|
| 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) |
 Ravenge    |
Posted - 2005.08.30 02:10:00 -
[871]
First of all take the plate out of the equation.. I know you seem to ignore the posts from people who fly plated raxs who state its the plate that overpowers it. Also define any range.. as no matter how hard i try.. i can't quite get my rax to do 250 dps at 100km, maybe i'm missing something.. at the most a rax is effective up to 20km (unless your running an officer warp scrambler) It would be interesting to see how the 200dps ruppy handles a non plated rax... at lets say since its at ANY range.. starting 30km apart.. |
 ELECTR0FREAK |
Posted - 2005.08.30 04:59:00 -
[872]
Don't talk to me as if I don't know what I'm talking about. I flew a plated Rax into PVP last week, engaged a fleet of 28 IRON warships (with 6 friendlies), a dozen of which were firing on me, and still almost managed to bag a Crow (Hi Sorja  ... I swear, 2 more seconds...)4 heavy drones reduces a Thorax's DPS from 260 with a plate and light neuts (only 90 of that DPS is from the neuts, the other 170 is the drones) to a more reasonable 175. Add in the fact that the 85 from the drones is VERY flexible firepower, and the fact that Blasters ALREADY do high DPS because of their short range, and you really have no excuse to complain. Nowhere did I say the Rax could do 250 DPS at 100km. Now you're trying to put words in my mouth, and it's a sad attempt. A Ruppie can't do 200 DPS with over 5k HP. And you know what, it SHOULD beat the Rax at longer ranges. ITS A LONG RANGE SHIP. The Rax SHOULD win at close range engagements. ITS A SHORT RANGE SHIP. Don't cry to me that its not overpowered because it can't beat a MWD-fitted long range ship when the fight starts at long range. Thats a specific scenario, and even then the Rax has the ability to warp off if its being out ranged (that's the downside to having a ship with range) and then return back on a playing field of it's choice. The issue is at hand that the Thorax is supposed to be the king of short-range, but its high DPS (at no fitting cost), easy plateability, ability to manipulate the battle well with its speed, and the fact that it's way too good at too many things means that it's overpowered. Saying that a Rax will lose to a MWDing Ruppie with Howies and damage mods when the fight takes place past 30km, and then trying to use that to support your claim that the Rax isn't overpowered is ridiculous. I might as well claim that the Cerberus MUST be better than any other HAC simply because it has the ability to use FoF missiles versus ECM jamming. Its a ridiculous blanket statement because the Cerberus is obviously an inferor HAC except in VERY specific situations. Just because a Cerb could fire back at a Scorpion and a Zealot can't doesn't mean it will win. Exactly the same as the fact that just because a Ruppie can fire on a Thorax while it can't fire back doesn't mean it will win. If its within range of a 20km scrambler, the T-Rax's drones will allow it to deal back equal damage if not more. Otherwise, the Rax can leave the engagement and return at a closer combat range. Citing a specific circumstance is not an adequate reason for claiming that the Thorax is balanced. It can be used in an attempt to support an arguement but makes for a very weak foundation to your cause. Debating 101 folks. The issue here is, the Thorax is way too versatile and powerful for its own good. It has way too many pluses and too few minuses. It's been proven time and time again, but those peope with 400k skillpoints in Drones, no cruiser and gunnery skills, but still manage to easily outdamage AND outank those much more skilled players in other ships is a definate indicator of a problem. -Electrofreak Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula |
 ELECTR0FREAK Eye of God |
Posted - 2005.08.30 04:59:00 -
[873]
Don't talk to me as if I don't know what I'm talking about. I flew a plated Rax into PVP last week, engaged a fleet of 28 IRON warships (with 6 friendlies), a dozen of which were firing on me, and still almost managed to bag a Crow (Hi Sorja ... I swear, 2 more seconds...)4 heavy drones reduces a Thorax's DPS from 260 with a plate and light neuts (only 90 of that DPS is from the neuts, the other 170 is the drones) to a more reasonable 175. Add in the fact that the 85 from the drones is VERY flexible firepower, and the fact that Blasters ALREADY do high DPS because of their short range, and you really have no excuse to complain. Nowhere did I say the Rax could do 250 DPS at 100km. Now you're trying to put words in my mouth, and it's a sad attempt. A Ruppie can't do 200 DPS with over 5k HP. And you know what, it SHOULD beat the Rax at longer ranges. ITS A LONG RANGE SHIP. The Rax SHOULD win at close range engagements. ITS A SHORT RANGE SHIP. Don't cry to me that its not overpowered because it can't beat a MWD-fitted long range ship when the fight starts at long range. Thats a specific scenario, and even then the Rax has the ability to warp off if its being out ranged (that's the downside to having a ship with range) and then return back on a playing field of it's choice. The issue is at hand that the Thorax is supposed to be the king of short-range, but its high DPS (at no fitting cost), easy plateability, ability to manipulate the battle well with its speed, and the fact that it's way too good at too many things means that it's overpowered. Saying that a Rax will lose to a MWDing Ruppie with Howies and damage mods when the fight takes place past 30km, and then trying to use that to support your claim that the Rax isn't overpowered is ridiculous. I might as well claim that the Cerberus MUST be better than any other HAC simply because it has the ability to use FoF missiles versus ECM jamming. Its a ridiculous blanket statement because the Cerberus is obviously an inferor HAC except in VERY specific situations. Just because a Cerb could fire back at a Scorpion and a Zealot can't doesn't mean it will win. Exactly the same as the fact that just because a Ruppie can fire on a Thorax while it can't fire back doesn't mean it will win. If its within range of a 20km scrambler, the T-Rax's drones will allow it to deal back equal damage if not more. Otherwise, the Rax can leave the engagement and return at a closer combat range. Citing a specific circumstance is not an adequate reason for claiming that the Thorax is balanced. It can be used in an attempt to support an arguement but makes for a very weak foundation to your cause. Debating 101 folks. The issue here is, the Thorax is way too versatile and powerful for its own good. It has way too many pluses and too few minuses. It's been proven time and time again, but those peope with 400k skillpoints in Drones, no cruiser and gunnery skills, but still manage to easily outdamage AND outank those much more skilled players in other ships is a definate indicator of a problem. Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula |
ELECTR0FREAK Eye of God |
Posted - 2005.08.30 04:59:00 -
[874]
Don't talk to me as if I don't know what I'm talking about. I flew a plated Rax into PVP last week, engaged a fleet of 28 IRON warships (with 6 friendlies), a dozen of which were firing on me, and still almost managed to bag a Crow (Hi Sorja ... I swear, 2 more seconds...)4 heavy drones reduces a Thorax's DPS from 260 with a plate and light neuts (only 90 of that DPS is from the neuts, the other 170 is the drones) to a more reasonable 175. Add in the fact that the 85 from the drones is VERY flexible firepower, and the fact that Blasters ALREADY do high DPS because of their short range, and you really have no excuse to complain. Nowhere did I say the Rax could do 250 DPS at 100km. Now you're trying to put words in my mouth, and it's a sad attempt. A Ruppie can't do 200 DPS with over 5k HP. And you know what, it SHOULD beat the Rax at longer ranges. ITS A LONG RANGE SHIP. The Rax SHOULD win at close range engagements. ITS A SHORT RANGE SHIP. Don't cry to me that its not overpowered because it can't beat a MWD-fitted long range ship when the fight starts at long range. Thats a specific scenario, and even then the Rax has the ability to warp off if its being out ranged (that's the downside to having a ship with range) and then return back on a playing field of it's choice. The issue is at hand that the Thorax is supposed to be the king of short-range, but its high DPS (at no fitting cost), easy plateability, ability to manipulate the battle well with its speed, and the fact that it's way too good at too many things means that it's overpowered. Saying that a Rax will lose to a MWDing Ruppie with Howies and damage mods when the fight takes place past 30km, and then trying to use that to support your claim that the Rax isn't overpowered is ridiculous. I might as well claim that the Cerberus MUST be better than any other HAC simply because it has the ability to use FoF missiles versus ECM jamming. Its a ridiculous blanket statement because the Cerberus is obviously an inferor HAC except in VERY specific situations. Just because a Cerb could fire back at a Scorpion and a Zealot can't doesn't mean it will win. Exactly the same as the fact that just because a Ruppie can fire on a Thorax while it can't fire back doesn't mean it will win. If its within range of a 20km scrambler, the T-Rax's drones will allow it to deal back equal damage if not more. Otherwise, the Rax can leave the engagement and return at a closer combat range. Citing a specific circumstance is not an adequate reason for claiming that the Thorax is balanced. It can be used in an attempt to support an arguement but makes for a very weak foundation to your cause. Debating 101 folks. The issue here is, the Thorax is way too versatile and powerful for its own good. It has way too many pluses and too few minuses. It's been proven time and time again, but those peope with 400k skillpoints in Drones, no cruiser and gunnery skills, but still manage to easily outdamage AND outank those much more skilled players in other ships is a definate indicator of a problem. Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula |
 csebal |
Posted - 2005.08.30 09:40:00 -
[875] Edited by: csebal on 30/08/2005 09:47:05 OMG. Stop mentioning blasters on raxes in terms of DPS. No rax has the speed to keep the enemy inside blaster range, unless that enemy is a complete noob, or is AFK. So you can take your precious blaster DPS, ans shove it up your rear, as it isnt going to do you any good. If you fit MWDs to the rax, you may keep up in speed, but the long range gunships will tear you apart before you say: Oh f**k. People talk about 'rax being overpowered, like if it would be the second best thing next to dreads. Well, let me enlighten you. Close range, (that means below 15km) thoraxes deal out decent damage. They are prone to snipers, skilled frigate pilots, HACs, basically anything that is either fast, far away, or is tanked properly. So what? Thoraxes manage to kill battleships when they jump through gates? Kill them when they sit at a sniper spot for half an hour waiting for the covert ops to make a jump point on them? Kill frigates and cruisers that instead of fleeing with MWD on decide to orbit a rax at 5km? Manage to kill HACs in groups? I see nothing overpowered there. It is how the game should work. Problem is, that no other cruiser can do that. My question is: do you see people flying those other cruiser? Did you see those cruisers before the patch that made plates on cruisers viable? No. Why? Because they are cr*p. They are worth nothing, but to be base components for HAC construction. So all in one, i do agree that thoraxes WITH plates USING heavy drones are out of balance ATM. Not compared to other ship classes, but compared to other cruisers. I could rather say, that most cruisers have no role / place in PvP atm. The only cruisers i really think of being useful atm are: Thorax - as a short range damage dealer / close escort Blackbird - EV Maller - Flying armor (aka distraction, aka tank, aka bait) There are some more, that are marginally useful, but they are easily taken apart by just a single AF, unless they fit plates, in which case they lose a big deal of their firepower. Personally i do not like the way HACs or AFs are done. They are like mini battleships and cruisers, with all the advantages of their respective ship class. Sig radius, sig resolution, speed, agility, etc. AFs make cruisers look like cheap -noob man's toy-, while HACs make battleships obsolete. (The close / med range ones for sure) TL1 ships need some love, and TL2 ships need a specialized role. I like interceptors, because they are fast, but reasonably weak. I like covert ops, because they have a definite role. Love support ships, as they also have a special role. AFs and HACs are just the 'more guns, better guns' kind of ugly beasts, CCP has come up with the please the grinding crowd. I wonder when the Assault Battleship will come, that will make dreadnoughts look like some child's toy. So why whine for nerfing the few TL1 ships that are worth anything. Instead of it, whine for boosting all the other TL1 ships, so that once again people will start using them for things other than lvl2 agent running. - This post is my personal opinion. It does not represent the standpoint of the HUN Corporation or that of the Imperium Alliance in any way. - - |
 csebal Rage of Angels Morsus Mihi |
Posted - 2005.08.30 09:40:00 -
[876] Edited by: csebal on 30/08/2005 09:47:05 OMG. Stop mentioning blasters on raxes in terms of DPS. No rax has the speed to keep the enemy inside blaster range, unless that enemy is a complete noob, or is AFK. So you can take your precious blaster DPS, ans shove it up your rear, as it isnt going to do you any good. If you fit MWDs to the rax, you may keep up in speed, but the long range gunships will tear you apart before you say: Oh f**k. People talk about 'rax being overpowered, like if it would be the second best thing next to dreads. Well, let me enlighten you. Close range, (that means below 15km) thoraxes deal out decent damage. They are prone to snipers, skilled frigate pilots, HACs, basically anything that is either fast, far away, or is tanked properly. So what? Thoraxes manage to kill battleships when they jump through gates? Kill them when they sit at a sniper spot for half an hour waiting for the covert ops to make a jump point on them? Kill frigates and cruisers that instead of fleeing with MWD on decide to orbit a rax at 5km? Manage to kill HACs in groups? I see nothing overpowered there. It is how the game should work. Problem is, that no other cruiser can do that. My question is: do you see people flying those other cruiser? Did you see those cruisers before the patch that made plates on cruisers viable? No. Why? Because they are cr*p. They are worth nothing, but to be base components for HAC construction. So all in one, i do agree that thoraxes WITH plates USING heavy drones are out of balance ATM. Not compared to other ship classes, but compared to other cruisers. I could rather say, that most cruisers have no role / place in PvP atm. The only cruisers i really think of being useful atm are: Thorax - as a short range damage dealer / close escort Blackbird - EV Maller - Flying armor (aka distraction, aka tank, aka bait) There are some more, that are marginally useful, but they are easily taken apart by just a single AF, unless they fit plates, in which case they lose a big deal of their firepower. Personally i do not like the way HACs or AFs are done. They are like mini battleships and cruisers, with all the advantages of their respective ship class. Sig radius, sig resolution, speed, agility, etc. AFs make cruisers look like cheap -noob man's toy-, while HACs make battleships obsolete. (The close / med range ones for sure) TL1 ships need some love, and TL2 ships need a specialized role. I like interceptors, because they are fast, but reasonably weak. I like covert ops, because they have a definite role. Love support ships, as they also have a special role. AFs and HACs are just the 'more guns, better guns' kind of ugly beasts, CCP has come up with the please the grinding crowd. I wonder when the Assault Battleship will come, that will make dreadnoughts look like some child's toy. So why whine for nerfing the few TL1 ships that are worth anything. Instead of it, whine for boosting all the other TL1 ships, so that once again people will start using them for things other than lvl2 agent running. My post does not represent the general or official opinion of anyone else besides me. No matter what YOU believe. Rest.In.Peace HUN |
csebal Rage of Angels Morsus Mihi |
Posted - 2005.08.30 09:40:00 -
[877] Edited by: csebal on 30/08/2005 09:47:05 OMG. Stop mentioning blasters on raxes in terms of DPS. No rax has the speed to keep the enemy inside blaster range, unless that enemy is a complete noob, or is AFK. So you can take your precious blaster DPS, ans shove it up your rear, as it isnt going to do you any good. If you fit MWDs to the rax, you may keep up in speed, but the long range gunships will tear you apart before you say: Oh f**k. People talk about 'rax being overpowered, like if it would be the second best thing next to dreads. Well, let me enlighten you. Close range, (that means below 15km) thoraxes deal out decent damage. They are prone to snipers, skilled frigate pilots, HACs, basically anything that is either fast, far away, or is tanked properly. So what? Thoraxes manage to kill battleships when they jump through gates? Kill them when they sit at a sniper spot for half an hour waiting for the covert ops to make a jump point on them? Kill frigates and cruisers that instead of fleeing with MWD on decide to orbit a rax at 5km? Manage to kill HACs in groups? I see nothing overpowered there. It is how the game should work. Problem is, that no other cruiser can do that. My question is: do you see people flying those other cruiser? Did you see those cruisers before the patch that made plates on cruisers viable? No. Why? Because they are cr*p. They are worth nothing, but to be base components for HAC construction. So all in one, i do agree that thoraxes WITH plates USING heavy drones are out of balance ATM. Not compared to other ship classes, but compared to other cruisers. I could rather say, that most cruisers have no role / place in PvP atm. The only cruisers i really think of being useful atm are: Thorax - as a short range damage dealer / close escort Blackbird - EV Maller - Flying armor (aka distraction, aka tank, aka bait) There are some more, that are marginally useful, but they are easily taken apart by just a single AF, unless they fit plates, in which case they lose a big deal of their firepower. Personally i do not like the way HACs or AFs are done. They are like mini battleships and cruisers, with all the advantages of their respective ship class. Sig radius, sig resolution, speed, agility, etc. AFs make cruisers look like cheap -noob man's toy-, while HACs make battleships obsolete. (The close / med range ones for sure) TL1 ships need some love, and TL2 ships need a specialized role. I like interceptors, because they are fast, but reasonably weak. I like covert ops, because they have a definite role. Love support ships, as they also have a special role. AFs and HACs are just the 'more guns, better guns' kind of ugly beasts, CCP has come up with the please the grinding crowd. I wonder when the Assault Battleship will come, that will make dreadnoughts look like some child's toy. So why whine for nerfing the few TL1 ships that are worth anything. Instead of it, whine for boosting all the other TL1 ships, so that once again people will start using them for things other than lvl2 agent running. My post does not represent the general or official opinion of anyone else besides me. No matter what YOU believe. Rest.In.Peace HUN |
 Khristopher |
Posted - 2005.08.30 10:08:00 -
[878] Ugh I wish people would stop screaming nerf the rax and start screaming boost the other cruisers! Don't get me wrong the thorax is a great ship but IMO its not overpowered. Its the other cruisers that are underpowered. |
 Khristopher Legio I Mordu Cohort I |
Posted - 2005.08.30 10:08:00 -
[879] Ugh I wish people would stop screaming nerf the rax and start screaming boost the other cruisers! Don't get me wrong the thorax is a great ship but IMO its not overpowered. Its the other cruisers that are underpowered. |
Khristopher Legio I Mordu Cohort I |
Posted - 2005.08.30 10:08:00 -
[880] Ugh I wish people would stop screaming nerf the rax and start screaming boost the other cruisers! Don't get me wrong the thorax is a great ship but IMO its not overpowered. Its the other cruisers that are underpowered. |
 Vee Bot |
Posted - 2005.08.30 10:16:00 -
[881]
Well then how bout we add the equivilent of 150ish dps (from 8 heavy drones, average skills) in the form of turrets to the other teir III cruisers, say 2 hi slots 2 turrets and an extra missile + PG + CPU to the rupture. 2 hi slots 2 turrets +pg +cpu to the maller and last but not least 2 more hi slots to the moa, 2 turrets and a missile slot +cpu +pg. Yea, rax is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO not over powered.....  ------------------ Remember that your Unique, like everyone else. |
 Vee Bot |
Posted - 2005.08.30 10:16:00 -
[882]
Well then how bout we add the equivilent of 150ish dps (from 8 heavy drones, average skills) in the form of turrets to the other teir III cruisers, say 2 hi slots 2 turrets and an extra missile + PG + CPU to the rupture. 2 hi slots 2 turrets +pg +cpu to the maller and last but not least 2 more hi slots to the moa, 2 turrets and a missile slot +cpu +pg. Yea, rax is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO not over powered..... ------------------ Remember that your Unique, like everyone else. |
Vee Bot |
Posted - 2005.08.30 10:16:00 -
[883]
Well then how bout we add the equivilent of 150ish dps (from 8 heavy drones, average skills) in the form of turrets to the other teir III cruisers, say 2 hi slots 2 turrets and an extra missile + PG + CPU to the rupture. 2 hi slots 2 turrets +pg +cpu to the maller and last but not least 2 more hi slots to the moa, 2 turrets and a missile slot +cpu +pg. Yea, rax is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO not over powered..... ------------------ Remember that your Unique, like everyone else. |
Ravenge |
Posted - 2005.08.30 11:56:00 -
[884]
You sir are an idiot, why? for starters you need more then 400k of sps to be able to control 8 drones alone (lvl 5 rank 1 - 256000 and lvl 3 rank 5 - 226275) then you need the rest of the relevent drone skills to get that uber dps from the drones.. then we have the support skills, (hull upgrade lvl 3 at the minimum ... if you want to use hardeners lvl 4) and lets not forget at even at lvl 3 gallente cruiser.. the mwd cap penalty still screws over the rax. If your going to witter on about debates, first of all use fact to back up your argument and not pull random rubbish out of the air and claim its correct. And a little reminder, you claimed the rax could do 250 dps at ANY range.. i pointed out you couldn't so thats another lesson on getting your facts correct before trying to make argument. And an unplated rax dies in less then 10 seconds at 30km from thats 200 dps ruppy.. wow.. the rax isn't as overpowered as you think it is.. like its been said before.. its the oversized plates. |
Ravenge |
Posted - 2005.08.30 11:56:00 -
[885] Edited by: Ravenge on 30/08/2005 15:48:56
You sir are an idiot, why? for starters you need more then 400k of sps to be able to control 8 drones alone (lvl 5 rank 1 - 256000 and lvl 3 rank 5 - 226275) then you need the rest of the relevent drone skills to get that uber dps from the drones.. Plus having those skills, are irrelevent since you need the cruise skills to be able to field the 8 heavies you like to moan about. So on top of the drone skills you have to add the support skills, (hull upgrade lvl 3 at the minimum ... if you want to use hardeners lvl 4) and lets not forget at even at lvl 3 gallente cruiser.. the mwd cap penalty still screws over the rax. Slowly but surely you start to see the skill points needed rise.. I wouldn't be suprised if you needed more skill points to fly a plated rax, that fields 8 heavies and does 250 dps at close range.. then you needed to fly a pre-patch raven, but thats speculation.. also its worth taking into account the training time needed to get all those skills up.. It would be worth finding out how long it would take a new player to train up all the skills needed.. But remember that if your thing about using the learning skills and advanced learning skills to modify the training times to add them into the time frame.. So if your going to witter on about debates, first of all use fact to back up your argument and not pull random rubbish out of the air and claim its correct. And a little reminder, you claimed the rax could do 250 dps at ANY range.. i pointed out you couldn't so thats another lesson on getting your facts correct before trying to make argument. And an unplated rax dies in less then 10 seconds at 30km from thats 200 dps ruppy.. wow.. the rax isn't as overpowered as you think it is.. like its been said before.. its the oversized plates. Minor edit, to make it read a little better. |
Ravenge |
Posted - 2005.08.30 11:56:00 -
[886] Edited by: Ravenge on 30/08/2005 15:48:56
You sir are an idiot, why? for starters you need more then 400k of sps to be able to control 8 drones alone (lvl 5 rank 1 - 256000 and lvl 3 rank 5 - 226275) then you need the rest of the relevent drone skills to get that uber dps from the drones.. Plus having those skills, are irrelevent since you need the cruise skills to be able to field the 8 heavies you like to moan about. So on top of the drone skills you have to add the support skills, (hull upgrade lvl 3 at the minimum ... if you want to use hardeners lvl 4) and lets not forget at even at lvl 3 gallente cruiser.. the mwd cap penalty still screws over the rax. Slowly but surely you start to see the skill points needed rise.. I wouldn't be suprised if you needed more skill points to fly a plated rax, that fields 8 heavies and does 250 dps at close range.. then you needed to fly a pre-patch raven, but thats speculation.. also its worth taking into account the training time needed to get all those skills up.. It would be worth finding out how long it would take a new player to train up all the skills needed.. But remember that if your thing about using the learning skills and advanced learning skills to modify the training times to add them into the time frame.. So if your going to witter on about debates, first of all use fact to back up your argument and not pull random rubbish out of the air and claim its correct. And a little reminder, you claimed the rax could do 250 dps at ANY range.. i pointed out you couldn't so thats another lesson on getting your facts correct before trying to make argument. And an unplated rax dies in less then 10 seconds at 30km from thats 200 dps ruppy.. wow.. the rax isn't as overpowered as you think it is.. like its been said before.. its the oversized plates. Minor edit, to make it read a little better. |
ArchenTheGreat |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:31:00 -
[887]
He never said that. He asked you to show another (any) cruiser which can do such a DPS at choosen by you (any) range. Where are you from? I am from Poland and not native English speaker but I managed to understand Elektr0freak. |
 ArchenTheGreat Caldari Yesodic Nomads Corp Triumvirate. |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:31:00 -
[888]
He never said that. He asked you to show another (any) cruiser which can do such a DPS at choosen by you (any) range. Where are you from? I am from Poland and not native English speaker but I managed to understand Elektr0freak. |
ArchenTheGreat Caldari Yesodic Nomads Corp Triumvirate. |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:31:00 -
[889]
He never said that. He asked you to show another (any) cruiser which can do such a DPS at choosen by you (any) range. Where are you from? I am from Poland and not native English speaker but I managed to understand Elektr0freak. |
 Nyxus |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:49:00 -
[890] Edited by: Nyxus on 30/08/2005 12:53:11
That's why I use medium beam II's on my plated rax with ogres. 24km range, best un-bonused small guns in the game. Cap is np with good skills. Alternatively you can use 150mm T2's. Both options give you 20km+ range with incredible tracking. Only nubs or those who KNOW they won't be engaging ceptors (aka pirates) put blasters on a Rax. I flew a plated Rax back in 03. The dronebay overpowered it then, the plate boost just exacerbated the problem. One final point to those who the the Rax is "just fine". If it is just fine, how bout giving the Omen 2 more turret slots and enough grid to fit them? Because that's how many more it would need to equalize the dps between the cruisers. Omen with 6 Heavy Beam II's =! balanced. Neither does a Rax with 5 guns and 8 wasps and a BS sized plate. Nyxus |
 Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:49:00 -
[891] Edited by: Nyxus on 30/08/2005 12:53:11
That's why I use medium beam II's on my plated rax with ogres. 24km range, best un-bonused small guns in the game. Cap is np with good skills. Alternatively you can use 150mm T2's. Both options give you 20km+ range with incredible tracking. Only nubs or those who KNOW they won't be engaging ceptors (aka pirates) put blasters on a Rax. I flew a plated Rax back in 03. The dronebay overpowered it then, the plate boost just exacerbated the problem. One final point to those who the the Rax is "just fine". If it is just fine, how bout giving the Omen 2 more turret slots and enough grid to fit them? Because that's how many more it would need to equalize the dps between the cruisers. Omen with 6 Heavy Beam II's =! balanced. Neither does a Rax with 5 guns and 8 wasps and a BS sized plate. Nyxus
|
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:49:00 -
[892] Edited by: Nyxus on 30/08/2005 12:53:11
That's why I use medium beam II's on my plated rax with ogres. 24km range, best un-bonused small guns in the game. Cap is np with good skills. Alternatively you can use 150mm T2's. Both options give you 20km+ range with incredible tracking. Only nubs or those who KNOW they won't be engaging ceptors (aka pirates) put blasters on a Rax. I flew a plated Rax back in 03. The dronebay overpowered it then, the plate boost just exacerbated the problem. One final point to those who the the Rax is "just fine". If it is just fine, how bout giving the Omen 2 more turret slots and enough grid to fit them? Because that's how many more it would need to equalize the dps between the cruisers. Omen with 6 Heavy Beam II's =! balanced. Neither does a Rax with 5 guns and 8 wasps and a BS sized plate. Nyxus
|
 Markie |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:53:00 -
[893] Remove all ammo and weapons from the game and give people stones and harch words to throw at each other! Who ever can spam fastest wins?!?! OMG, I h8 threads that say change this change that, get over it or get a better ship. |
 Markie 2 Days |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:53:00 -
[894] Remove all ammo and weapons from the game and give people stones and harch words to throw at each other! Who ever can spam fastest wins?!?! OMG, I h8 threads that say change this change that, get over it or get a better ship. |
Markie 2 Days |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:53:00 -
[895] Remove all ammo and weapons from the game and give people stones and harch words to throw at each other! Who ever can spam fastest wins?!?! OMG, I h8 threads that say change this change that, get over it or get a better ship. |
 csebal |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:57:00 -
[896]
That is reverse logic, and it does no good. Just because the whole cruiser class is a pile of cr4p, the few ones that are still useful to some extent should be nerfed? Shouldn't we instead think about ways to make the other cruisers more useful as well? Yeah, a revised slot / hardpoint layout would be a start. Then the armor / shield / structure HPs and resistances should come. It is always easier to nerf something, especially if it is where it should be. Problem is, that nerfing = destruction. By nerfing, you are reducing the game one step at a time. If you make a trend of it, you'll end up with one ship, one slot, one module, and one player to rule it all. So - as hard as it is - CCP should finally take the constructive way, and look at those damn cruisers again, overhaul them completely, and give them new life. Is this discussion really about the rax? Isn't this all about HAC / AF / BS pilots, who can not take the fact, that given proper skills and fitting, a group of TL1 cruisers (in some cases even a single one) can win against them? - This post is my personal opinion. It does not represent the standpoint of the HUN Corporation or that of the Imperium Alliance in any way. - - |
csebal Rage of Angels Morsus Mihi |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:57:00 -
[897]
That is reverse logic, and it does no good. Just because the whole cruiser class is a pile of cr4p, the few ones that are still useful to some extent should be nerfed? Shouldn't we instead think about ways to make the other cruisers more useful as well? Yeah, a revised slot / hardpoint layout would be a start. Then the armor / shield / structure HPs and resistances should come. It is always easier to nerf something, especially if it is where it should be. Problem is, that nerfing = destruction. By nerfing, you are reducing the game one step at a time. If you make a trend of it, you'll end up with one ship, one slot, one module, and one player to rule it all. So - as hard as it is - CCP should finally take the constructive way, and look at those damn cruisers again, overhaul them completely, and give them new life. Is this discussion really about the rax? Isn't this all about HAC / AF / BS pilots, who can not take the fact, that given proper skills and fitting, a group of TL1 cruisers (in some cases even a single one) can win against them? My post does not represent the general or official opinion of anyone else besides me. No matter what YOU believe. Rest.In.Peace HUN |
csebal Rage of Angels Morsus Mihi |
Posted - 2005.08.30 12:57:00 -
[898]
That is reverse logic, and it does no good. Just because the whole cruiser class is a pile of cr4p, the few ones that are still useful to some extent should be nerfed? Shouldn't we instead think about ways to make the other cruisers more useful as well? Yeah, a revised slot / hardpoint layout would be a start. Then the armor / shield / structure HPs and resistances should come. It is always easier to nerf something, especially if it is where it should be. Problem is, that nerfing = destruction. By nerfing, you are reducing the game one step at a time. If you make a trend of it, you'll end up with one ship, one slot, one module, and one player to rule it all. So - as hard as it is - CCP should finally take the constructive way, and look at those damn cruisers again, overhaul them completely, and give them new life. Is this discussion really about the rax? Isn't this all about HAC / AF / BS pilots, who can not take the fact, that given proper skills and fitting, a group of TL1 cruisers (in some cases even a single one) can win against them? My post does not represent the general or official opinion of anyone else besides me. No matter what YOU believe. Rest.In.Peace HUN |
csebal |
Posted - 2005.08.30 13:16:00 -
[899]
You cannot expect the same DPS from different ships. Heavy Beam IIs are medium range, so their DPS output should obviously be lower than that of a thorax /w drones. So you SHOULD NOT - NEVER, NEVER EVER, NOPE - equalize the DPS of ships, but instead you have to look at their roles, and determine a DPS according to that. Meaning: Short range = high DPS Medium range = medium DPS Long range = low DPS why that? Because long range ships rely on their ability to get away before they get hurt, plus they have a damage advantage against short range ones, as the short range ships have to get close to them first. Short range on the other hand requires you to stand toe-to-toe with your opponent, meaning that unless you fit WCSs, it'll be a fight to the death. You rely on high damage to kill the opponent, and get out before you get killed by more enemies. I do not know how that is hard to understand. Just look at the different guns, and you'll see, that the shorter it's range is, the bigger the actual DPS gets. The ideal balance of course would be to have: frig sized ships, able to fit frig sized weapons / cruiser sized weapons, vulnerable to frig sized weapons, almost invulnerable to cruiser sized ones, basically invisible to BS and larger. cruiser sized ships, able to fit frig - to - BS sized weapons, vulnerable to cruiser sized weapons, base 75% resistance (over any armor res) against frig sized weapons, almost invulnerable to BS sized guns. battleship sized ships, able to fit frig - to - dread guns, vulnerable to BS weapons, invulnerable to frig sized ones, base 75% resistance (over any armor res) against cruiser weapons, almost invulnerable to dread guns. dreads, only prone to other dreads / pos defenses, able to fit anything, but only ships the same class the weapon fired is in. This way, people would be forced to have mixed fleets / mixed ship setups. Too bad that the majority of people only want to grind their way through the biggest gun, and they do not care about real balance or fleet composition. Thats why we have threads like this, because people are afraid to lose their 'i-win' HACs, and consider any ship being at least nearly useful against them to be a threat. - This post is my personal opinion. It does not represent the standpoint of the HUN Corporation or that of the Imperium Alliance in any way. - - |
csebal Rage of Angels Morsus Mihi |
Posted - 2005.08.30 13:16:00 -
[900]
You cannot expect the same DPS from different ships. Heavy Beam IIs are medium range, so their DPS output should obviously be lower than that of a thorax /w drones. So you SHOULD NOT - NEVER, NEVER EVER, NOPE - equalize the DPS of ships, but instead you have to look at their roles, and determine a DPS according to that. Meaning: Short range = high DPS Medium range = medium DPS Long range = low DPS why that? Because long range ships rely on their ability to get away before they get hurt, plus they have a damage advantage against short range ones, as the short range ships have to get close to them first. Short range on the other hand requires you to stand toe-to-toe with your opponent, meaning that unless you fit WCSs, it'll be a fight to the death. You rely on high damage to kill the opponent, and get out before you get killed by more enemies. I do not know how that is hard to understand. Just look at the different guns, and you'll see, that the shorter it's range is, the bigger the actual DPS gets. The ideal balance of course would be to have: frig sized ships, able to fit frig sized weapons / cruiser sized weapons, vulnerable to frig sized weapons, almost invulnerable to cruiser sized ones, basically invisible to BS and larger. cruiser sized ships, able to fit frig - to - BS sized weapons, vulnerable to cruiser sized weapons, base 75% resistance (over any armor res) against frig sized weapons, almost invulnerable to BS sized guns. battleship sized ships, able to fit frig - to - dread guns, vulnerable to BS weapons, invulnerable to frig sized ones, base 75% resistance (over any armor res) against cruiser weapons, almost invulnerable to dread guns. dreads, only prone to other dreads / pos defenses, able to fit anything, but only ships the same class the weapon fired is in. This way, people would be forced to have mixed fleets / mixed ship setups. Too bad that the majority of people only want to grind their way through the biggest gun, and they do not care about real balance or fleet composition. Thats why we have threads like this, because people are afraid to lose their 'i-win' HACs, and consider any ship being at least nearly useful against them to be a threat. My post does not represent the general or official opinion of anyone else besides me. No matter what YOU believe. Rest.In.Peace HUN |
| 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: ELECTR0FREAK| Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 1,61s, ref 20250923/0822 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. |