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) |

Akimo Heth
State War Academy Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 11:58:00 -
[151] - Quote
The Djego wrote:The damage buff is far to massive, there will be little reason at all to use blasters and auto cannons with this numbers outside solo pvp, the only saving grace of puls is that beams are nearly unfit able on everything except the Harbinger, Zealot and Absolution and puls got scorch ammo.
The major issue of medium rails is the lack of tracking in combination with fast movement at 18-28km kitting ranges and that caldari hulls lack the effective turrets(gallente hulls with drones + rails already get ok damage on paper). The reason why small rails work is that they are used within web range and large rails are used on hulls with a lot of tracking mods or at far higher ranges. Damage is not the source of the problem with medium rails(at least on gallente hulls), it is damage application and all you gain by this change is wrecking medium blasters and auto cannons.
Great points on medium beams, it is still far easier to just fit pulse scorch and save the ass ache of trying to make a beam fit work with the PG fitting and cap use. |

Silver Getsuga
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 12:55:00 -
[152] - Quote
Tobias Hareka wrote:Silver Getsuga wrote:Not saying they're. But they look weak in particular case. Low sig (up to and including cruisers) fast ( >500 m/s) ships that swarm L3s. On paper mid-to-long range turrets on a kiting ship look better than heavy missiles.
Even with precision missiles. _Right now_ precision missiles on slow (<300 m/s) targets look about the same as rails. Post buff rails will do ~33% better. Range wise rails do better too.
That makes Drake look bad. It'll not be effective in L3s (due to dps) and L4s (due to tank/damage trade off). Maybe some kind of damage application bonus would do in theory (instead of range bonus, since drake have enough tank for L3s). Or players can adapt with HAMs.
But you don't have to believe me. Play with DPS windows in EFT. I could be wrong. Tank and dps is fine for level 3 missions. Tank should be enough for Guristas level 4s. [Drake, L3 Active PvE Drake] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Internal Force Field Array I 10MN Afterburner II Medium Shield Booster II Kinetic Deflection Field II Kinetic Deflection Field II Thermic Dissipation Field II Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Medium Processor Overclocking Unit I Medium Warhead Rigor Catalyst I Medium Warhead Flare Catalyst I
Are you really using navy ammo for L3s?
Anyway let me show you a DPS graph:
Target is 418 m/s Caracal moving towards us on an angle. So rails wouldn't look too awesome.
Drake and Ferox fighting with 5 Hobgoblins II.
As you can see navy ammo aside Ferox beats Drake on that target @ 10 km or more. Navy ammo closes the gap but still Ferox looks better 20-45km.
If you remove angular velocity (since frigates and cruisers in L3s don't spiral you much) Ferox will be better up to 52 km
http://imgur.com/vHYSbf2 |

Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
117
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 13:05:00 -
[153] - Quote
Jacob Holland wrote:CCP Rise wrote: Medium Rails (all sizes and metas): +15% Rate of Fire +15% Damage Multiplier -15% Tracking Speed
Corresponing cap use reduction? At present an Omen with Heavy Beams will burn about 10.5 GJ per shot while a Thorax with 250mm Rails burns 10. (According to the values listed in the EVElopedia). The base ROF on the two turrets is the same 6s (the Omen than has an ROF bonus of course). The ROF gain of new rails puts a significant, additional cap pressure on the ships using them - pushing them closer to Lasers with ammo use...
Not sure where those numbers are coming from? Guessing Evelopedia is massively out of date.
Comparing an Omen (multifreq) and Thorax (antimatter) as above with level 5 skills. (So you get the 50% cap bonus on the Omen) Each laser on the Omen uses over 8 cap per shot. Their cycle time is 3.24 seconds. 2.47 cap per second per gun The Thorax guns use 5.25 cap per shot, with a cycle time of 4.6 seconds. 1.14 cap per second per gun.
Even with the Rate of fire change on the rails they aren't even going to be close to the cap usage of Beam lasers - and that's on a ship with a cap usage bonus. BTW - thorax has near enough the same sized cap as an Omen :)
On a Maller - 16.25 cap per volley, cycle time of 4.32. That's 3.76 cap per second per gun.
Now this isn't a whining about cap usage post, I just wanted to point out that Rails aren't even the same league as Beams for using cap! |

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
324
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 13:18:00 -
[154] - Quote
Does anybody else think this should be the order of alpha to dps?
-Heavy Missiles -Beams -Arties -Rails
why? - missiles .. well think nukes .. also useful for reducing lag
-Beams ... well big beams laser tearing through your ship it should hurt.. and would take time for the heat to dissipate for another shot .. also lasers aplha is low atm and they use A LOT of cap.
-Arites .. are like little missiles
-Rails .. are basically a swarm of bullets 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. |

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
984
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 13:20:00 -
[155] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Windman Advena wrote:Rails and Beams DPS will be about 40% better then Artillery DPS. Give Artillery 20% RoF bonus. Artillery DPS will be still 25% less then Beam or Rails DPS When you get 6k alpha out of a T2 arty fit you get about 2.5 from a dps fit with other guns and alpha > to DPS everyday, if you can't kill it with a single volley bring more arties. Those are already the reason why beams and rails are total crap atm. Just shut up please. Alpha is NOT > DPS every day. Alpha is > DPS only if ALpha is high enough to kill the enemy. When you are fightign larger ships.. DPS >>>>> ALPHA.
I'm pretty sure you either misunderstood the "thing" or don't understand at all how alpha works.
Fit a instant arty cane and shoot T2 destroyers with to see them pop under a single shot, now do the same thing with your uber rails or beams and watch your target gtfo and laugh at you.
The only way to kill the same destroyer with those 2 guns other than alpha is when the target stays enough time for you to cycle several times your guns which they shouldn't aloud you to, on the other hand a single volley means instant kill
Again instead of EFT spewing numbers this is about experience and I have yet to see any rails or beams battlecruiser one shot T2 destroyers with 6k ehp or blow in two shots faction frigates at 140km like arty can do (if you can't do this you need to learn how)
Now if you're talking about structure shooting crap with bazillions EHP or capital ships DPS guns or faster ROF guns will be superior ONLY because smaller volley rails/beams will catch arty dps after a couple shots, non the less, is something can be killed with 2 or 3 arty volleys arties will be superior at use in this case every time.
After latest rails changes and some ships bonus changes Rails got a nice buff but still, RAILS&BEAMS need to cycle a couple times to catch up same dmg you can put with arties in a single volley, it's that simple.
Now you can stfu yourself and return under your bridge.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
484
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 13:22:00 -
[156] - Quote
Akimo Heth wrote:The Djego wrote:The damage buff is far to massive, there will be little reason at all to use blasters and auto cannons with this numbers outside solo pvp, the only saving grace of puls is that beams are nearly unfit able on everything except the Harbinger, Zealot and Absolution and puls got scorch ammo.
The major issue of medium rails is the lack of tracking in combination with fast movement at 18-28km kitting ranges and that caldari hulls lack the effective turrets(gallente hulls with drones + rails already get ok damage on paper). The reason why small rails work is that they are used within web range and large rails are used on hulls with a lot of tracking mods or at far higher ranges. Damage is not the source of the problem with medium rails(at least on gallente hulls), it is damage application and all you gain by this change is wrecking medium blasters and auto cannons. Great points on medium beams, it is still far easier to just fit pulse scorch and save the ass ache of trying to make a beam fit work with the PG fitting and cap use.
Especially when you consider the ramifications of having to put a PG mod in a lowslot instead of a heat sink as a result.
In that case, it's still Pulse >>> Beams.
The range, I presume, cannot change all that much without causing balance issues. So the solution lies in the fitting requirements and cap use. But then, I've had this argument all before. At least Bouh hasn't popped up yet to scream about how you can't buff beams at all ever. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
984
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 13:34:00 -
[157] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Akimo Heth wrote:The Djego wrote:The damage buff is far to massive, there will be little reason at all to use blasters and auto cannons with this numbers outside solo pvp, the only saving grace of puls is that beams are nearly unfit able on everything except the Harbinger, Zealot and Absolution and puls got scorch ammo.
The major issue of medium rails is the lack of tracking in combination with fast movement at 18-28km kitting ranges and that caldari hulls lack the effective turrets(gallente hulls with drones + rails already get ok damage on paper). The reason why small rails work is that they are used within web range and large rails are used on hulls with a lot of tracking mods or at far higher ranges. Damage is not the source of the problem with medium rails(at least on gallente hulls), it is damage application and all you gain by this change is wrecking medium blasters and auto cannons. Great points on medium beams, it is still far easier to just fit pulse scorch and save the ass ache of trying to make a beam fit work with the PG fitting and cap use. Especially when you consider the ramifications of having to put a PG mod in a lowslot instead of a heat sink as a result. In that case, it's still Pulse >>> Beams. The range, I presume, cannot change all that much without causing balance issues. So the solution lies in the fitting requirements and cap use. But then, I've had this argument all before. At least Bouh hasn't popped up yet to scream about how you can't buff beams at all ever.
And these changes aren't making LR weapon HACs any better or better choice than ABCs but they will have some uses.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
485
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 13:38:00 -
[158] - Quote
Quote:And these changes aren't making LR weapon HACs any better or better choice than ABCs but they will have some uses.
HACs, on their own? Maybe, maybe not. But they are still the pre-alpha, the starting point for discussion, as Rise mentioned. Hence why this discussion is so important. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |

Kenneth Skybound
Solarii Assault Squad Solarii Federation
63
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 13:45:00 -
[159] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Windman Advena wrote:Rails and Beams DPS will be about 40% better then Artillery DPS. Give Artillery 20% RoF bonus. Artillery DPS will be still 25% less then Beam or Rails DPS When you get 6k alpha out of a T2 arty fit you get about 2.5 from a dps fit with other guns and alpha > to DPS everyday, if you can't kill it with a single volley bring more arties. Those are already the reason why beams and rails are total crap atm. Just shut up please. Alpha is NOT > DPS every day. Alpha is > DPS only if ALpha is high enough to kill the enemy. When you are fightign larger ships.. DPS >>>>> ALPHA.
I think you are forgetting arty is more than just dps. It has variable damage type and no cap usage. That's why it has such low dps in comparison, because it can choose how to shoot, isn't shut down by cap issues AND has alpha.
Against an omni tank out of neut range which survives volley? Yes, it is weaker. But then we don't want homogenized weapons, right? |

Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Gank for Profit
42
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 14:03:00 -
[160] - Quote
so why do med rails have less tracking then med arty? do you plan on changing that for all sizes? Quote CCP Fozzie: ... The days of balance and forget are over.
|

Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
328
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 14:09:00 -
[161] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote:so why do med rails have less tracking then med arty? do you plan on changing that for all sizes?
also shield rail brutix now does more dps then armor blaster one \o/
really thats crazy i assume blasters with 2 mags against Rails with 3 mags? 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. |

Schmell
Russian Thunder Squad Darkness of Despair
37
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 14:16:00 -
[162] - Quote
The funny thing is that still with worst tracking, med rails will in some cases outperform all available medium sized gun types |

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
984
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 14:19:00 -
[163] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Quote:And these changes aren't making LR weapon HACs any better or better choice than ABCs but they will have some uses. HACs, on their own? Maybe, maybe not. But they are still the pre-alpha, the starting point for discussion, as Rise mentioned. Hence why this discussion is so important.
Indeed but for what we can read all around everyone has his version of what HACs/SACs are meant to be, which clearly demonstrates ther is no real defined role for T2 assault cruisers in between T1 versions and ABC's, meanwhile HAC/SAC are supposed to be SPECIALIZED ships.
My question after T1 cruisers rebalance, after ABCs rebalance is, and legitimate I think: what are HAC/SAC supposed to be specialized at? Being expensive with no real benefit over T1 versions nor good enough to compete with ABC's? -what's the point?
Of course this is only my version and vision of HAC's/SAC's but ihmo for a very specialized ship they need to get the special role they're meant to and most important the tools to achieve their task:
-be dam fast with a nasty small signature and tank (via resist profile), 0 sign bloom when MWD or change bonus to 100% AB speed eventually even bigger to catch MWD speeds
-deliver average 650dps at least (BC dps for a T2 specialized cruiser isn't OP) with in disruption/web range without requiring additional range modules
-get a 3rd rig slot !! this is clearly important and there's no reason they shouldn't have it to increase the interest over T1's
With these changes the natural way to balance those bonus is to force those ships to resist profile tank rather than buffer
->very small signature with good speed and nasty resist profile and only after------->DPS
Only my opinion of course *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |

I'm Down
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
169
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 14:50:00 -
[164] - Quote
All the issues brought up in this thread by this "balance" are exactly why you have to hit the tracking formula.
You simply cannot keep tweaking damage because at some point, you paint yourself into a corner.
Quote:Rails that have worse tracking than artilleries Rails that have better dps than blasters or pulses. Beam Legions and Proteus that have near broken dps statistics. Missile nerfs coming back to haunt you.
You can't continue down this road. Please just enhance the tracking formula to create balance within gun classes by varying the ranges they excel.
It's so simple:
Create a % modifier on all guns that affects Sig Resolution at range. Create higher modifiers for Artilleries and Pulse.
Create medium modifiers for Autocannons and Beams.
Create Low modifiers for blasters and Rails.
This way, you create zones of engagement where everything performs better than others. Rails now have tracking modified advantages at longer ranges and you can change range ammo to help also account for this. But nerf their tracking in close due to this modifier being built in for range engagements only.
Autocannons get a medium Modifier because they have falloff already affect them at range. This also means you can return them to pre TE nerf ranges so that they get more range, but bigger drop offs. I see pulses and beam balance in that pulses have higher tracking, beams have higher range potential, but both excel in mid ranges. Ultimately it's a tradeoff of which side is needed more. Beams might actually get a slightly higher advantage in modified tracking due to sig after 50km in this area so that pulses can't dominate the field always.
Make pulses and artilleries have high falloffs so that pulses don't have huge advantages at range over any other weapon system and Artlleries still thump, but struggle at any range to actually project their damage.
It's the best option for balance for guns because it creates zones of variation where everything excels and damage is no longer a factor so much as tactics are. It also creates a need for the return of a variety of ships rather than uniform fleet concepts.
Then all you have to do is fix drones and Sentry carriers and wham.... weapon balance. No more stat tweaking, and more options for ship diversity.
JUST think, this opens up the door so that HACs can actually excel somewhere that ABCs cannot. |

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
290
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 15:10:00 -
[165] - Quote
I was just EFTing, and you cannot fit an 800mm plate thorax with 200mm rails without investing in an ACR or some implants. It's the same for an 800mm plated 250mm rail deimos. Also, this falloff bonus is stupid for railguns, adds less and less as you go up the ranges. Should switch all gallente range bonuses to optimal, then make blasters more optimally than falloffy. |

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
985
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 15:21:00 -
[166] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:I was just EFTing, and you cannot fit an 800mm plate thorax with 200mm rails without investing in an ACR or some implants. It's the same for an 800mm plated 250mm rail deimos. Also, this falloff bonus is stupid for railguns, adds less and less as you go up the ranges. Should switch all gallente range bonuses to optimal, then make blasters more optimally than falloffy.
I can't completely agree with you because the dps potential with hybrids in fall off is clearly the best while increasing optimal would make them beams alike and wouldn't change much for blaster pilots the simple fact they are in scram web range to do any interesting dmg except large blasters being at the right spot. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |

CannonFodder82
The Vo'Shun
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 15:46:00 -
[167] - Quote
i have sat and read this whole thread, im sitting here wondering if some of these people are playing the same game i am |

Blastcaps Madullier
Celestial Horizon Corp. ROFL Citizens
96
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 15:54:00 -
[168] - Quote
plenty have said since the last hybrid rebalance that the damage on medium rails needed looking at again, all can say is about bloody time :) |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
485
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 16:17:00 -
[169] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Quote:And these changes aren't making LR weapon HACs any better or better choice than ABCs but they will have some uses. HACs, on their own? Maybe, maybe not. But they are still the pre-alpha, the starting point for discussion, as Rise mentioned. Hence why this discussion is so important. Indeed but for what we can read all around everyone has his version of what HACs/SACs are meant to be, which clearly demonstrates ther is no real defined role for T2 assault cruisers in between T1 versions and ABC's, meanwhile HAC/SAC are supposed to be SPECIALIZED ships. My question after T1 cruisers rebalance, after ABCs rebalance is, and legitimate I think: what are AHAC/SHAC supposed to be specialized at? Being expensive with no real benefit over T1 versions nor good enough to compete with ABC's? -what's the point? Of course this is only my version and vision of AHAC's/SHAC's but ihmo for a very specialized ship they need to get the special role they're meant to and most important the tools to achieve their task: -be dam fast with a nasty small signature and tank (via resist profile), 0 sign bloom when MWD or change bonus to 100% AB speed eventually even bigger to catch MWD speeds -deliver average 650dps at least (BC dps for a T2 specialized cruiser isn't OP) with in disruption/web range without requiring additional range modules -get a 3rd rig slot !! this is clearly important and there's no reason they shouldn't have it to increase the interest over T1's With these changes the natural way to balance those bonus is to force those ships to resist profile tank rather than buffer ->very small signature with good speed and nasty resist profile and only after------->DPS Only my opinion of course
I'd have to say, my own analysis led to this conclusion as well. Hictors pretty much have the "tank" aspect covered, while ABCs have an unreachable monopoly on range and kiting. Range and kiting were pretty much what the HACs, at least the Zealot, which was the best one, used to do.
So, we cannot allow a ~60 mil isk ship with far fewer SP requirements to just outright invalidate an entire T2 ship class.
Thus, the niche that remains, is high dps close range tackling, with above average resiliency thanks to their high resist profile. Which is the direction I see them moving towards. I'd honestly say they aren't there yet, though.
We might consider tweaking their cost, because whether CCP likes it or not, to the players, cost is a factor. If I can buy 30+ Thorax for the price of a Deimos (even if it was any good), then you best believe I will buy up the Thoraxes instead. I'm not alone among players who enjoy cost effectiveness, and view it as a power all of it's own. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |

Zimmy Zeta
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
25231
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 16:25:00 -
[170] - Quote
Urkhan Law wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Windman Advena wrote:Rails and Beams DPS will be about 40% better then Artillery DPS. When you get 6k alpha out of a T2 arty fit you get about 2.5 from a dps fit with other guns and alpha > to DPS everyday When you are fightign larger ships.. DPS >>>>> ALPHA. How medium arties are used at the moment, Lokis? Hurricanes? Aren't they been used in a sort of "niche" combat only (certain fleet types in certain conditions) ? It's an honest question, I only fly frigs (and badly), I really don't know the current application/meta of medium arties. If one day I decide to upgrade to cruisers (solo - small gang low sec roamer), I really can't see why should I use them.
Bomber defense for larger fleets, mainly.
Just think of how bad an average post by me is, and then realize half of them are even worse |

Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Gank for Profit
42
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 16:31:00 -
[171] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Crazy KSK wrote:so why do med rails have less tracking then med arty? do you plan on changing that for all sizes?
also shield rail brutix now does more dps then armor blaster one \o/ really thats crazy i assume blasters with 2 mags against Rails with 3 mags?
4 mag stabs actually( 706vs679) with 3 its( 667vs679) 12dps less then the blaster one
Brutix, 250s shield_buffer wrote: [Brutix, 250s shield_buffer] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Damage Control II
Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Warp Disruptor II
NEW 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M NEW 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M NEW 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M NEW 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M NEW 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M NEW 250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M [empty high slot]
Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Hammerhead II x5
Brutix, mixed_blasters higher_tank armor_buffer wrote: [Brutix, mixed_blasters higher_tank armor_buffer] Damage Control II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates II
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I
Heavy Ion Blaster II, Void M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Void M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Void M Heavy Ion Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M [empty high slot]
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Hammerhead II x5
PS: full ion brutix need 1%gp implant and I don't like opening that can of worms that's why it looks like that Quote CCP Fozzie: ... The days of balance and forget are over.
|

Shahai Shintaro
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry Templis Dragonaors
35
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 16:47:00 -
[172] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote: Also, this falloff bonus is stupid for railguns, adds less and less as you go up the ranges. Should switch all gallente range bonuses to optimal, then make blasters more optimally than falloffy.
I think that's the point and the difference between a gallente hybrid boat and a Caldari one. The gallente boat is designed to be strapped with blasters hence falloff and tracking bonuses while the Caldari boats are designed for rails and hence get optimal bonuses |

Catherine Laartii
Khanid Regional Directorate
23
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 17:18:00 -
[173] - Quote
When are you fixing Quad Light Beam Lasers? The damage buff to them is nice, but they really need to be made a pulse laser, or given quite a bit more tracking to have them viable as close-range weapons, since they're basically blaster-range lasers WITHOUT the latter's tracking. :( |

Max Zerg
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 17:49:00 -
[174] - Quote
Dear CCP Rise,
being rather noob Gallente pilot i can speak only about Rails
1) they are not of any use when fast enemy ships are closer than 15-18 km what distances they would be useful after reballancing ?
2) +15% ROF for me means -15% capacitor recharge rate, am i corrrect? this would result in using Vexors as pure dorone boats with no guns Myrmidons may use projectiles. What do you think about cap stable PVE Vexor? How do i fit rails to Vexor ? Requirements to learn Capacitor skills and Controlled Bursts to 5 and plug in +5 Control Bursts slot 10 implnat are somewhat tough for newb, aren't they ? So what about newbie PVE Vexor's pilots, any ideas, please?
( i realize that with your "ALL 5" you do not think about noobs, this is why i'd like to remind you about the difficulties new players may experience with lack of capacitor for "upgraded" railguns )
Thanks |

Merii Kha'sen
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 17:51:00 -
[175] - Quote
Given this buff, Heavy Missiles also need to be brought back in line with the long range turrets to make sure they stay competitive, especially given that they have flight time. |

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
988
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 18:05:00 -
[176] - Quote
Zimmy Zeta wrote:Urkhan Law wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Windman Advena wrote:Rails and Beams DPS will be about 40% better then Artillery DPS. When you get 6k alpha out of a T2 arty fit you get about 2.5 from a dps fit with other guns and alpha > to DPS everyday When you are fightign larger ships.. DPS >>>>> ALPHA. How medium arties are used at the moment, Lokis? Hurricanes? Aren't they been used in a sort of "niche" combat only (certain fleet types in certain conditions) ? It's an honest question, I only fly frigs (and badly), I really don't know the current application/meta of medium arties. If one day I decide to upgrade to cruisers (solo - small gang low sec roamer), I really can't see why should I use them. Bomber defense for larger fleets, mainly.
Some null entities like Hydra BL and actually many other gangs use arty Cyna gangs and have an impressive success rate, most used are of course Cynabals but also Munins supported by anti tackle SFIs and they can mess up pretty much larger gang groups quite easily.
Of course the specific ships bonus helps those arties work like a charm and when you have enough numbers (20/25 ships including 1/2 logi scout bbler and anti tackle like SFI) those do really nasty things and are very hard to catch if the FC is as good has some Hydra dudes (always awesome to fight them, always learning stuff) -Elo Knight is not Hydra member but he's a dam good FC at this kind of stuff even if I haven't crossed his road doing this for a while.
Edit: actually after the proliferation of sniping ABCs these groups are less and less seen all over the place but when they do it always finishes with lots of blood and dead corpses all over the place. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
988
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 18:11:00 -
[177] - Quote
Merii Kha'sen wrote:Given this buff, Heavy Missiles also need to be brought back in line with the long range turrets to make sure they stay competitive, especially given that they have flight time.
I'm saying this since the beginning of this thread, HM's are now uninteresting as hell, after turrets rebalance HM's will be of no interest at all. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1140
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 18:13:00 -
[178] - Quote
Shahai Shintaro wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote: Also, this falloff bonus is stupid for railguns, adds less and less as you go up the ranges. Should switch all gallente range bonuses to optimal, then make blasters more optimally than falloffy.
I think that's the point and the difference between a gallente hybrid boat and a Caldari one. The gallente boat is designed to be strapped with blasters hence falloff and tracking bonuses while the Caldari boats are designed for rails and hence get optimal bonuses
The deimos is quite clearly NOT designed to be strapped with blasters.. Its pretty awful at it.
Not that its amazing at rails, like trouser said, its fittings can't accommodate armor tanking and rails. Also its slow.. Bringing us back to the Why the **** is the Vaga so fast compared to the deimos thing. BYDI recruitment closed-ish |

Serenity Zipher
10
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 18:24:00 -
[179] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Merii Kha'sen wrote:Given this buff, Heavy Missiles also need to be brought back in line with the long range turrets to make sure they stay competitive, especially given that they have flight time. I'm saying this since the beginning of this thread, HM's are now uninteresting as hell, after turrets rebalance HM's will be of no interest at all.
Tech 2 HM's were the first weapon system I trained for in eve. On my Damnation with 3 ballistic controls 2's and all support skills to 4 , I only get 236.9 DPS. I wish i trained for HAM's now  |

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
989
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 18:34:00 -
[180] - Quote
Serenity Zipher wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Merii Kha'sen wrote:Given this buff, Heavy Missiles also need to be brought back in line with the long range turrets to make sure they stay competitive, especially given that they have flight time. I'm saying this since the beginning of this thread, HM's are now uninteresting as hell, after turrets rebalance HM's will be of no interest at all. Tech 2 HM's were the first weapon system I trained for in eve. On my Damnation with 3 ballistic controls 2's and all support skills to 4 , I only get 236.9 DPS. I wish i trained for HAM's now 
The major problem of this weapon system came with little changes, not game ones but players choices.
The proliferation of HM Drakes and after Tengus fleets only put on the spotlight what was going wrong with HM's: the ridiculous flight time and explosion radius.
Thing is that not only those were nerf at reasonable numbers but on top their dps got nerf which results in even less applied DPS than paper numbers. DPS loss+explo radius nerf brought an even higher nerf when the dps numbers at that time were acceptable considering the loss due to missile mechanic changes.
Since then we've seen T1 cruisers and BC's changes hit, ship bonus changes and now turrets changes and I'm pretty sure HM's will be the most uninteresting weapon system to use if used at all and this not because HAM's became too strong but only because HM's got a higher nerf then they needed.
I don't want to see again 100MN AB Tengus shooting HMs at stupid ranges, hell implement a stupid variable in 100MN ABs "can't be fit on T3's" but HM's need right now a little 3% dmg increase imho but after turrets rebalance it will be around 20%. *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 |