Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
lone wolfman
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 13:43:00 -
[271] - Quote
also i do not know why people are worried about the HM being left behind. with these changes i think they are getting buffed. HM will still hit the target while rails/arty/beam won't.
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
324
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 14:50:00 -
[272] - Quote
lone wolfman wrote:also i do not know why people are worried about the HM being left behind. with these changes i think they are getting buffed. HM will still hit the target while rails/arty/beam won't.
As hard as a shart, but yeah.
HMLs are pretty underwhelming at the moment. |
Akturous
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
179
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 15:08:00 -
[273] - Quote
To the person asking about gleam, with gleam on that fit it is 8.5k optimal and the tracking is WORSE than a scorch pulse, post patch it gets even worse. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8 |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
324
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 16:36:00 -
[274] - Quote
Akturous wrote:To the person asking about gleam, with gleam on that fit it is 8.5k optimal and the tracking is WORSE than a scorch pulse, post patch it gets even worse.
I never bothered training beams over small. |
Aplier Shivra
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 17:07:00 -
[275] - Quote
So, I've seen this touched upon a little bit in the past 14 pages. It is looking like after this change, beams will be stepping on the territory of pulse's T2 ammo, while doing more dps with all other ammo types. Some quick numbers are showing beam's IN multifreq/gleam dps to be within just a few % of pulse's conflag, although that's with gleam still having worse tracking, but IN multifreq getting the same dps out to double the range. Looking at scorch, beam's IN xray will match it's range and be doing a bit over 10% more dps, or if that scorch pilot wanted more range and is using two tracking comps for it, beam's IN ultraviolet will still match the range and dps, and with those two tracking comps towards tracking speed will be able to track almost just as well.
However, for the pilots without T2 guns, the difference becomes huge the moment a pulse boat wants to do damage with any decent amount of range. Pulse would have to put in standard to match beam's multifreq optimal, but with beams doing 75% more damage at this range. Even against frigs that would be giving you some tracking problems at 15km beams still blow pulse's dps out of the water while being able to project out even farther much more easily. Because (scripted) tracking comps only give 15% optimal vs. 30% tracking, for every range-scripted TC the pulse boat tries to use to increase range, the beam boat can put that TC towards tracking and downgrade the ammo one step to have the same range.
I know there are many other factors to consider, and my head is going through them faster than I can type them. I do feel like this change for beams is a step in a good direction, but heavy-handed in the implementation. Short range weapons should not need to use to T2 ammo to hope of matching long range's dps against anything other than close, fast frigs.
My suggestion would be to reduce the numbers on rails to 15% damage, 7.5% RoF, -10% tracking, and beams to 15% damage, -5% tracking, (arties can stay as their proposed amounts). Instead take a closer look at T2 ammo choices as a point of balance between the gun types. I'm okay with beam's short range ammo matching pulse's for dps and range cause it will still have worse tracking, I'm not okay with their faction short range ammo matching that dps as well with twice the range, or for their T1 ammo out dpsing pulse's.
Perhaps even introduce a new mid range T2 ammo that can add another strategic option. For beams this could be a crystal with 10% reduced range, 85% reduced cap use, and damage between the T1 and navy Standard crystal. Arties could have one that has 10% reduced range, 50% reduced RoF (so it fires twice as fast), and 8 explosive/3 kin damage, which would translate to about 20% more dps than faction titanium sabot but much lower alpha and no tracking bonus, and still less dps than T1 fusion. Other things are possible, these are just some ideas for T2 ammo that can get the ball rolling. |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
2133
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 20:20:00 -
[276] - Quote
Will you fix the quad light beam lasers while you're at it? Their range is lower than the small turrets they're derived from. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |
Zarnak Wulf
In Exile. Imperial Outlaws.
1264
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 20:34:00 -
[277] - Quote
If I slap 250mm rails onto a Ferox, and load it with faction AM right now - I end up with 399 DPS at 31km + 19.5km of falloff. The Ferox has 80 - 100 DPS in drones after that. Unheated. Pushing 60k EHP.
Am I reading it right that medium Rails overall will get a 35% DPS buff? This buff would push the Ferox into 540 DPS territory before drones or overheating. It's a nice improvement - still not on par with the Naga but nice nonetheless. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
434
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 22:02:00 -
[278] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Will you fix the quad light beam lasers while you're at it? Their range is lower than the small turrets they're derived from. no they wont just like they wont fix the unused/overused ammo types |
Pinky Feldman
NO MOAR TEARS I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
555
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 22:29:00 -
[279] - Quote
Aplier Shivra wrote:So, I've seen this touched upon a little bit in the past 14 pages. It is looking like after this change, beams will be stepping on the territory of pulse's T2 ammo, while doing more dps with all other ammo types. Some quick numbers are showing beam's IN multifreq/gleam dps to be within just a few % of pulse's conflag, although that's with gleam still having worse tracking, but IN multifreq getting the same dps out to double the range. Looking at scorch, beam's IN xray will match it's range and be doing a bit over 10% more dps, or if that scorch pilot wanted more range and is using two tracking comps for it, beam's IN ultraviolet will still match the range and dps, and with those two tracking comps towards tracking speed will be able to track almost just as well.
However, for the pilots without T2 guns, the difference becomes huge the moment a pulse boat wants to do damage with any decent amount of range. Pulse would have to put in standard to match beam's multifreq optimal, but with beams doing 75% more damage at this range. Even against frigs that would be giving you some tracking problems at 15km beams still blow pulse's dps out of the water while being able to project out even farther much more easily. Because (scripted) tracking comps only give 15% optimal vs. 30% tracking, for every range-scripted TC the pulse boat tries to use to increase range, the beam boat can put that TC towards tracking and downgrade the ammo one step to have the same range.
I know there are many other factors to consider, and my head is going through them faster than I can type them. I do feel like this change for beams is a step in a good direction, but heavy-handed in the implementation. Short range weapons should not need to use to T2 ammo to hope of matching long range's dps against anything other than close, fast frigs.
My suggestion would be to reduce the numbers on rails to 15% damage, 7.5% RoF, -10% tracking, and beams to 15% damage, -5% tracking, (arties can stay as their proposed amounts). Instead take a closer look at T2 ammo choices as a point of balance between the gun types. I'm okay with beam's short range ammo matching pulse's for dps and range cause it will still have worse tracking, I'm not okay with their faction short range ammo matching that dps as well with twice the range, or for their T1 ammo out dpsing pulse's.
Perhaps even introduce a new mid range T2 ammo that can add another strategic option. For beams this could be a crystal with 10% reduced range, 85% reduced cap use, and damage between the T1 and navy Standard crystal. Arties could have one that has 10% reduced range, 50% reduced RoF (so it fires twice as fast), and 8 explosive/3 kin damage, which would translate to about 20% more dps than faction titanium sabot but much lower alpha and no tracking bonus, and still less dps than T1 fusion. Other things are possible, these are just some ideas for T2 ammo that can get the ball rolling.
Beams will continue to be irrelevant until they get a cap usage reduction. On a beam Nomen, every 10 seconds you've just used 10% of your cap to fire guns with no other mods being active. Adding a cap booster can help band-aid this, but the possibility of running out of cap charges before projectile/hybrid platforms run out of ammo is pretty bad.
Likewise, cap reduction to fire rigs do exist, but when you're dropping tank or gimping the fit for fitting mods because of the increased powergrid requirements, you're generally better off using something else.
The moar you cry the less you pee |
Akimo Heth
State War Academy Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 23:09:00 -
[280] - Quote
Pinky Feldman wrote:
Beams will continue to be irrelevant until they get a cap usage reduction. On a beam Nomen, every 10 seconds you've just used 10% of your cap to fire guns with no other mods being active. Adding a cap booster can help band-aid this, but the possibility of running out of cap charges before projectile/hybrid platforms run out of ammo is pretty bad.
Likewise, cap reduction to fire rigs do exist, but when you're dropping tank or gimping the fit for fitting mods because of the increased powergrid requirements, you're generally better off using something else.
Sadly the cap reduction and fitting made to the large beams didn't trickle down to medium and small. Until then there's little reason to use anything other than Scorch....hmm roughly same dps out to Scorch range, enough range for almost all purposes, and better tracking....I'm listening....but also half the fitting and cap usage? |
|
Large Collidable Object
morons.
2153
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 23:30:00 -
[281] - Quote
As a matter of fact, I'd like to see them have a 33% AB speed bonus instead of the 50% MWD sig reduction bonus - something I would have preferred for assault frigs in the first place.
Of course after their base speeds have been adjusted to their T1 counterparts. You know... morons. |
Foxyfloofs
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.23 23:37:00 -
[282] - Quote
What a great change! Maybe the diemost can be used like normal ahac after this. Shield-rail vigilant anyone? |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
367
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 00:02:00 -
[283] - Quote
CCP Rise
its funny if you look at the tracking of medium Rails as they are currently they still don't track aswell as gardes or bouncers and you are going to nerf the tracking of rails further as you believe the tracking is too good ... so you must believe gardes and bouncers tracking is also too good... Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Gul Amarr
Orange County Cruisers
19
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 00:03:00 -
[284] - Quote
Anything worthwhile I can do with a Sac I couldn't do with a Drake at 1/3 the cost?
No?
Thought so... |
TekGnosis
Rules of Acquisition Acquisition Of Empire
19
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 00:20:00 -
[285] - Quote
Eeeeh, so my initial instinct.... WTF can I haz my HML back??? Now even Arty does better deepz. Getting applied damage with HML is pretty hard vs especially all the speed buffed (well everything).
Nerfing rail tracking after buffing them last patch seems... *sigh*
|
Akturous
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
180
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 00:47:00 -
[286] - Quote
The thing is, the useful engagement range of most laser ships is covered with scorch and scorch has better tracking than Gleam (the high tracking ammo), not to mention when you switch to MF in pulses your tracking damage goes way up.
I think Beams (all sizes, but especially meds) need an optimal boost (indeed med rails and arty could certainly use one). Since their tracking is worse than scorch, I should be able to use MF in an equivalent size beam and get the same optimal as a scorch pulse. That would increase the damage, but still have much worse tracking which is fine.
They certainly need a cap use and fitting reduction, though I'd much prefer to see the amarr ships be given lots of extra cap and fitting, that would lend some creativity to its uses. Tachyons might as well be called Oracle laser beams, since it's the only ship that fits them effectively.
TekGnosis wrote: Eeeeh, so my initial instinct.... WTF can I haz my HML back??? Now even Arty does better deepz. Getting applied damage with HML is pretty hard vs especially all the speed buffed (well everything).
Nerfing rail tracking after buffing them last patch seems... *sigh*
They also nerfed artillery tracking. Rail damage projection will be pretty damn good, though I think the tracking nerf was a bit heavy. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8 |
Ellariona
Bite Me inc Bitten.
147
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 01:14:00 -
[287] - Quote
Marcel Devereux wrote:Let's go over the rails checklist.
Shield ships: Tank - check, Speed - check, Range - check, Tracking - check, DPS - check. Done ship it!
Armor ships: Tank - not if you want to fit the guns, Speed - not if you want a tank, Range - checkish, Tracking - not if you want range, DPS - not if you want that tank, but then again if you wanted a tank you can't fit the guns. Ship it? Sure why not. CCP Rise pities the fool that flies armor.
When are we going to see Armor 2.0?
Let me correct that for you:
Shield ships: Tank - depends on ewar/utility/dualprop/etc, Speed - depends on ewar/utility/dualprop/etc, Range - either that or nanos, which works, Tracking - either that or nanos, which works, DPS - check.
Armor ships: Tank - depends on dps/speed, Speed - depends on dps/tank, Range - depends on ewar/utility/speed/tank/dps/race/ammo/ Tracking - "not if you want range" (If you have range/speed, why would you need tracking?), DPS - with blasters and pulses being most popular here, can't complain: check!
As you can see, in terms of EFT-warrioring and theorycrafting, there's not a big gap between armor ships and shield ships. Choices need to be made and it appears as if you don't like making them. If it were the case that one type of tank would be far better than the other, as you implied with your post, noone would fly the other, bad type.
Popular examples of how armor/shield choice is pretty negligible: - Both armor canes and shield drakes (lol, imagine armor drakes) have been popular ships for ages. - Both armor and shield T3s have been used for a while now in W-space. If anything, armor is more popular here. - Both plates and shield extenders are popular items on the market, among other tank mods. - With nanite reps, the armor vexor is popular again (as far as I've seen in high/low). - Both armor and shield doctrines are used widely in all security zones. - Plenty of 'hybrid' ships, able to fit both armortanks and shieldtanks, are being flown with either tank on them, proving that each kind of fit serves a good purpose for at least something. So, I can't imagine one of them being better in a general sense. Who are we kidding here, there is no 'general sense' in PVP.
So you see, it's hardly done, but ship it anyway, EVE will always be a work in progress. If you halt that progress, you're not helping anybody. You need to change stuff to see what is better and what is worse in such complex systems like internet spaceship warfare. To wine about buffs and nerfs is ridiculous, to supply the CSM and devs and features & ideas forum with tweaks, improvements and suggestions or ideas is the way to go. This is not a wine-thread, it's a constructive, productive feedback medium.
On the OP,
Only thing I'm worried about is that certain type guns will remain unused, because the changes are too broadly implemented. As another player pointed out already, there's certain sizes and types that really aren't viable in combat compared to their neighboring sizes or other race mediums.
Anyone can see what size/type guns we are talking about by just looking at the ingame compare tool and using a spreadsheet software graph to visualize the data. I suggest the devs look into that further instead of looking at the whole range and trying to implement a quick solution for all medium type guns. Just as the speed nerf (remember, the big one, with nano rework and ceptors nerf and shizzle, couple years back),
I think it might be handy to have some sort of visual representation of all the guns, from small to capital, with all their stats and types sorted properly. (gimme some time, working on it myself, let's see where the outliers are) |
Chessur
Life of lively full life thx to shield battery
132
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 01:34:00 -
[288] - Quote
The changes look ok, but currently you need to make the fitting much easier. So many ships cannot fight these guns with out hugely compromising tank / cap. In order for these guns to be used seriously in PvP fitting requirements need to be lowered- massively. |
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
122
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 08:42:00 -
[289] - Quote
Aplier Shivra wrote:I know there are many other factors to consider, and my head is going through them faster than I can type them. I do feel like this change for beams is a step in a good direction, but heavy-handed in the implementation. Short range weapons should not need to use to T2 ammo to hope of matching long range's dps against anything other than close, fast frigs. You underestimate just how significant tracking can be.
Taking a Zealot for example. With current beams (before the tracking nerf) - if it is moving at base speed ~250m/s, flying with transversal to a stationary zealot and firing with multifrequency it will not be getting clean hits until it's ~15km away. Any closer and it loses a huge amount of dps.
Even if paper dps is the same, Pulse lasers will still definitely be used on brawling setups. This change is going to put some variation into the weapon fitting which is going to be awesome!
You won't need to worry about every laser ship you encounter once these changes hit being ranged beam fit. In the event you find people like this, get up close and they won't hit you :) |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1174
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 09:00:00 -
[290] - Quote
The omen really is a piece of ****..
After the changes with beam lasers you can get decent dps if you can settle for.
Using one of your very valuable three mid slots for a cap booster.
Fitting a 10 mill ACR
Only marginally outperforming a scorch omen in raw dps numbers (While losing in actual applied dps)
Ohh and then there is the tank. You can get about 14k ehp out of it really... You can't use a big plate because of speed/fittings, you can't use buffer/res armor rigs because it will slow you down too much and you can't active tank it because you don't have the fittings or cap for it.
Honestly why does it seem like all amarr laser boats have several different features that are literally working against each other?
I mean for fucks sake it has a bonus for its capacitor.. And then a ******* bonus that increases its cap use.. what the actual ****?
I think pretty much the only sub BS Amarr laser hull that isn't a complete disaster is the navy aug because it actually has a slot layout that compliments lasers and armor tanking instead of punishing it. Seriously the whole sub BS amarr laser line needs a complete overhaul. The problem isn't just lasers, its poorly designed ships. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
|
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1017
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 10:36:00 -
[291] - Quote
Mr Floydy wrote:Aplier Shivra wrote:I know there are many other factors to consider, and my head is going through them faster than I can type them. I do feel like this change for beams is a step in a good direction, but heavy-handed in the implementation. Short range weapons should not need to use to T2 ammo to hope of matching long range's dps against anything other than close, fast frigs. You underestimate just how significant tracking can be. Taking a Zealot for example. With current beams (before the tracking nerf) - if it is moving at base speed ~250m/s, flying with transversal to a stationary zealot and firing with multifrequency it will not be getting clean hits until it's ~15km away. Any closer and it loses a huge amount of dps. Even if paper dps is the same, Pulse lasers will still definitely be used on brawling setups. This change is going to put some variation into the weapon fitting which is going to be awesome! You won't need to worry about every laser ship you encounter once these changes hit being ranged beam fit. In the event you find people like this, get up close and they won't hit you :)
Fit TE+TC script OP range and hit with pulses at beams range with better tracking and alpha/dps *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Tribal Band
327
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 15:41:00 -
[292] - Quote
Omens are fine. Lrn2pvp Free Ripley Weaver! |
Gnoshia
Section 8. Fatal Ascension
53
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 16:21:00 -
[293] - Quote
lone wolfman wrote:also i do not know why people are worried about the HM being left behind. with these changes i think they are getting buffed. HM will still hit the target while rails/arty/beam won't.
As someone has already pointed out, HMLs aren't where they should be. Most people don't use them in either PvP or PvE.
They got nerfed to heavily me thinks. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1179
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 16:39:00 -
[294] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Omens are fine. Lrn2pvp
If by fine you mean worse at its given job than all other cruisers, sure. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1018
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 23:24:00 -
[295] - Quote
Gnoshia wrote:lone wolfman wrote:also i do not know why people are worried about the HM being left behind. with these changes i think they are getting buffed. HM will still hit the target while rails/arty/beam won't.
As someone has already pointed out, HMLs aren't where they should be. Most people don't use them in either PvP or PvE. They got nerfed to heavily me thinks.
Thing is most dudes will argue medium turrets are worst, and they're right but with a smaller distinction: Medium LR atm are total crap, HM's just crappy but can compete with those but after buffs? no way in hell I'm about to see HM's get arty alpha (over 6K) AND distance (140km with RF TS arty cane is easy to achieve) HM's will need at least -15% rof to catch medium LR turrets or 20% dmg increase for a start then tweak if needed.
Also: tracking on hybrids thrown away is such a silly idea... *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Rikimaru Ichikawa
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 00:14:00 -
[296] - Quote
Deacon Abox wrote:What about optimal on Beams? They have the same optimal as Arty, but arty get more falloff. And Arty have volley advantage. All beams need an optimal buff imo. You could take away a little something to compensate if you must (tracking, dps, whatever) but right now they are the worst at range of all long range weapon platforms. Which makes no sense as they are a friggin beam of light in a vacuum. Agreed. |
Akimo Heth
State War Academy Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 00:43:00 -
[297] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Gnoshia wrote:lone wolfman wrote:also i do not know why people are worried about the HM being left behind. with these changes i think they are getting buffed. HM will still hit the target while rails/arty/beam won't.
As someone has already pointed out, HMLs aren't where they should be. Most people don't use them in either PvP or PvE. They got nerfed to heavily me thinks. Thing is most dudes will argue medium turrets are worst, and they're right but with a smaller distinction: Medium LR atm are total crap, HM's just crappy but can compete with those but after buffs? no way in hell I'm about to see HM's get arty alpha (over 6K) AND distance (140km with RF TS arty cane is easy to achieve) HM's will need at least -15% rof to catch medium LR turrets or 20% dmg increase for a start then tweak if needed. Also: tracking on hybrids thrown away is such a silly idea...
Saying HM's shouldn't get at least a small piece of this overall buff is like saying they're currently 30+% better (the size of the rail buff) than the other LR weapons. They're not as useless as other LR medium weapons but 30+% better? No way. |
Oberus MacKenzie
Shadows Of The Federation Drunk 'n' Disorderly
12
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 01:11:00 -
[298] - Quote
Great stat balances, but in my honest opinion the tracking penalty on long range turret ammo is still a problem. Maybe 50% or 60% instead. A 75% tracking penalty makes it so you can't ever track frigates, even from max range.
I like these changes but they really make heavy missiles obsolete. Nobody uses them right now because of how absolutely terrible they became after the nerf, and these changes will make them even worse. The list of caldari ships that are worth using in PvP is extremely short and only getting shorter. ECM got a huge kick in the teeth, the drake is practically useless now, the tengu got neutered and caldari HACs aren't getting the love they need to be functional. If I could get the skillpoints refunded that I spent on caldari, missiles and ECM I would do it in a heartbeat. They are becoming more and more worthless with every patch. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1181
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 01:22:00 -
[299] - Quote
Oberus MacKenzie wrote:Great stat balances, but in my honest opinion the tracking penalty on long range turret ammo is still a problem. Maybe 50% or 60% instead. A 75% tracking penalty makes it so you can't ever track frigates, even from max range.
I like these changes but they really make heavy missiles obsolete. Nobody uses them right now because of how absolutely terrible they became after the nerf, and these changes will make them even worse. The list of caldari ships that are worth using in PvP is extremely short and only getting shorter. ECM got a huge kick in the teeth, the drake is practically useless now, the tengu got neutered and caldari HACs aren't getting the love they need to be functional. If I could get the skillpoints refunded that I spent on caldari, missiles and ECM I would do it in a heartbeat. They are becoming more and more worthless with every patch.
More like double the penalty on short range (gun) ammo. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1019
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 10:18:00 -
[300] - Quote
Akimo Heth wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Gnoshia wrote:lone wolfman wrote:also i do not know why people are worried about the HM being left behind. with these changes i think they are getting buffed. HM will still hit the target while rails/arty/beam won't.
As someone has already pointed out, HMLs aren't where they should be. Most people don't use them in either PvP or PvE. They got nerfed to heavily me thinks. Thing is most dudes will argue medium turrets are worst, and they're right but with a smaller distinction: Medium LR atm are total crap, HM's just crappy but can compete with those but after buffs? no way in hell I'm about to see HM's get arty alpha (over 6K) AND distance (140km with RF TS arty cane is easy to achieve) HM's will need at least -15% rof to catch medium LR turrets or 20% dmg increase for a start then tweak if needed. Also: tracking on hybrids thrown away is such a silly idea... Saying HM's shouldn't get at least a small piece of this overall buff is like saying they're currently 30+% better (the size of the rail buff) than the other LR weapons. They're not as useless as other LR medium weapons but 30+% better? No way.
Let me spell it again, I'm not English native so you'll excuse my bad English.
Currently HM's are absolutely worthless, I'm not saying or comparing them to medium turrets other than arty because those are the only ones actually working rather well, so, at current state HM's are indeed absolutely crap.
Now if you want to compare current HM's with current rails/beam to say those are ok then you're doing it wrong all down the hill, if you want to see how bad a weapon system is you don't compare it with the truly horrible ones but with the only one worth :arties: and you will quickly figure out HM's are indeed nerf to hell and only then yes, you can get rails and beam to the ring and figure out how much of a bad joke those are.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |