|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: one page | |
| Author | Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
 Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released Euphoria Unleashed    |
Posted - 2005.08.26 06:18:00 -
[601] Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 26/08/2005 06:19:11 I havent read all 12 pages as I have to go to work. But I feel the real power of the Rax lies in it ability to use a 1600 plate and tank like a mofo. Nerf the plate allowing it to only be used by BS, then you would force Rax pilots to fit medium blasters, the way the ship was meant to be fitted. Yes the rax will do excellent damage, buts it supposed to. It just wont be able to tank like a BS anymore. IMO leave the drones nerf the plate. EDIT: oh and thank you for promotion of my vid guys.  It's great being Amarr that flys Minmintar aint it? EVIL SYNNs > Bob are the best, we have to pay them to use the plexs... |
 Hephaesteus |
Posted - 2005.08.26 08:21:00 -
[602] Here's my set up Highs 5 light neutron blasters tech 2 Med 10mn ab tech 2 2x cap recharger tech 2 Low 1600mm crystaline carbide armour Med armour rep tech 2 3x 50% armour hardeners Drone bay with 8 heavy drones Maybe the only thing that is wrong is being able to fit bs armour plates apart from that I think the Rax is fairly balanced. BTW if the rax gets a nerf what will be the next ship that the whiners pick on.  |
 Hephaesteus Gallente PILGRIMS Insane Asylum |
Posted - 2005.08.26 08:21:00 -
[603] Edited by: Hephaesteus on 26/08/2005 08:33:57 Edited by: Hephaesteus on 26/08/2005 08:33:25 Here's my set up Highs 5 light neutron blasters tech 2 Med 10mn ab tech 2 2x cap recharger tech 2 or webber and scrambler Low 1600mm crystaline carbide armour Med armour rep tech 2 3x 50% armour hardeners Drone bay with 8 heavy drones Maybe the only thing that is wrong is being able to fit bs armour plates apart from that I think the Rax is fairly balanced. BTW if the rax gets a nerf what will be the next ship that the whiners pick on. |
 Muad 'dib |
Posted - 2005.08.26 08:49:00 -
[604]
This is EXACTLY what i ment to add to this disscussion, i wasnt trying to compare the Rax to the Rupture in a 1v1. Whiners will not whine more if the rax is nerfed, its unballenced atm and with 1600mm plates being so easy to fit and the raxes mwd bonus; that just adds more 'fuel to the fire'. Anyone know what a rax puts out in DPS from a medium blaster setup, im thinkin about 300, with the 150 odd from drones thats a 450 dps monster - even if it is close range its almost DOUBLE the power of other cruisers, although max dmg isnt really the issue its the almost effortless 'free' dmg. Sure there cant be may 'dont nerf the rax' people left, appart form those who own a researched BPO and have gallante cruiser 5 lol. |
 Muad 'dib Caldari Smoking Hillbillys The Volition Cult |
Posted - 2005.08.26 08:49:00 -
[605]
This is EXACTLY what i ment to add to this disscussion, i wasnt trying to compare the Rax to the Rupture in a 1v1. Whiners will not whine more if the rax is nerfed, its unballenced atm and with 1600mm plates being so easy to fit and the raxes mwd bonus; that just adds more 'fuel to the fire'. Anyone know what a rax puts out in DPS from a medium blaster setup, im thinkin about 300, with the 150 odd from drones thats a 450 dps monster - even if it is close range its almost DOUBLE the power of other cruisers, although max dmg isnt really the issue its the almost effortless 'free' dmg. Sure there cant be may 'dont nerf the rax' people left, appart form those who own a researched BPO and have gallante cruiser 5 lol. |
 Kye Kenshin |
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:08:00 -
[606] I think im gonna have to side with the nerf the plate people on this one now. I dont want to nerf the rax but i realised it was overpowered somewhere and at first i thought it was the drones. But it isnt its the plate. Even with 4 heavies it will still be overpowered for the sheer fact it can tank like a bs and still deal good dmg. Even if you did nerf the dronebay i would still fly it with a plate and still win. Hell i even killed a few people without drones just because i can out tank them. So the soultion is simple just limit plate's to there proper ship class. |
 Kye Kenshin Sanctum's Edge |
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:08:00 -
[607] I think im gonna have to side with the nerf the plate people on this one now. I dont want to nerf the rax but i realised it was overpowered somewhere and at first i thought it was the drones. But it isnt its the plate. Even with 4 heavies it will still be overpowered for the sheer fact it can tank like a bs and still deal good dmg. Even if you did nerf the dronebay i would still fly it with a plate and still win. Hell i even killed a few people without drones just because i can out tank them. So the soultion is simple just limit plate's to there proper ship class. |
 Zophi |
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:19:00 -
[608] Edited by: Zophi on 26/08/2005 10:25:07
Well, look REALLY carefully. All those idiots he shots TARGETS HIM(!) not his drones. Look at the Thorax guy fighting the Domi. He takes out the drones first! Thats the way to do it... Simpel case of good pilot killing n00bs... Proves NOTHING! Would only prove something if these guys were putting up a decent fight... --- "Why can't we all just get along?" |
 Zophi TAOSP Band of Brothers |
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:19:00 -
[609] Edited by: Zophi on 26/08/2005 10:25:07
Well, look REALLY carefully. All those idiots he shots TARGETS HIM(!) not his drones. Look at the Thorax guy fighting the Domi. He takes out the drones first! Thats the way to do it... Simpel case of good pilot killing n00bs... Proves NOTHING! Would only prove something if these guys were putting up a decent fight... --- "Why can't we all just get along?" |
Hephaesteus |
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:07:00 -
[610] Just saw the vid, nice one. But what were some of those guys doing .  |
Hephaesteus Gallente PILGRIMS Insane Asylum |
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:07:00 -
[611] Just saw the vid, nice one. But what were some of those guys doing . |
Deja Thoris |
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:17:00 -
[612]
Screw that. This game is for intelligent people. Dont dumb it down to the morons level. For Christs sake. Ooh, I'm a level 2 goon. If that level one nublet attacks me the outcome is predetermined. Why the hell bother if the outcome is predetermined? |
 Deja Thoris Revelations Inc. Shroud Of Darkness |
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:17:00 -
[613]
Screw that. This game is for intelligent people. Dont dumb it down to the morons level. For Christs sake. Ooh, I'm a level 2 goon. If that level one nublet attacks me the outcome is predetermined. Why the hell bother if the outcome is predetermined? |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 12:17:00 -
[614]
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 -
[615] 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 -
[616] 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 -
[617] 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 |
 Kye Kenshin |
Posted - 2005.08.26 12:52:00 -
[618] A big problem we have i these problems is no one seems to back up these arguements with in game tests. People just throw random numbers around that qucikly came up with at work and i dont trust it. Eve isnt a pure numbers game there's too many variables in combat to decide an outcome based on pure numbers. So instead of everyone arguing back and forth lets actually test it! How about we test Platerax with 8 heavies Platerax with 4 heavies Platerax with 10 mediums Rax with no plate with 8 heavies At least then we would have something to works with instead of numbers and statistics. P.s i think someone might of suggested this before but i cant be bothered to read through all 12 pages to find out |
Kye Kenshin Sanctum's Edge |
Posted - 2005.08.26 12:52:00 -
[619] A big problem we have i these problems is no one seems to back up these arguements with in game tests. People just throw random numbers around that qucikly came up with at work and i dont trust it. Eve isnt a pure numbers game there's too many variables in combat to decide an outcome based on pure numbers. So instead of everyone arguing back and forth lets actually test it! How about we test Platerax with 8 heavies Platerax with 4 heavies Platerax with 10 mediums Rax with no plate with 8 heavies At least then we would have something to works with instead of numbers and statistics. P.s i think someone might of suggested this before but i cant be bothered to read through all 12 pages to find out |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 13:19:00 -
[620]
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 -
[621]
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 -
[622] 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 -
[623] 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 |
 Muad 'dib |
Posted - 2005.08.26 13:45:00 -
[624]
It doesnt matter much what range the guns are as long as your comparing the same for all ships. Id like to see gank maller and gank moa results but with max drone dmg added to it aswell, that is where the problem lies i didnt compare guns before as everyone knows that blasters should do the most dmg of all close range weapons. The reason i used long range is because there better ballanced, and we see that the ships are in the same rough area, but when drone dmg is added the thorax will jump out in front, and if it was using blasters too that would create an even bigger gap (no doubt overtaking most BCs in max dmg). |
Muad 'dib Caldari Smoking Hillbillys The Volition Cult |
Posted - 2005.08.26 13:45:00 -
[625]
It doesnt matter much what range the guns are as long as your comparing the same for all ships. Id like to see gank maller and gank moa results but with max drone dmg added to it aswell, that is where the problem lies i didnt compare guns before as everyone knows that blasters should do the most dmg of all close range weapons. The reason i used long range is because there better ballanced, and we see that the ships are in the same rough area, but when drone dmg is added the thorax will jump out in front, and if it was using blasters too that would create an even bigger gap (no doubt overtaking most BCs in max dmg). |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:07:00 -
[626] 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 -
[627] 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 |
 j0sephine |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:19:00 -
[628] Edited by: j0sephine on 26/08/2005 14:20:29 "Id like to see gank maller and gank moa results (..)" Dunno what gank moa really be, to be honest... you can mount 4x 250mm rails on her with 4 damage mods, but that leaves launcher slots empty (not enough grid left) ... with all tech.2 gear she'd do ~196 raw dps then. If you drop a damage mod for RCU to install the launchers, the overall DoT might go up to ~210 dps... but that'll leave you with some 40 grid even with maxed out skills, to use for all the lows (didn't check the cpu, might get tight too) |
 Muad 'dib |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:19:00 -
[629]
agreed 110%. Cruisers needed the plates, but the thorax does not need 8 heavy drones, 10 mediums perhaps just not so many of those damned heavys. |
Muad 'dib Caldari Smoking Hillbillys The Volition Cult |
Posted - 2005.08.26 14:19:00 -
[630]
agreed 110%. Cruisers needed the plates, but the thorax does not need 8 heavy drones, 10 mediums perhaps just not so many of those damned heavys. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: one page | |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page | |
Originally by: Nomen Nescio| Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,17s, ref 20250913/1353 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. |