 5 * 150mm railguns, * mwd, web, disruptor, * 1600mm plate t2, 2 energized nano t2, RCU t1, med rep t2 speed: 208m/s with navigation 5 & cheapo +3% speed implant armor: 5512hp with hull upgrades 5 My next thorax setup (without oversized plate): * 5 * 150mm railguns, * mwd, web, disruptor, * 2 * 800mm plate t2, 2 energized nano t2, med rep t2 speed: 187m/s with navigation 5 & cheapo +3% speed implant armor: 5517hp with hull upgrades 5 (like 21m/s are going to matter) Don't give me the bull "800mm is oversized too", the t2 version takes 230 pg and fit on a stabber without pg mod, while still fitting a AB2 and medium guns.
Selective reading 4tw. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 18:44:00 -
[175] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 18:49:00
Since i grow tired of the bull you make up on the move without anything to back it up, here are numbers for you: Medium armor rep t2: 173 mw & 23 tf 720mm artillery t2: 275 mw & 32 tf 250mm railgun t2: 236 mw & 44 tf Heavy pulse laser t2: 231 mw & 35 tf Medium capacitor booster t2: 150 mw & 25 tf Large capacitor battery: 250 mw & 100 tf Medium nosferatu t2: 200 mw & 25 tf Medium energy neutralizer t2: 225 mw & 20 tf 10nm MWD t2: 165 mw & 50 tf 800mm steel plate t2: 230 mw & 28 tf 400mm steel plate t2: 35 mw & 23 tf One is the low-end cruiser plate, the other is the high-end cruiser plate. As i said, the fact that i can fit a 800mm plate t2, a t2 propulsion mod, t2 medium weapons (4 medium AC and 2 cruiser sized missile launchers) without power mod on one of the most pg challenged t1 cruiser out there (stabber) should be the evidence of the plate being a cruiser plate. You can also fit a 800mm plate t2 and med electrons t2 and a mwd t2 with only one power upgrade on a thorax. It's getting you nowhere to propose to change all the game so that the drone bay of the thorax makes sense. Besides, removing plates is the worst thing that could happen to the thorax. Why you want to do that is something i don't understand. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 18:44:00 -
[176] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 05/09/2005 18:49:00
Since i grow tired of the bull you make up on the move without anything to back it up, here are numbers for you: Medium armor rep t2: 173 mw & 23 tf 720mm artillery t2: 275 mw & 32 tf 250mm railgun t2: 236 mw & 44 tf Heavy pulse laser t2: 231 mw & 35 tf Medium capacitor booster t2: 150 mw & 25 tf Large capacitor battery: 250 mw & 100 tf Medium nosferatu t2: 200 mw & 25 tf Medium energy neutralizer t2: 225 mw & 20 tf 10nm MWD t2: 165 mw & 50 tf 800mm steel plate t2: 230 mw & 28 tf 400mm steel plate t2: 35 mw & 23 tf One is the low-end cruiser plate, the other is the high-end cruiser plate. As i said, the fact that i can fit a 800mm plate t2, a t2 propulsion mod, t2 medium weapons (4 medium AC and 2 cruiser sized missile launchers) without power mod on one of the most pg challenged t1 cruiser out there (stabber) should be the evidence of the plate being a cruiser plate. You can also fit a 800mm plate t2 and med electrons t2 and a mwd t2 with only one power upgrade on a thorax. It's getting you nowhere to propose to change all the game so that the drone bay of the thorax makes sense. Besides, removing plates is the worst thing that could happen to the thorax. Why you want to do that is something i don't understand. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 19:04:00 -
[177]
Since it's bull day today, i'll come up with a similar argument to prove that the typhoon is the high end, high skill battleship that dooms them all, especially fitted with a large t2 gun of each race. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.05 19:04:00 -
[178]
Since it's bull day today, i'll come up with a similar argument to prove that the typhoon is the high end, high skill battleship that dooms them all, especially fitted with a large t2 gun of each race. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.06 01:33:00 -
[179]
Facts, figures > opinions. My final words to you. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate |
Posted - 2005.09.06 01:33:00 -
[180]
Facts, figures > opinions. My final words to you. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust |
Originally by: Noriath| Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,22s, ref 20250911/1746 EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP. |
| 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. |