|
| 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) |
 Kaeten Hybrid Syndicate    |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:28:00 -
[991] Edited by: Kaeten on 04/09/2005 01:29:27 ppl dont understand that 8 heavy drones are very easey to destroy, especially with medium drones... the plate issue has nothing to do wit hthis as all cruisers can fit the same. One thing that is unfair is that the maller gets an extra high and low slot over the thorax, is that fair or does the drone bay balance it out, people forget to bring every advantage in. Pwnage PvP Recruitment |
 akrotor |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:36:00 -
[992] CCP DONT NERF ANYMOORE FECKING THINGS GOD DAMN IT U WHINING FECKING *****ES MAKE ME SICK  |
 akrotor The Black Fleet |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:36:00 -
[993] CCP DONT NERF ANYMOORE FECKING THINGS GOD DAMN IT U WHINING FECKING *****ES MAKE ME SICK |
akrotor The Black Fleet |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:36:00 -
[994] CCP DONT NERF ANYMOORE FECKING THINGS GOD DAMN IT U WHINING FECKING *****ES MAKE ME SICK |
 j0sephine |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:51:00 -
[995] "ppl dont understand that 8 heavy drones are very easey to destroy, especially with medium drones..." ffs... like all people in this thread who came up with this bright idea how easy it is to kill that amount of heavy drones, did you actually try it? --;; 8 heavy drones = ~3.5 k of hp time before your own ship goes poof under Thorax' and drones firepower = 50-60 seconds top, unless you're in a Maller tanked up to gills. But hey, Maller has no drone bay so that's kinda moot point. amount of medium drones needed to generate enough damage to kill 8 heavy drones in less than 60 secods, presuming perfect performance with target switching, no delay when switching to another drone etc = 10+ amount of cruisers able to carry 10 medium drones that ain't Thorax: 2 ... Arbitrator and Vexor. ... if this thread was a horse, it'd be glue by now >.<;;; |
 j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:51:00 -
[996] "ppl dont understand that 8 heavy drones are very easey to destroy, especially with medium drones..." ffs... like all people in this thread who came up with this bright idea how easy it is to kill that amount of heavy drones, did you actually try it? --;; 8 heavy drones = ~3.5 k of hp time before your own ship goes poof under Thorax' and drones firepower = 50-60 seconds top, unless you're in a Maller tanked up to gills. But hey, Maller has no drone bay so that's kinda moot point. amount of medium drones needed to generate enough damage to kill 8 heavy drones in less than 60 secods, presuming perfect performance with target switching, no delay when switching to another drone etc = 10+ amount of cruisers able to carry 10 medium drones that ain't Thorax: 2 ... Arbitrator and Vexor. ... if this thread was a horse, it'd be glue by now >.<;;; |
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:51:00 -
[997] "ppl dont understand that 8 heavy drones are very easey to destroy, especially with medium drones..." ffs... like all people in this thread who came up with this bright idea how easy it is to kill that amount of heavy drones, did you actually try it? --;; 8 heavy drones = ~3.5 k of hp time before your own ship goes poof under Thorax' and drones firepower = 50-60 seconds top, unless you're in a Maller tanked up to gills. But hey, Maller has no drone bay so that's kinda moot point. amount of medium drones needed to generate enough damage to kill 8 heavy drones in less than 60 secods, presuming perfect performance with target switching, no delay when switching to another drone etc = 10+ amount of cruisers able to carry 10 medium drones that ain't Thorax: 2 ... Arbitrator and Vexor. ... if this thread was a horse, it'd be glue by now >.<;;; |
 Kaeten |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:54:00 -
[998]Yes I have and I don't like how easy it is |
Kaeten Hybrid Syndicate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:54:00 -
[999]Yes I have and I don't like how easy it is Pwnage PvP Recruitment |
Kaeten Hybrid Syndicate |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:54:00 -
[1000]Yes I have and I don't like how easy it is Pwnage PvP Recruitment |
 j0sephine |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:55:00 -
[1001] "Yes I have and I don't like how easy it is" So how exactly did it went and what ship was it done with..? |
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:55:00 -
[1002] "Yes I have and I don't like how easy it is" So how exactly did it went and what ship was it done with..? |
j0sephine Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:55:00 -
[1003] "Yes I have and I don't like how easy it is" So how exactly did it went and what ship was it done with..? |
Nyxus |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:58:00 -
[1004]
8 Heavy drones have 2400 armor - that is the equivalent to TWO unplated Thorax. Medium drones do......8 DPS. Yeah that will be easy to take out as they circle you at 1000m/s.  The Maller has the same number of Turret slots as the Thorax. That last slot you can fit....uhh.....not much. You can't even fit a Nos becuase of the fitting reqs. That last high slot is useless in 90% of the fittings. And don's say a smartbomb, look at the fittings, then go fire one up in empire. Oh yea, they dont work near gates or stations either. The Maller has an extra low slot for defence. The Thorax would still have 100 more dronebay than the Maller. It just doesnt need 200.  Nyxus |
 Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:58:00 -
[1005]
8 Heavy drones have 2400 armor - that is the equivalent to TWO unplated Thorax. Medium drones do......8 DPS. Yeah that will be easy to take out as they circle you at 1000m/s. The Maller has the same number of Turret slots as the Thorax. That last slot you can fit....uhh.....not much. You can't even fit a Nos becuase of the fitting reqs. That last high slot is useless in 90% of the fittings. And don's say a smartbomb, look at the fittings, then go fire one up in empire. Oh yea, they dont work near gates or stations either. The Maller has an extra low slot for defence. The Thorax would still have 100 more dronebay than the Maller. It just doesnt need 200. Nyxus
|
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three |
Posted - 2005.09.04 01:58:00 -
[1006]
8 Heavy drones have 2400 armor - that is the equivalent to TWO unplated Thorax. Medium drones do......8 DPS. Yeah that will be easy to take out as they circle you at 1000m/s. The Maller has the same number of Turret slots as the Thorax. That last slot you can fit....uhh.....not much. You can't even fit a Nos becuase of the fitting reqs. That last high slot is useless in 90% of the fittings. And don's say a smartbomb, look at the fittings, then go fire one up in empire. Oh yea, they dont work near gates or stations either. The Maller has an extra low slot for defence. The Thorax would still have 100 more dronebay than the Maller. It just doesnt need 200. Nyxus
|
 Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.04 03:03:00 -
[1007] 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 -
[1008] 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 -
[1009] 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 |
Hephaesteus |
Posted - 2005.09.04 08:15:00 -
[1010] Wow, you lot still moaning.  |
 Hephaesteus Gallente PILGRIMS Insane Asylum |
Posted - 2005.09.04 08:15:00 -
[1011] Wow, you lot still moaning. |
Hephaesteus Gallente PILGRIMS Insane Asylum |
Posted - 2005.09.04 08:15:00 -
[1012] Wow, you lot still moaning. |
 Justice Bringer |
Posted - 2005.09.04 09:48:00 -
[1013]
A very good post Nyxus and nice to see someone take time to do an in depth comparison of sorts. I, however, would have liked to see you do calculations for all distances up to say 45km as this is the maximum distance drones can fly, unless you use an Ishtar. Otherwise all you've done is not show the complete picture over which battles may ensue. I think maybe we'll see that the DPS of a Thorax at 45km will be pitiful, which would explain why it's so high at closer distances. It simply NEEDS to put out damage that is far and above any other ship to redress the inbalance of taking so much itself for so long. Please do this comparison (if you can) and then we'lll begin to have a full picture of the Thorax from close to far and its corresponding DPS. I'm quite sure that you'll all agree that the Eagle and Cerberus HAS have very low DPS compared with their peers and this is a result of the distance at which they must operate. And i'm sure the Thorax will have a decrease in its DPS at around 40km - 45km also compared with point blank range of <10km. Just my thoughts.  |
 Justice Bringer Minmatar United Univers |
Posted - 2005.09.04 09:48:00 -
[1014]
A very good post Nyxus and nice to see someone take time to do an in depth comparison of sorts. I, however, would have liked to see you do calculations for all distances up to say 45km as this is the maximum distance drones can fly, unless you use an Ishtar. Otherwise all you've done is not show the complete picture over which battles may ensue. I think maybe we'll see that the DPS of a Thorax at 45km will be pitiful, which would explain why it's so high at closer distances. It simply NEEDS to put out damage that is far and above any other ship to redress the inbalance of taking so much itself for so long. Please do this comparison (if you can) and then we'lll begin to have a full picture of the Thorax from close to far and its corresponding DPS. I'm quite sure that you'll all agree that the Eagle and Cerberus HAS have very low DPS compared with their peers and this is a result of the distance at which they must operate. And i'm sure the Thorax will have a decrease in its DPS at around 40km - 45km also compared with point blank range of <10km. Just my thoughts. |
Justice Bringer Minmatar United Univers |
Posted - 2005.09.04 09:48:00 -
[1015]
A very good post Nyxus and nice to see someone take time to do an in depth comparison of sorts. I, however, would have liked to see you do calculations for all distances up to say 45km as this is the maximum distance drones can fly, unless you use an Ishtar. Otherwise all you've done is not show the complete picture over which battles may ensue. I think maybe we'll see that the DPS of a Thorax at 45km will be pitiful, which would explain why it's so high at closer distances. It simply NEEDS to put out damage that is far and above any other ship to redress the inbalance of taking so much itself for so long. Please do this comparison (if you can) and then we'lll begin to have a full picture of the Thorax from close to far and its corresponding DPS. I'm quite sure that you'll all agree that the Eagle and Cerberus HAS have very low DPS compared with their peers and this is a result of the distance at which they must operate. And i'm sure the Thorax will have a decrease in its DPS at around 40km - 45km also compared with point blank range of <10km. Just my thoughts. |
Ithildin |
Posted - 2005.09.04 10:50:00 -
[1016] Thanks, Naughty Boy. Just a few points: * In your comparison you listed only 4 turrets on the Rupture and no launchers, could it not fit even Assault Launchers afterwards? * Where the Maller doesn't have drones to slightly augment it's damage or to serve as a small-ship protection, it does have nearly 50% better tracking than the others and a tanking bonus. * It is interesting how the Moa lags behind in damage, however a single electronic warfare module in the last med slot may make all the difference in a combat. Can't help feeling that a tiny something is still needed, however. Just remember that equality in damage isn't everything and that you don't fly Caldari to do lots of damage. * It is amazing how all ships perform similar in a direct damage calculation using long range turrets. Thorax. The Thorax' fortÚ is blasters, and this is where things get difficult. Blasters require a very expensive (fitting) micro warpdrive. Also, the Thorax has a bonus to micro warpdrive efficiency which it doesn't use when fitted with long range turrets. A basic problem with this balance is that blasters and railguns are too similar, and thus you cannot build the Thorax as a pro-blaster ship nor can you make a generalized boost to it's fittings without possibly unbalancing the long-range balance. It would be interesting if CCP's developers took their time to make the hybrid fitting requirements loaded differently, with railguns more kind to Caldari powergrid and CPU and blasters more kind to Gallentean powergrid and CPU. In other words, make railguns require more CPU and less powergrid while blasters require more powergrid and less CPU, and additionally have Gallentean ships increase in powergrid and decrease in CPU (making them more similar to Amarrian fitting grid and CPU). Granted, the tampering should only be done to encourage the use of the two different weapons, and not prohibit the use of the other type. This is to support that Gallente and Caldari both use two different weapon types (the secondary weapon types being either drones or missiles), and by splitting the hybrid category in two "parts", thus increasing predictability, allows for better optimization of the incorporation of the two factions philosophies onto their respective ship hulls. -- Ligh weight. Some people fly Thorax or Armageddon to compensate what their body lack. I fly Dominix. |
 Ithildin Gallente The Corporation Cruel Intentions |
Posted - 2005.09.04 10:50:00 -
[1017] Thanks, Naughty Boy. Just a few points: * In your comparison you listed only 4 turrets on the Rupture and no launchers, could it not fit even Assault Launchers afterwards? * Where the Maller doesn't have drones to slightly augment it's damage or to serve as a small-ship protection, it does have nearly 50% better tracking than the others and a tanking bonus. * It is interesting how the Moa lags behind in damage, however a single electronic warfare module in the last med slot may make all the difference in a combat. Can't help feeling that a tiny something is still needed, however. Just remember that equality in damage isn't everything and that you don't fly Caldari to do lots of damage. * It is amazing how all ships perform similar in a direct damage calculation using long range turrets. Thorax. The Thorax' fortT is blasters, and this is where things get difficult. Blasters require a very expensive (fitting) micro warpdrive. Also, the Thorax has a bonus to micro warpdrive efficiency which it doesn't use when fitted with long range turrets. A basic problem with this balance is that blasters and railguns are too similar, and thus you cannot build the Thorax as a pro-blaster ship nor can you make a generalized boost to it's fittings without possibly unbalancing the long-range balance. It would be interesting if CCP's developers took their time to make the hybrid fitting requirements loaded differently, with railguns more kind to Caldari powergrid and CPU and blasters more kind to Gallentean powergrid and CPU. In other words, make railguns require more CPU and less powergrid while blasters require more powergrid and less CPU, and additionally have Gallentean ships increase in powergrid and decrease in CPU (making them more similar to Amarrian fitting grid and CPU). Granted, the tampering should only be done to encourage the use of the two different weapons, and not prohibit the use of the other type. This is to support that Gallente and Caldari both use two different weapon types (the secondary weapon types being either drones or missiles), and by splitting the hybrid category in two "parts", thus increasing predictability, allows for better optimization of the incorporation of the two factions philosophies onto their respective ship hulls. - EVE is sick. |
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation Cruel Intentions |
Posted - 2005.09.04 10:50:00 -
[1018] Thanks, Naughty Boy. Just a few points: * In your comparison you listed only 4 turrets on the Rupture and no launchers, could it not fit even Assault Launchers afterwards? * Where the Maller doesn't have drones to slightly augment it's damage or to serve as a small-ship protection, it does have nearly 50% better tracking than the others and a tanking bonus. * It is interesting how the Moa lags behind in damage, however a single electronic warfare module in the last med slot may make all the difference in a combat. Can't help feeling that a tiny something is still needed, however. Just remember that equality in damage isn't everything and that you don't fly Caldari to do lots of damage. * It is amazing how all ships perform similar in a direct damage calculation using long range turrets. Thorax. The Thorax' fortT is blasters, and this is where things get difficult. Blasters require a very expensive (fitting) micro warpdrive. Also, the Thorax has a bonus to micro warpdrive efficiency which it doesn't use when fitted with long range turrets. A basic problem with this balance is that blasters and railguns are too similar, and thus you cannot build the Thorax as a pro-blaster ship nor can you make a generalized boost to it's fittings without possibly unbalancing the long-range balance. It would be interesting if CCP's developers took their time to make the hybrid fitting requirements loaded differently, with railguns more kind to Caldari powergrid and CPU and blasters more kind to Gallentean powergrid and CPU. In other words, make railguns require more CPU and less powergrid while blasters require more powergrid and less CPU, and additionally have Gallentean ships increase in powergrid and decrease in CPU (making them more similar to Amarrian fitting grid and CPU). Granted, the tampering should only be done to encourage the use of the two different weapons, and not prohibit the use of the other type. This is to support that Gallente and Caldari both use two different weapon types (the secondary weapon types being either drones or missiles), and by splitting the hybrid category in two "parts", thus increasing predictability, allows for better optimization of the incorporation of the two factions philosophies onto their respective ship hulls. - EVE is sick. |
Naughty Boy |
Posted - 2005.09.04 12:56:00 -
[1019] 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 -
[1020] 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. |
| 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: j0sephine| Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,17s, ref 20250912/0915 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. |