| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Pelea Ming
Prostitutes Are Always Wlling
157
   |
Posted - 2013.04.21 13:06:00 -
[451] - Quote
for what it's worth, I've noticed that they've changed the cargoholds on all the ships, presumably to allow them to hold some pre-determined amount of boosters/ammo that is meant to allow them to be in some sort of balance for PvP.
So obviously NOT addressing the PvE issues, which I will be in Duality later on today to look into, I spent 3 hours tweaking out an Abaddon fit last night, but I want to test it out before I start pointing out the flaws I ran into just fitting it.
Though I was happy enough that my Incursion Vanguard site running Tachmare will no longer require the Eluctiation rig with the implants I already use with it, I was able to keep it's DPS the same while giving it a slight boost to scan res and range. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
4637
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 13:21:00 -
[452] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:What the **** are you smoking? That's called logic : just look again at the numbers, and if I made a mistake or misinterprete something, feel free to argue instead shitposting.
You declared a ship that needs no less than seven cap mods and one PG mod to be a threat to the viability of railguns. So much for logic.
You did do a convenient little handwave there about "it doesn't matter how many cap mods or fitting mods you need" except, well, it does.
It doesn't even look like you have any experience with battleship PVP and that all you're doing is theorycrafting.
Malcanis for CSM 8
Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 16:08:00 -
[453] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:You declared a ship that needs no less than seven cap mods and one PG mod to be a threat to the viability of railguns. So much for logic.
You did do a convenient little handwave there about "it doesn't matter how many cap mods or fitting mods you need" except, well, it does.
It doesn't even look like you have any experience with battleship PVP and that all you're doing is theorycrafting.
The purpose of your ship is to fire its guns, no matter how fitting mods it use to do it effectively. If, besides the dozen helping mod it use, it is still better than another ship, then it's balance. Get a brain please : equalizing the number of cap modules you need is completely stupid if you already have better performances than the other without them.
As for the pvp experience, maybe you can explain why the fleet tachyon Abaddon I showed wouldn't be better than a fleet Rokh ? Enlighten us with your knowledge please, I'd be glad to accept a valid reason to calm my fears. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy
The ROC
25
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 16:11:00 -
[454] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:You declared a ship that needs no less than seven cap mods and one PG mod to be a threat to the viability of railguns. So much for logic.
You did do a convenient little handwave there about "it doesn't matter how many cap mods or fitting mods you need" except, well, it does.
It doesn't even look like you have any experience with battleship PVP and that all you're doing is theorycrafting. The purpose of your ship is to fire its guns, no matter how fitting mods it use to do it effectively. If, besides the dozen helping mod it use, it is still better than another ship, then it's balance. Get a brain please : equalizing the number of cap modules you need is completely stupid if you already have better performances than the other without them. As for the pvp experience, maybe you can explain why the fleet tachyon Abaddon I showed wouldn't be better than a fleet Rokh ? Enlighten us with your knowledge please, I'd be glad to accept a valid reason to calm my fears.
...
Do you know who the **** you're talking to? I get the feeling you don't.
Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 16:41:00 -
[455] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Do you know who the **** you're talking to? I get the feeling you don't. He could be a king, a god, Einstein or the president, that wouldn't make what he is saying true if it's not.
And the truth is that a tachyon abaddon will be arguably better than a rokh for pve, despite all the slots used for cap and fitting. So unless I'm wrong, something I'd be glad to recognize if you show evidence of it, I'll stand on my position. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
613
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 16:57:00 -
[456] - Quote
What's the point of even talking about a Tachy Abaddon, tracking is atrocious and you restrict yourself to missions against Sansha/Blood/Eon. Tach's may be viable on the lower resist Apocalypse however, but then your cap will really be hurting as the requirement to tank 20% more is rather significant.
Missile Armageddon. No other option comes close .. double bonus use of TP to keep drones aggro free and assist missiles. Adopt or Die (not a typo  ) |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
4642
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 20:05:00 -
[457] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:it is still better than another ship, then it's balance. Get a brain please : equalizing the number of cap modules you need is completely stupid if you already have better performances than the other without them.
Better in one singular aspect is not the same as better overall. Stop pretending that it is.
Malcanis for CSM 8
Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 21:02:00 -
[458] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Bouh Revetoile wrote:it is still better than another ship, then it's balance. Get a brain please : equalizing the number of cap modules you need is completely stupid if you already have better performances than the other without them. Better in one singular aspect is not the same as better overall. Stop pretending that it is.
Worse in one singular aspect is not the same as worse overall. Stop pretending that it is.
You see ? We agree in fact !
The Rokh being better with caplife only don't make it better than the Abaddon overall.
The Abaddon having worse caplife than most ship don't make it worse than them overall.
Congrats ! We just discovered that a ship can have a bad cap life and trouble fitting its weapons, and still be good, and all this with pure logic ! |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
4642
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 21:10:00 -
[459] - Quote
No, it can't. Bad cap life happens to be a particularly crippling aspect, same as having trouble fitting weapons.
It's one of those singular aspects that can completely ruin a ship.
A damage ship that can't fire its weapons is useless. Why you seem to think this doesn't matter is baffling to me.
Malcanis for CSM 8
Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 21:32:00 -
[460] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Bad cap life happens to be a particularly crippling aspect, same as having trouble fitting weapons. That can be said about almost any aspect of a ship. You are obsessed with capacitor. (Did a neuting ship **** you in your EVE infancy ? :D)
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
210
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 21:54:00 -
[461] - Quote
I have removed some less desirable post that did not contribute positively to the discussion at hand.
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
ISD Ezwal
Lieutenant
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department |
|
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 22:09:00 -
[462] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:No, it can't. Bad cap life happens to be a particularly crippling aspect, same as having trouble fitting weapons.
It's one of those singular aspects that can completely ruin a ship.
A damage ship that can't fire its weapons is useless. Why you seem to think this doesn't matter is baffling to me.
This crippling aspect didn't prevent the Abaddon from becoming one of the best ship in game. And the same goes for multiple laser ships. Can you show me one ship ruined by it's bad capacitor ? |
Naomi Anthar
No Tax So Relax.
56
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 22:40:00 -
[463] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:No, it can't. Bad cap life happens to be a particularly crippling aspect, same as having trouble fitting weapons.
It's one of those singular aspects that can completely ruin a ship.
A damage ship that can't fire its weapons is useless. Why you seem to think this doesn't matter is baffling to me. This crippling aspect didn't prevent the Abaddon from becoming one of the best ship in game. And the same goes for multiple laser ships. Can you show me one ship ruined by it's bad capacitor ?
And you think it was one of best ships because of what ? It was best because of resist bonus not because of goddamn lasers T_T if it could use autocannons or artillery (aka being bonused for it) then it would. |
Ayla Crenshaw
Polish Immortals
26
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 06:52:00 -
[464] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:Bouh Revetoile wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:No, it can't. Bad cap life happens to be a particularly crippling aspect, same as having trouble fitting weapons.
It's one of those singular aspects that can completely ruin a ship.
A damage ship that can't fire its weapons is useless. Why you seem to think this doesn't matter is baffling to me. This crippling aspect didn't prevent the Abaddon from becoming one of the best ship in game. And the same goes for multiple laser ships. Can you show me one ship ruined by it's bad capacitor ? And you think it was one of best ships because of what ? It was best because of resist bonus not because of goddamn lasers T_T if it could use autocannons or artillery (aka being bonused for it) then it would.
Actually some historical data I dug up pointed to Abaddons using Artillery at some point in EVE lifetime. En masse. I think it was a "thing" on Serenity until just recently.
Not that Our Dear Special Needs (he's got a very special need to keep Lasers ******) Friend Bouh will ever admit it's a problem. Not that it matters much, because he's just a lone troll. |
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 09:24:00 -
[465] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:And you think it was one of best ships because of what ? It was best because of resist bonus not because of goddamn lasers T_T if it could use autocannons or artillery (aka being bonused for it) then it would.
Should I conclude that actually no ship suffer from these crippling cap and fitting ?
If the hull advantages compensate for the drawbacks of weapons, then it's balanced. If you buff the weapons on such a hull, then it become OP.
That's really the first time I see people acknowledging for ships being rather good and still crying for a buff like if it was require for the ship to be used. |
Ayla Crenshaw
Polish Immortals
26
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 09:42:00 -
[466] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Naomi Anthar wrote:And you think it was one of best ships because of what ? It was best because of resist bonus not because of goddamn lasers T_T if it could use autocannons or artillery (aka being bonused for it) then it would. Should I conclude that actually no ship suffer from these crippling cap and fitting ? If the hull advantages compensate for the drawbacks of weapons, then it's balanced. If you buff the weapons on such a hull, then it become OP. That's really the first time I see people acknowledging for ships being rather good and still crying for a buff like if it was require for the ship to be used.
Called it.
Dear Bouh, every time a ship, as a standard fit, does not use it's bonused weaponry thousands OCD-suffering nerds cry out in terror. They don't get cut short though, unlike poor souls on Aldebaran. Why? Because it points out there's something terribly wrong with balance going on. |
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 10:18:00 -
[467] - Quote
Ayla Crenshaw wrote:Dear Bouh, every time a ship, as a standard fit, does not use it's bonused weaponry thousands OCD-suffering nerds cry out in terror. They don't get cut short though, unlike poor souls on Aldebaran. Why? Because it points out there's something terribly wrong with balance going on.
Sometimes, a bonus is situational and make the ship very good in these situations, yet the ship can be good in other situations even without using this bonus.
I know this situation puzzle a lot of people, but I don't see it as problematic, that is a tool for balance like any other I think. |
Ayla Crenshaw
Polish Immortals
26
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 11:37:00 -
[468] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:Ayla Crenshaw wrote:Dear Bouh, every time a ship, as a standard fit, does not use it's bonused weaponry thousands OCD-suffering nerds cry out in terror. They don't get cut short though, unlike poor souls on Aldebaran. Why? Because it points out there's something terribly wrong with balance going on. Sometimes, a bonus is situational and make the ship very good in these situations, yet the ship can be good in other situations even without using this bonus. I know this situation puzzle a lot of people, but I don't see it as problematic, that is a tool for balance like any other I think.
So you should be perfectly fine with Railguns being totally unviable, right? |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
4648
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 12:57:00 -
[469] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:No, it can't. Bad cap life happens to be a particularly crippling aspect, same as having trouble fitting weapons.
It's one of those singular aspects that can completely ruin a ship.
A damage ship that can't fire its weapons is useless. Why you seem to think this doesn't matter is baffling to me. This crippling aspect didn't prevent the Abaddon from becoming one of the best ship in game. And the same goes for multiple laser ships. Can you show me one ship ruined by it's bad capacitor ?
It wasn't one of the best ships. It was very situationally decent. In many cases people didn't even put lasers on them.
Our alliance used them for a time. Our fit had a T2 elutriation rig (-25% cap use) and a T2 HCB, and it still wasn't able to fight for very long before it ran out of cap. We no longer use them. We don't even use Zealots currently.
Malcanis for CSM 8
Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |
Doctor Ape MD
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 12:57:00 -
[470] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Besides, I haven't made missions for ages, so my pve knowledge is a bit outdated, but as much as I can see from these fits, not so much.
Honestly, I think you've said enough right there concerning Amarr BS mission running. Why you continue to argue the subject is beyond me, but it appears to have something to do with how lasers compare to railguns. If you really want to compare the two weapon systems correctly, you have to compare lasers (pulse and beam) to hybrids (railguns AND blasters). |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
4649
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 13:05:00 -
[471] - Quote
Why are we even talking about PVE?
Balance is about PVP.
Malcanis for CSM 8
Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 13:37:00 -
[472] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Why are we even talking about PVE?
Balance is about PVP.
Indeed, but some people here started a crusade for their right to have a pve ship cap stable with tachyon and an armor repper. So I'm trying to explain to them that 1) cap stability is useless ; and 2) with the proposed changes they will have a good tachyon option ON TOP of the already existing and performant option of pulse.
And about the balance of PVP, I already talked about it : the problem is that tachyon and 425mm railguns overlaps. Make one useful, and the other isn't useful anymore unless the difference between shield and armor are enough in favor of the loser. From a balance perspective, buffing beams is dangerous. |
Regolis
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 13:52:00 -
[473] - Quote
Please stop quoting and/or replaying to the Gallente troll.
His objective is to make sure that Amarr stays broken.
His argument is that energy weapons shouldn't be cap stable.
Not energy weapons and local armor repairing.
He is unconcerned that every other ship in the game has no trouble firing their weapons until they run out of ammo.
Just Amarr should be unable to fire for more than 1 min with their guns.
He also doesn't appear concerned that Hyperion has THE MOST CAPACITOR of any ship and uses less than 1/3 of it. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
4649
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 14:03:00 -
[474] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:And about the balance of PVP, I already talked about it : the problem is that tachyon and 425mm railguns overlaps. Make one useful, and the other isn't useful anymore unless the difference between shield and armor are enough in favor of the loser. From a balance perspective, buffing beams is dangerous.
Not any more so than railguns and artillery or beam lasers and artillery overlap.
Railguns are still going to be viable for a few reasons:
- The Rokh is still capable of a really good tank. With fleet boosts (Damnation for Apoc, Vulture for Rokh) and the best tank I could come up with on the Tachyon Apoc without sacrificing DPS, the Rokh still comes out 30k EHP ahead.
- Being a shield ship, the Rokh is set up to complement alpha Maelstrom fleets. Tachyon ships really can't do this. And buffed beam lasers will definitely not pose any threat to the artillery's massive alpha, nor its entirely capless design.
Malcanis for CSM 8
Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
307
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 14:20:00 -
[475] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Railguns are still going to be viable for a few reasons:
- The Rokh is still capable of a really good tank. With fleet boosts (Damnation for Apoc, Vulture for Rokh) and the best tank I could come up with on the Tachyon Apoc without sacrificing DPS, the Rokh still comes out 30k EHP ahead.
- Being a shield ship, the Rokh is set up to complement alpha Maelstrom fleets. Tachyon ships really can't do this. And buffed beam lasers will definitely not pose any threat to the artillery's massive alpha, nor its entirely capless design.
Thanks for finaly make a constructive post.
All I was arguing against was a larger buff to tachyon in fact : the Rokh come out with a tank advantage, but the Apoc would take it back if it didn't need the PG rig.
And I'm pretty sure some Rokh fleets operate alone. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
4649
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 15:24:00 -
[476] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Railguns are still going to be viable for a few reasons:
- The Rokh is still capable of a really good tank. With fleet boosts (Damnation for Apoc, Vulture for Rokh) and the best tank I could come up with on the Tachyon Apoc without sacrificing DPS, the Rokh still comes out 30k EHP ahead.
- Being a shield ship, the Rokh is set up to complement alpha Maelstrom fleets. Tachyon ships really can't do this. And buffed beam lasers will definitely not pose any threat to the artillery's massive alpha, nor its entirely capless design.
Thanks for finaly make a constructive post. All I was arguing against was a larger buff to tachyon in fact : the Rokh come out with a tank advantage, but the Apoc would take it back if it didn't need the PG rig. And I'm pretty sure some Rokh fleets operate alone.
The Apoc needs two powergrid mods in order to fit a rack of T2 tachyons, a meta 4 MWD, a meta 4 HCB, and a meta 4 1600mm armor plate.
And even then it needs at least one CPU mod in order to fit two T2 heat sinks, a T2 DC, another meta 4 1600mm plate, a T2 EANM, a SB, and a TC.
Even then it's pretty much impossible to hit 90k EHP.
The Rokh can fit everything it needs and hit ~125k EHP without needing a single fitting mod.
Malcanis for CSM 8
Module activation timers are buggy - CCP please fix |
Asmodai Xodai
Legio Geminatus
Gentlemen's Agreement
49
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 03:51:00 -
[477] - Quote
I know opinions vary, and that's fine. But wouldn't it be useful for the great bulk of us who believe Amarr ships and weapons have serious issues to come together in some kind of grand statement? A manifesto of sorts? Would anyone like to join me in crafting some language, and perhaps signing?
We, the undersigned, believe in the following principles:
- Amarr is not the red-headed stepchild of this game, and we actively refuse such a label and treatment. Our race will be treated the same as any other race in this game - no better, and no worse.
- Lasers are not hands down better than any other weapon system in the game, requiring far-reaching and severe punishments in order to balance them out. They are just another racial weapon system, and as such merely accel at some things and not at others, just as any other racial weapon system.
- It is not a 'bonus' or a 'reward' to be able to fit our racial weapon system, while all other races are allowed to freely fit their racial weapon system and thus get this bonus 'for free.'
As such, we, the undersigned, demand the following:
- Remove cap use bonuses from our ships, and give us other bonuses, the same as any other race.
- Give us powergrid fitting requirements that are in-line with all other races in the game.
- Give our ships capacitor usage that is in-line with all other races in the game.
- If, after these adjustments, lasers are OP, then by all means adjust lasers.
Signed,
Asmodai Xodai
[others...]
By the way, I think many of the posters here should consider moving to another race. Sticking with one race while it is continually given the shaft by CCP is the same as sticking with the same political party who screws you over and over again. The only way to force change in that situation (or, at least one way) is to go to another party, or stop voting altogether. Well, the same applies here.
Personally, after having played Amarr exclusively from day one, I already made my first battlecruiser a non-Amarr ship, and the first battleship I get will be non-Amarr (already training for it).
In short, start voting with your ship choices. Train up and fly other ships. If Amarr usage statistics plummet, CCP can either accept a three-race game, or do something about it. It will be their choice, but at least you will have made yours. |
Regolis
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.23 20:03:00 -
[478] - Quote
This is a comparison of the lasers and railguns. As you can see from this the Tachyon doesn't equate to anything on the list.
I am all for balancing lasers so it would appear one of two things needs to happen first.
Either get rid of the tachyon and balance lasers or add the equivalent tachyon sized gun to all the laser class beams.
People have been blowing smoke about balance and how unfair it would be to reduce power costs of lasers.
This is the current balance on Live servers.
Small
Small Focused Beam Laser I
10 km range
4 km falloff
7.22 activation GJ
4.00 rate of fire
3.0 damage modifier
0.1 rad/sec tracking
150mm Railgun I
12 km range
6 km falloff
2.34 activation GJ
4.25 rate of fire
3.025 damage modifier
0.0735 rad/sec tracking
Medium
Heavy Beam I
20 km range
8 falloff
21.67 activation GJ
6.00 rate of fire
3.0 damage modifier
0.033 rad/sec tracking
250mm Railgun I
24 km range
12 falloff
7.0 activation GJ
6.375 rate of fire
3.025 damage modifier
0.02415 rad/sec tracking
Large
Mega Beam Laser I
40 km range
16 falloff
65 activation GJ
9.00 rate of fire
3.0 damage modifier
0.0153125 rad/sec tracking
425mm Railgun I
48 km range
24 km falloff
21 activation GJ
9.56 rate of fire
3.025 damage modifier
0.01010625 rad/sec tracking
Tachyon Beam Laser I
44 km range
20 km falloff
95 activation GJ
12.5 rate of fire
4.5 damage modifier
0.01392 rad/sec tracking
TLDR: Until you get to battleship sized turrets there is parity between Beams and Railguns except for the abusive power costs.
|
Avald Midular
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
25
|
Posted - 2013.04.25 13:29:00 -
[479] - Quote
Regolis wrote:This is a comparison of the lasers and railguns. As you can see from this the Tachyon doesn't equate to anything on the list.
I am all for balancing lasers so it would appear one of two things needs to happen first.
Either get rid of the tachyon and balance lasers or add the equivalent tachyon sized gun to all the laser class beams.
People have been blowing smoke about balance and how unfair it would be to reduce power costs of lasers.
This is the current balance on Live servers.
Small
Small Focused Beam Laser I
10 km range
4 km falloff
7.22 activation GJ
4.00 rate of fire
3.0 damage modifier
0.1 rad/sec tracking
150mm Railgun I
12 km range
6 km falloff
2.34 activation GJ
4.25 rate of fire
3.025 damage modifier
0.0735 rad/sec tracking
Medium
Heavy Beam I
20 km range
8 falloff
21.67 activation GJ
6.00 rate of fire
3.0 damage modifier
0.033 rad/sec tracking
250mm Railgun I
24 km range
12 falloff
7.0 activation GJ
6.375 rate of fire
3.025 damage modifier
0.02415 rad/sec tracking
Large
Mega Beam Laser I
40 km range
16 falloff
65 activation GJ
9.00 rate of fire
3.0 damage modifier
0.0153125 rad/sec tracking
425mm Railgun I
48 km range
24 km falloff
21 activation GJ
9.56 rate of fire
3.025 damage modifier
0.01010625 rad/sec tracking
Tachyon Beam Laser I
44 km range
20 km falloff
95 activation GJ
12.5 rate of fire
4.5 damage modifier
0.01392 rad/sec tracking
TLDR: Until you get to battleship sized turrets there is parity between Beams and Railguns except for the abusive power costs.
You didn't include PG fitting of each.
|
Drake Doe
SVER True Blood
Unclaimed.
147
|
Posted - 2013.04.25 14:34:00 -
[480] - Quote
Avald Midular wrote:Regolis wrote:This is a comparison of the lasers and railguns. As you can see from this the Tachyon doesn't equate to anything on the list.
I am all for balancing lasers so it would appear one of two things needs to happen first.
Either get rid of the tachyon and balance lasers or add the equivalent tachyon sized gun to all the laser class beams.
People have been blowing smoke about balance and how unfair it would be to reduce power costs of lasers.
This is the current balance on Live servers.
Small
Small Focused Beam Laser I
10 km range
4 km falloff
7.22 activation GJ
4.00 rate of fire
3.0 damage modifier
0.1 rad/sec tracking
150mm Railgun I
12 km range
6 km falloff
2.34 activation GJ
4.25 rate of fire
3.025 damage modifier
0.0735 rad/sec tracking
Medium
Heavy Beam I
20 km range
8 falloff
21.67 activation GJ
6.00 rate of fire
3.0 damage modifier
0.033 rad/sec tracking
250mm Railgun I
24 km range
12 falloff
7.0 activation GJ
6.375 rate of fire
3.025 damage modifier
0.02415 rad/sec tracking
Large
Mega Beam Laser I
40 km range
16 falloff
65 activation GJ
9.00 rate of fire
3.0 damage modifier
0.0153125 rad/sec tracking
)425mm Railgun I
48 km range
24 km falloff
21 activation GJ
9.56 rate of fire
3.025 damage modifier
0.01010625 rad/sec tracking
Tachyon Beam Laser I
44 km range
20 km falloff
95 activation GJ
12.5 rate of fire
4.5 damage modifier
0.01392 rad/sec tracking
TLDR: Until you get to battleship sized turrets there is parity between Beams and Railguns except for the abusive power costs.
You didn't include PG fitting of each.
No need to point out a known problem, but when you look at them on the ships that can fit them without sacrificing fitting space there's a huge difference.
"The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."-Vermaak Doe |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |