| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:03:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Meridius on 03/12/2005 06:05:30 <HellGremlin> Rest in peace, Zealot :(
Btw my main post had exactly 0 characters left, is that teh pwn or what? ________________________________________________________
|

Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:03:00 -
[2]
Disclaimer: This thread is about HAC's, not recon cruisers, do not discuss them please. Do not discuss tech 2 ammo as well as there is no indication that they are going to arrive as they are on the sisi DB.
Stacking changes:
The nerf to damage mods is harsh but i can underdstand it. However, damage mods are not all that have been nerfed. Amarr ships have ample low slots that we either tank or gank with. You do not do both, that is dumb and something that is done most affectively on Caldari/Minmatar ships where mid. What i'm getting at is that more then 3 hardners is useless. So lets say on an Armageddon i have 2 reps and 3 hardners. I want to be an uber tank because i have lots of lowslots but hey, i can't because more then 3 is useless.
Here are some interesting numbers regarding HAC dps in RMR. Right now the Zealot on TQ is the 3rd most damaging HAC but is realistically the best HAC ganker. In gank it's trade off is that it's extremely predictable and easily counterable and ofc has no regenerative defenses to speak of.
This is what happens in RMR:
Zealot: 397.7 guns - Heavy Pulse Laser II
Deimos: 509.9 guns + 79.2 drones = 582.1 dps - Heavy Ion Blaster II Deimos w/rails: 352.1 guns + 79.2 drones = 431.3 dps - 250mm Railgun II
Heh, the Deimos outdamages the Zealot most damaging closerange weapon with rails. Rails which have a 18km optimal with AM and 22km of falloff (which ofc doesn't get affected by tracking disruptors).
The blaster setup does 46% more DPS and yet for some reason there is a thread claiming the Deimos needs a boost? Maybe it does in it's own way but not nearly as much as the Zealot needs one.
Muninn: 409.4 guns + 49.95 missiles + 49.5 drones = 508.85 dps - 425mm autocannon II
Vagabond: 409.4 guns + 24.97 missiles + 49.5 drones = 483.87 dps - 425mm autocannon II
The Vagabond is a speed demon which reaches 1km/s with just an afterburner. Put that speed together with access to all damage types and 21% more DPS then a Zealot and you have a mighty fine ship. I'm sorry, minmatar have lower dps then Amarr? Whats that trade off for all damage types you say, less damage? Hmm, doesn't appear so. Moving on...
Cerberus: 343.4 missiles - Heavy Missile Launcher II
Wow, the Zealot does a whole 15.8% more dps then a Cerberus. The Cerberus which of course has an optimal 1800% that of a Zealot and doesn't have to worry about things like tracking disruptors. The Cerberus can also switch damage types, it loses a damage bonus but it still has the ability. If a Zealot encounters a Vagabond, it's SOL because of resistances. If the Cerberus were to face a similar resistance wall it could switch and break it's targets tank.
If Assault Missiles come out the Cerberus's dps will no doubt match or exceed the Zealots.
Ishtar: 466.6 drones Ishtar: 559.92 drones + 244.74 guns = 784.66 dps - Heavy Ion Blaster II + 1 drone control mod
The new king of damage is the Ishtar. 466.6 with full sucking power/tank on or 784.66 in gank + damps. That is almost 200% more damage then a Zealot
In gank mode thats 31% more damage then the TQ Zealot which has even less defense (no damps). People have whined about the TQ Zealot several times (for reasons that are beyond me) yet this Ishtar is balanced and nobody seems concerned? Funny how that works.
In NOS mode the Ishtar does 17.3% more dps then a Zealot while wearing a full 5 slot tank, 5 highslots set for draining the life blood of any ship as well as mids dedicated to electronically crippling it's opponent.
Wow.
I don't want any of these other HAC's nerfed...well, maybe the Ishtar as it's about 20dps away from doing what a gankapest does on TQ now. Heh.
The Zealot needs a 5th turret. It didn't need one before because it had a line of lowslots to fill with damage mod glory. That is no longer the case. The Zealot is now left a droneless EW weak predictable ship that is hilariously easy to counter while putting out sub-par damage. ________________________________________________________
|

DarkAmarr101
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:13:00 -
[3]
I agree...isent the Zealot a damage dealer? Because that seems what its setup to do....CCP shame on you.
|

Corto Maltese
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:17:00 -
[4]
signed ___________________________________
|

0Virtu0
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:18:00 -
[5]
Edited by: 0Virtu0 on 03/12/2005 06:17:58 The suggestion brought upon by Meridius is fully supposed by myself.
Or...in other words /signed ---------------------------------- I play EvE and I don't even get a stupid signature. |

Ante
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:18:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Ante on 03/12/2005 06:18:39 I'd like to see comparisons of the HACs with the Deimos using guns that it can fit. That excludes neutron blasters, 250mm railgun IIs and 200mm railgun IIs. This is because all of the above are impossible to fit with other required modules without at least one reactor control unit.
EDIT: Nice sig Corto.
|

Corto Maltese
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:19:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Ante Edited by: Ante on 03/12/2005 06:18:39 I'd like to see comparisons of the HACs with the Deimos using guns that it can fit. That excludes neutron blasters, 250mm railgun IIs and 200mm railgun IIs. This is because all of the above are impossible to fit with other required modules without at least one reactor control unit.
EDIT: Nice sig Corto.
He has ions listed.
And thanks. ___________________________________
|

Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:19:00 -
[8]
What i really don't like about the new stacking changes is that it works against hardners to.
I have lots of lowslots, i want insane resists now that i can't have good damage. Oh wait, i can't do that either. Yeah, i'd rather have a midslots please so i can damp/jam/do something usefull to my target. ________________________________________________________
|

Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:22:00 -
[9]
:( ------ Campaign to remove shield hardener effects, they suck!! |

Lucian Alucard
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:22:00 -
[10]
with a brain,the right skills and a fundemental knowledge of what it takes to fit each ship inconcordeance with the new restrictions you can see that on Sisi these numbers are right and you can fit these ships as such. Yes I hate you all, now go away.
The best joke ever!!!! [url]http://www.livejournal.com/users/sweet__kitty/40953.html?mode=reply |

j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:25:00 -
[11]
"Amarr ships have ample low slots that we either tank or gank with. You do not do both, that is dumb and something that is done most affectively on Caldari/Minmatar ships where mid."
Just curious, but... why exactly is it dumb and not to be done, come RMR? ^^;
I mean, currently with the stacking penalty being far milder it makes lot of sense to fill the ship up to gills with damage mods, and just gank with overpowering damage. Equally, it might make sense to play turtle with tanking gear in all slots and hope you can wear the enemy out.
But, with the way new stacking is done there seems to be no reason why one couldn't fit the most beneficial amount of damage mods (2-3 i think) to keep their damage relatively high, and use the remaining modules for the tank... so you can delay the point of your own death long enough for the other ship to break. o.O;
or is that maybe some kind of "thou shall not tank and gank" think written in the Scriptures, or something ^^;;
|

Uuve Savisaalo
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:25:00 -
[12]
Although I do not use amarr ships or zealot whatsoever, there is truth to the point presented here. Although limited in damage types offered, the zealot has always served as a polar opposite of the sacrelige in that it is primarily a damage dealer. Under the new ruleset this profile is being hampered to such a severe degree that the zealot can no longer survive on sheer damage output alone. One of the viable ways of rectifying this and keeping the zealot in, more or less, its present state post-RMR would be the addition of an extra turret slot and minor grid increase. This does, of course, considerably increase the zealot's damage potential but preserve its role as damage dealer well enough to be a most viable choice.
|

Hobblin I
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:26:00 -
[13]
I love you Meri.. you concisely spoke what I have wanted to say in many long badly written posts.
|

Hobblin I
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:27:00 -
[14]
Originally by: j0sephine "Amarr ships have ample low slots that we either tank or gank with. You do not do both, that is dumb and something that is done most affectively on Caldari/Minmatar ships where mid."
Just curious, but... why exactly is it dumb and not to be done, come RMR? ^^;
I mean, currently with the stacking penalty being far milder it makes lot of sense to fill the ship up to gills with damage mods, and just gank with overpowering damage. Equally, it might make sense to play turtle with tanking gear in all slots and hope you can wear the enemy out.
But, with the way new stacking is done there seems to be no reason why one couldn't fit the most beneficial amount of damage mods (2-3 i think) to keep their damage relatively high, and use the remaining modules for the tank... so you can delay the point of your own death long enough for the other ship to break. o.O;
or is that maybe some kind of "thou shall not tank and gank" think written in the Scriptures, or something ^^;;
Because that way it does neither remotely well.
|

Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:27:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Ante Edited by: Ante on 03/12/2005 06:18:39 I'd like to see comparisons of the HACs with the Deimos using guns that it can fit. That excludes neutron blasters, 250mm railgun IIs and 200mm railgun IIs. This is because all of the above are impossible to fit with other required modules without at least one reactor control unit.
EDIT: Nice sig Corto.
Do you see neutron nlasters in my post? I don't.
That 250mm rails setup fit without any RCU's as well. Dmg mods, sensor boosters, tracking enhancers. To top it off it has drones to fend off inties. If you setup a beam Zealot inties will own the **** out of you and then have cake at your funeral. ________________________________________________________
|

Hobblin I
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:29:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Meridius Edited by: Meridius on 03/12/2005 06:05:30 <HellGremlin> Rest in peace, Zealot :(
|

j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:29:00 -
[17]
"Because that way it does neither remotely well."
Do you mean it as in, Amarr ship fitting regular armour tank will tank worse than any other armour tanker, and with the same amount of damage mods like any other ship it will also do worse damage than anyone else? Because i somehow can't convince myself to buy that o.O;
|

Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:29:00 -
[18]
an extra turret means the zealot does 497 dps ------ Campaign to remove shield hardener effects, they suck!! |

Dr Tetrahydrocannabinol
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:31:00 -
[19]
You are very biased but i can see where you are coming from.
As for the zealot, i think all t2 ships need a look at, especially after every patch which seems to change so much.
Btw, if you give the zealot 5th high slot isnt that counterproductive to the very thing CCP is trying to change? ---------------------------------------------
Oveur > CUZ IM EXTREEEEEEEEEEEEEEME!!!! |

Corto Maltese
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:32:00 -
[20]
A little off topic but also, RIP Armageddon. ___________________________________
|

Hobblin I
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:32:00 -
[21]
Originally by: j0sephine "Because that way it does neither remotely well."
Do you mean it as in, Amarr ship fitting regular armour tank will tank worse than any other armour tanker, and with the same amount of damage mods like any other ship it will also do worse damage than anyone else? Because i somehow can't convince myself to buy that o.O;
Matters little what you need convincing of.
|

Argentarius
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:33:00 -
[22]
Signed.
|

j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:34:00 -
[23]
"Matters little what you need convincing of."
Well, not like you're even trying to begin with. Too hard of a task perhaps, to provide some actual facts to support the whine...
|

Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:34:00 -
[24]
Originally by: j0sephine "Amarr ships have ample low slots that we either tank or gank with. You do not do both, that is dumb and something that is done most affectively on Caldari/Minmatar ships where mid."
Just curious, but... why exactly is it dumb and not to be done, come RMR? ^^;
I mean, currently with the stacking penalty being far milder it makes lot of sense to fill the ship up to gills with damage mods, and just gank with overpowering damage. Equally, it might make sense to play turtle with tanking gear in all slots and hope you can wear the enemy out.
But, with the way new stacking is done there seems to be no reason why one couldn't fit the most beneficial amount of damage mods (2-3 i think) to keep their damage relatively high, and use the remaining modules for the tank... so you can delay the point of your own death long enough for the other ship to break. o.O;
or is that maybe some kind of "thou shall not tank and gank" think written in the Scriptures, or something ^^;;
It's dumb because:
1. Lasers eat lots of cap, despite the popluar belief Mega Pulse on a Geddon use more cap per second then Ions on a Megathron. That cap is taken out of what you can tank with and the more gank you go for the more cap your guns chew through.
2. Armor reps repair slowly, very slowly and most of the time you'll die with a lot cap left.
3. Those Caldari/Minmatar ships also have the advantage of being able to EW + gank (mostly Caldari). We can't do that. ________________________________________________________
|

Corto Maltese
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:42:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Hobblin I
Originally by: Corto Maltese Edited by: Corto Maltese on 03/12/2005 06:39:23 I was sitting thinking about post patch the other day.
What about like:
4 heavy pulse 2
normal mids
medium rep 2, energized adaptive and thermic, 800 plate, 3 damage mods
decent damage, decent tank, but also very predictable i guess 
Not really a tank.
Run that rep and your guns will stop very quickly..
Your best bet is to not even have the rep and just passively hope to tank long enough for your guns to kill.
However, with other ships having more hp, and the Zealot doing way less dps. That isn't quite a great scenario either.
* Corto Maltese parks his Zealot. ___________________________________
|

j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:45:00 -
[26]
"1. Lasers eat lots of cap, despite the popluar belief Mega Pulse on a Geddon use more cap per second then Ions on a Megathron. That cap is taken out of what you can tank with and the more gank you go for the more cap your guns chew through."
Everyone has perpetual cap problems while trying to tank and shoot at once, though... it's hardly Amarr specialty. Everyone else deals with it by fitting the cap boosters. Wouldn't the same approach actually benefit the Amarr ships more than others, given they have more free cargo space to store the charges? ^^;
In addition, lowered number of damage mods that's now worthwile to stack means, cap usage for turrets is far lower than what full-out gank ship needs to run the turrets... isn't it? o.O
"2. Armor reps repair slowly, very slowly and most of the time you'll die with a lot cap left."
OK, but then it sort of removes the first complaint, that is the high cap usage -- cap apparently isn't a problem. Now, if the problem is the armour repair rate, how comes there's been no complaints up to now how "omg armour repairers suck, i die before they work" ... and maybe if this is actual problem, it's time to start such thread as it'd benefit the very Zealot that's supposedly dying come next patch... along with every other armour tanker, i guess?
"3. Those Caldari/Minmatar ships also have the advantage of being able to EW + gank (mostly Caldari). We can't do that."
ok, but this is another issue altogether. You don't have any real defense against EW, but then adding another turret to your ship ain't going to make a difference here in the slightest -- if you get can of EW opened on your ship, you'll have 5 useless turrets instead of 4, same end effect ^^;;
|

Hobblin I
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:46:00 -
[27]
Originally by: j0sephine "1. Lasers eat lots of cap, despite the popluar belief Mega Pulse on a Geddon use more cap per second then Ions on a Megathron. That cap is taken out of what you can tank with and the more gank you go for the more cap your guns chew through."
Everyone has perpetual cap problems while trying to tank and shoot at once, though... it's hardly Amarr specialty. Everyone else deals with it by fitting the cap boosters. Wouldn't the same approach actually benefit the Amarr ships more than others, given they have more free cargo space to store the charges? ^^;
In addition, lowered number of damage mods that's now worthwile to stack means, cap usage for turrets is far lower than what full-out gank ship needs to run the turrets... isn't it? o.O
"2. Armor reps repair slowly, very slowly and most of the time you'll die with a lot cap left."
OK, but then it sort of removes the first complaint, that is the high cap usage -- cap apparently isn't a problem. Now, if the problem is the armour repair rate, how comes there's been no complaints up to now how "omg armour repairers suck, i die before they work" ... and maybe if this is actual problem, it's time to start such thread as it'd benefit the very Zealot that's supposedly dying come next patch... along with every other armour tanker, i guess?
"3. Those Caldari/Minmatar ships also have the advantage of being able to EW + gank (mostly Caldari). We can't do that."
ok, but this is another issue altogether. You don't have any real defense against EW, but then adding another turret to your ship ain't going to make a difference here in the slightest -- if you get can of EW opened on your ship, you'll have 5 useless turrets instead of 4, same end effect ^^;;
Wrong
|

BlackHawk177
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:48:00 -
[28]
WoW... That definatly needs to be fixed.
Either with the 5th turret slot or something else to boost the dps. There's no reason it should be doing almost 100dps less than a vagabond or Deimos.
Also the Cerb could use a little love, yea it can switch damage types but that's still really low.
Can we shoot them yet? |

j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:50:00 -
[29]
"Read the ops first post."
I did read it. It focuses on amount of damage dealt by ships, but makes no mention whatsoever about their defensive abilities... which means quite incomplete picture.
Overall, am surprised it boils down to "give us one more turret" when it's quite clear to me the Zealot would benefit far more from a nice drone bay -- then with selection of new drones the pilot would have choice if they want their mechanical slaves to provide them with nice repair ability, extra cap, extra damage or maybe EW of their own to cripple that annoying guy who tries to kill them.
But maybe flexibility isn't as cool as five lasers... o.O;
|

Hobblin I
|
Posted - 2005.12.03 06:53:00 -
[30]
The problem really is the lack of dps. We have a tanker whose dps ever other hac and decently tanked cruiser laughs at.
These other ships do more dps (or at par consideirng Cerb.. not sure about assault missiles), and have more versatility than the Zealot easily.
The Deimos is not versatile, but does WAY more DPS than a Zealot, the Ishtar is just overpowered. Vaga/Munin are good ships. Vaga is probably the most fun/survivable HAC in game.
On the other hand, we have a 1 trick Zealot whose trick has now been deemed not possible. Leaving it a weak dmg dealer, an average tanker. So the other hacs have ways to overcome the deficiencies... The Zealot does not.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |