| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Istvaan Shogaatsu
   |
Posted - 2005.12.21 21:02:00 -
[1]
What's the point of an ammo that gives you a bit of extra damage, while nerfing your tracking to the point of near-uselessness? Can't we just get some kind of increased energy consumption as a penalty, rather than these counter-productive bonuses that turn your pulses into crappy beams?
|
keepiru
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 21:03:00 -
[2]
Shh, youll wake the "nerf amarr" trollcrowd
>.>
<.<
-------------
Please fix the EW stacking bug :(
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 21:11:00 -
[3]
/signed, and I don't fly amarr
-------------
Please make Minmatar overpowered, CCP |
keepiru
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 21:18:00 -
[4]
But yes, theyre pretty fracking useless.
Tunr your pulses into beams, like, wow, ill have 20 o/
Especially scorch. Whats the bleeding point of low-tracking long-range pulse ammo, when all youre going to shoot at that range is bloody interceptors?
-------------
Please fix the EW stacking bug :(
|
Dr Rane
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 21:27:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu
Can't we just get some kind of increased energy consumption as a penalty, rather than these counter-productive bonuses that turn your pulses into crappy beams?
well they gave us a cap increasing bonus aswell.. except from tracking.
my new ...green.. M Pulse crystals use 25% more cap + decreases the tracking to 50%.
but only gives me a small damage boost.
oh lets not forget that they break after a sertain number of shots.. 
______________________________________________________
CCP: Why cant you let unloaded Crystals auto-stack?!
Originally by: Oveur
I'm Tuxford.
|
Istvaan Shogaatsu
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 22:40:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Istvaan Shogaatsu on 21/12/2005 22:44:32
Wow. Just... wow. These things are beyond worthless, they actually enter the realm of detracting from your ship's quality when equipped.
CCP. I love you but please, please get off the "every benefit must come with a crippling drawback" bandwagon you've been on as of late. It's not balance, you're just churning out garbage. As it stands there's no reason to use t2 pulse laser ammo whatsoever.
My recommendation: Make t2 pulse crystals cost more energy to fire - hell, even double the energy cost. That's it. No retarded tracking nerf, because that's the last thing pulse lasers need.
|
R31D
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 22:41:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Dr Rane
oh lets not forget that they break after a sertain number of shots..
Yeah, because people who buy Hyrbid and artillery ammo only have to buy it once and never run out of t2 ammo - however crap the ammo, T2 crystals lasting forever would seriously disrupt....something
Free bumpage for all |
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 22:45:00 -
[8]
Originally by: R31D
T2 crystals lasting forever would seriously disrupt....something
the market? 
-------------
Please make Minmatar overpowered, CCP |
Furion35
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 22:50:00 -
[9]
Originally by: R31D
Originally by: Dr Rane
oh lets not forget that they break after a sertain number of shots..
Yeah, because people who buy Hyrbid and artillery ammo only have to buy it once and never run out of t2 ammo - however crap the ammo, T2 crystals lasting forever would seriously disrupt....something
Agreed, as stupid as degrading Amarr ammo is, it must be done for balance reasons.
|
Jim Steele
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 22:53:00 -
[10]
I though the T2 ammo would be usefull and more damageing than current T1 ammo instead the tracking nerf on pulse ammo means you cant actually hit anything. I just think they didnt really think about this clearly when implementing the ammo.
Mabye it will get fixed "soon" Tm bacause its sooo bad, but in the mean time ill be using normal cheep ammo that doesnt run out and hits for more damage (because they actually hit!)
Author of "The Apoc Guide" |
Sadist
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 22:55:00 -
[11]
Then we want the same thing for rails - increase cap consumption, remove the retarded drawbacks. 25% tracking? No, thx.
---------------
VIP member of the [23]
Quote:
- Numbers alone do not win a battle
- No, but I bet they help.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 23:06:00 -
[12]
Edited by: j0sephine on 21/12/2005 23:16:14
"Especially scorch. Whats the bleeding point of low-tracking long-range pulse ammo, when all youre going to shoot at that range is bloody interceptors?"
Uhmm...
* large microwave lens: 40% more range, 16+8 = 24 total base damage
* large scorch lens: 50% more range, 36+8 = 44 total base damage
you get a lens that does as much damage as gamma crystal (i.e. just 10% less than multifrequency) over higher distance than microwave crystal... (i.e. nearly as much as with radio lens) Now, being able to deal this kind of damage with 60+ km optimal... doesn't really sound bad? ^^;;
in addition it's mostly EM, meaning it's pretty good in situation where everyone runs around with armour hardened against thermal damage... ^^;
(lasers, especially pulse lasers have high base tracking, so reduction in tracking can be pretty much ignored given highly increased range which in itself acts as counter to the tracking penalty)
|
Kyguard
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 23:07:00 -
[13]
Is the T2 ammo on market under "Advanced Pulse/Beam Crystals"?
I thought they were supposed to deal explosive damage? And yes, they do suck. 
--
I don't represent my alliance
God is on the side with the best artillery |
Shadowsword
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 23:12:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Shadowsword on 21/12/2005 23:14:09
Signed, none of the pulse cristals make me want to buy them. What a disappointment, after the time we waited for them.
The Spike hybrid charges get a -75% tracking, which combined with the fairly poor railgun tracking almost force you to put 2 tracking comps on your ship. Great for an Eagle or Harpy, and mostly useless for any other railship. With -35% or -50% tracking it would have been pretty decent...
The only T2 ammos really worth having are precision missiles, and those AC bullets that give +50% falloff (at least, I hop it's +50%, because if it's -50% then that too is useless).
|
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 23:30:00 -
[15]
Every single t2 ammo has serious drawback. Just look at void m, more cap use, way more cap use, horrible tracking, even worse range then normal, but a 25% damage increase. It'll eat a non nos equiped battleship in seconds, even with the new tanking, but damn those are some hefty penalties.
But we where warned, they're not more damage for more cost and higher skills, they're specialized ammos that have a specific purpose but they're not a replacement for normal ammo.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 23:32:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Gariuys on 21/12/2005 23:33:06
Originally by: Jim Steele
I though the T2 ammo would be usefull and more damageing than current T1 ammo instead the tracking nerf on pulse ammo means you cant actually hit anything. I just think they didnt really think about this clearly when implementing the ammo.
Mabye it will get fixed "soon" Tm bacause its sooo bad, but in the mean time ill be using normal cheep ammo that doesnt run out and hits for more damage (because they actually hit!)
They're for hiting stuff bigger then you, as in a lot easier to track. even at 25% tracking your tracking more then well enough to effectively hit battlecruisers and battleships with cruiser sized guns.
Used on a battleship the short range variants, well they need double web, and that's on both parties, but the damage potential is staggering. If you can get the conditions right that is.
Blasterthrons, with void L, against a dread.... wonder how long that awesome tank would last, against a couple of those.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.21 23:50:00 -
[17]
Edited by: j0sephine on 21/12/2005 23:52:59
Had a bit of fun with the ship fitting thingie, just for heck of it.
Crusader
4x dual light pulse II with scorch lens, 1mn mwd II, fleeting scrambler, adaptive nano II, 3x cap relay (or 2 + nanofiber or whatever. can swap one turret+cap relay for small repairer as well, if more desirable)
~107 dps with over 10 km optimal with 4 turrets, tracking bonus nearly cancels out the tracking penalty on its own, can run scrambler + mwd + 3 turrets forever.
funny ship with quite a bit of bite, there... for comparison, a Crow currently does ~80 dps at slightly less range, i.e. gets outdamaged by that Crusader by ~30% or so... not to mention rockets ain't going to hit in the first place with Crusader staying that far away. o.O;
|
Kyoko Sakoda
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 00:13:00 -
[18]
T2 ammo and missiles are screwy all the way through tbh. Some of the penalties are just too large for such a small boost.
|
KilROCK
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 00:33:00 -
[19]
and j0 Strikes again!!! kablam!! 
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 04:42:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Sarmaul
Originally by: R31D
T2 crystals lasting forever would seriously disrupt....something
the market?
No people would just sell them for tens of millions.
------------------------------------
Inappropriate signature -zhuge |
Cadiz
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 05:02:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Cadiz on 22/12/2005 05:02:15
The only two types of t2 gun ammo that I could see myself regularly using are Null for blasters and Barrage for autocannons. Well, and maybe Spike railgun rounds for a Harpy if I ever felt like swatting stuff at 70 - 80km in an AF for a laugh.
The rest are...eh. The tracking hits, which are pretty damn common, are a tough pill to swallow.
|
Urfin
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 08:12:00 -
[22]
Agreed, t2 lenses do look like crap and the bonuses don't really warrant the drawbacks. And why the HELL do they deteriorate? I mean, does it **** people off THAT much that Amarr don't have to haul ammo? Because the 'omg lenses break market' argument is pure crap.
Faction lenses SHOULD deteriorate because they're flat BETTER than t1 with zero drawbacks. But t2? Excuse meh, I wouldn't use that crap in 95% of situations even if they didn't break. Turn pulses into beams and beams into pulse? AND loose tracking either way? Sure.
_____________________
Heatsink - Ship efficiency calculation proggie |
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 09:16:00 -
[23]
What j0 said.
Tech2 ammo seems fine to me. Hell, the laser variants seem to better then the rest, if you want to make a point of comparing them. But in all honesty, I am very glad CCP d=esn't just listen to the people that just want more damage for more cash and more skills, it's good that stuff like this introduces mroe variables into fights.
_______________________________________________
Power to the players !
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 09:18:00 -
[24]
T2 Ammo and Missiles seem like a cruel joke to me. :|
Little benefit, lots of drawbacks..
------
Campaign to remove shield hardener effects, they suck!! |
Ardor
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 12:21:00 -
[25]
10% RoF bonus because of x turret specialization level 5 and 25% more damage of t2 ammo gives 38% more DoT compared to t1 ammo.
I think t2 ammo needs this penalties. Otherwise the only way for new players to competete would be EW. I don't want to see more EW. I dislike having EW as the great randomizer and equalizer.
In the past I have said tracking is not really a huge problem if you know what you are doing in discussions about lasers vs projectil weapons. Of course the same argument now is valid for lasers with t2 ammo. Yesterday I've tried heavy pulse with conflagration crystals and I was happy with the results. Don't forget laser crystals is not the only ammo with a tracking penalty.
The cap penalty hurts when you compare the cap usage of modulated lasers with cap usage of t2 lasers with t2 ammo. Named t1 weapons are still a very valid option even if they do 38% less damage. In a time of better tanks cap becomes even more important. But again laser users are not the only ones with cap penalties when using t2 ammo.
I admit I have not looked into all details but on a first look to me it seems t2 ammo of all races is 'balanced'. I will use t2 ammo, in certain situations. I will also use named t1 weapons in other situations. T2 ammo is a new tactical choice but not the I win button.
|
Dark fire
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 12:29:00 -
[26]
Originally by: keepiru
Shh, youll wake the "nerf amarr" trollcrowd
>.>
<.<
*yawn* what this? what going on? OMG NERF AMARR NOW!!! 
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 14:43:00 -
[27]
Extra damage at the expense of tracking? Sign me up. I could do with some decent anti-cruiser/BS ammo for my frigs...
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 14:51:00 -
[28]
Edited by: j0sephine on 22/12/2005 14:55:40
Hee.
If anyone still thinks T2 laser ammo is horrible with the tracking penalty... go to the tracking guide
enter the following:
(regular mega pulse II + gamma)
sig resolution: 400
optimal range: 26250
faloff: 10000
damage modifier: 3.6
rate of fire: 7.875
tracking speed: 0.03375
damage: 28 em, 16 thermal
(mega pulse II + scorch)
sig resolution: 400
optimal range: 63000
faloff: 10000
damage modifier: 3.6
rate of fire: 7.875
tracking speed: 0.025313
damage: 36 em, 8 thermal
(mega pulse II + microwave)
sig resolution: 400
optimal range: 58800
faloff: 10000
damage modifier: 3.6
rate of fire: 7.875
tracking speed: 0.03375
damage: 16 em, 8 thermal
(mega beam II + standard)
sig resolution: 400
optimal range: 60000
faloff: 20000
damage modifier: 3.6
rate of fire: 9.0
tracking speed: 0.019141
damage: 20 em, 12 thermal
... then go nuts with transversal and signature radius. Make sure to check both the chance to hit and damage amount curves... ;s
|
Reite
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 15:00:00 -
[29]
Originally by: j0sephine
Edited by: j0sephine on 21/12/2005 23:52:59
Had a bit of fun with the ship fitting thingie, just for heck of it.
Crusader
4x dual light pulse II with scorch lens, 1mn mwd II, fleeting scrambler, adaptive nano II, 3x cap relay (or 2 + nanofiber or whatever. can swap one turret+cap relay for small repairer as well, if more desirable)
~107 dps with over 10 km optimal with 4 turrets, tracking bonus nearly cancels out the tracking penalty on its own, can run scrambler + mwd + 3 turrets forever.
funny ship with quite a bit of bite, there... for comparison, a Crow currently does ~80 dps at slightly less range, i.e. gets outdamaged by that Crusader by ~30% or so... not to mention rockets ain't going to hit in the first place with Crusader staying that far away. o.O;
That setup will have some serious problems hitting.. I orbited a caracel at 11km with radio lenses on dual light pulses and i couldnt hit him much unless i turned off my mwd, and slowed down even abit more.. That was with radio lenses whicl have alot better tracking.. And yes, i got almost perfekt skills
|
Tonya Nastee
|
Posted - 2005.12.22 15:18:00 -
[30]
Originally by: j0sephine
Edited by: j0sephine on 22/12/2005 14:55:40
Hee.
If anyone still thinks T2 laser ammo is horrible with the tracking penalty... go to the tracking guide
enter the following:
[snip]
-75% is 25% of the orginal tracking not 75% you nubet
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |