| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
madaluap
   |
Posted - 2006.04.25 21:37:00 -
[91]
Edited by: madaluap on 25/04/2006 21:39:02
 Originally by: Tassi
Gallente own with their drones. I hope these changes wont make blasterthrons a wtfpwnmachine.
ATM drones (domi, ishtar, ishkur) ftw. After the changes drones and blasters ftw? Seems abit overkill for one race 
Even I would consider switching to gallente than 
Its not like the geddon can't give the same dps as a megathron with its dronebay...both can launch 5X ogre 2 and have no shipbonusses to them....
Also a blasterthron requires a lot of skills and skilzz <-- mind the Z there. Its not like you will suddenly see ****loads of blasterthrons. But if you do, some ex-raven pilots will soon find out that blasterthron isn't a flavour of the month ship  . I predict loads of pretty explosions...
_________________________________________________
In worldwar 2 they called me *****slap |
Porro
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 22:05:00 -
[92]
j0, in regards to finding the meaning of slow and sluggish, I agree that caldari ships can be damn brick like(they look like bricks thats probably why *whistles*) but I can't think of another race thats really held back by range, and is damn slow.
Minmatar ships are able to get pretty decent speeds and ac's have a pretty reasonable range, caldari are missile *****s and they're usually fine for range though being closer is better for them ie torps(can't really compare too much here as theres no cruiser size rocket but I'll give you that the cerby is pretty slow(again brick design ftw? :D ))
And Amarr can get ranges of at least 50k with pulses (scorch ftw?).
The deimos and thron, the main roots of complaining are damn slow, the thron , thats ok as its a battleship and a rail platform too so you can't really expect much from that. But the deimos a ship that was "engineered for blasters" is appalling speed and alignment wise especially when it has to get in sub 8k to do damage and other cruisers got a much more significant boost in velocity over their t1 counterparts.
----------------------------------------------------
(22:01:14) (Sangxianc) you, porro, have madder skillzors than i, sang, do
|
KamiCrazy
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 22:46:00 -
[93]
I have never been a fan of the deimos. And this is coming from someone who has been a fan of blasters since day 1.
The deimos is just not a sufficiently useful blaster boat. And it has a lot to do with being a combination of being slow + being light armored + having a **** MWD bonus.
Honestly the only thing you have to do is compare the vagabond to the deimos. That is all.
|
Bloodst0ne
|
Posted - 2006.04.25 22:54:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Forsch
Originally by: Gronsak
which AF/cepter/frig fits neutron blasters that have a better use in pvp than ions/electrons?
i know the taranis doest, i know the enyo sucks with blasters let alone neutrons
My taranis does. 
As does mine.
|
Kai Lae
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 03:19:00 -
[95]
While it's nice to hear that neutrons are being addressed, what about ions and electrons? The PG requirement on a light electron blaster is double what you get on a 75mm II for instance. Are these issues also being looked into?
|
DigitalCommunist
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 04:19:00 -
[96]
The unfortunate thing with any "fix" to large blasters is that it won't actually fix the problem. Fine, lets all hypothetically agree that blasters take too much cap, don't track good enough and are way too hard to fit.
Now lets go absolutely bat**** crazy and change the following:
- zero cap use
- double tracking
- 7x neutrons with no grid mods
You get what? I don't know, but I'll tell you what you don't get. You don't get more than 50% chance of surviving a close range encounter under ideal conditions with an equally capable pilot flying a Dominix, Raven, Nos Phoon, Nos Apoc, anyone with good ECM. In all honesty a blaster boost (as it should be rightfully called) is nice, it may even quell the whining; but I would sooner trade it in for other changes and additions.
I would like to see a nosferatu counter introduced, and I would like to see some sort of anti-missile system that isn't broken. I would also like to see transverse fixed, so that you don't end up missing targets which are perfectly still when you orbit them.
On top of that, I would enjoy the idea of new modules and skills. Advanced HSM - 5% less mwd sig penalty anyone? How about giving tech 2 ammo meaningful bonuses, instead of Null turning blasters into the gallente equivalent of ACs. Anyhoo, lets see what sisi brings :]
Purchasing Complex Fullerene Shards, contact me ingame.
|
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 04:44:00 -
[97]
Originally by: j0sephine
Edited by: j0sephine on 25/04/2006 20:45:20
"What exactly we have, is blaster ships that are not viable in any form of PvP unless a host of external factors are exactly right."
As opposed to what? Because you make it sound like every single other HAC (or any other combat ship for that matter) doesn't fall under this rule, and is a wtfpwn mobile in any 0-200 km engagement no matter their setup, 100% of time.
Pretty much every ship and setup relies on some 'external factors to be exactly right' in order to be viable and dies when they aren't. Hardly a big deal.
"If you had a clue, you wouldn't ask anyone to compare a blaster deimos to a blaster eagle."
And surprisingly enough, i didn't. I suggested to fly another ship to gain a perspective on what "slow and sluggish" can really mean.
"You are usually sensible but seems you have a few screws loose when you joined this thread. Go away if you dont like blasters and let those of us who actually enjoy flying blaster boats, have our say."
"if you don't like blasters"?
This isn't some sort of holy church of blaster pwnage where people sing praises to the guy with highest wrecking shot they got out of their Deimos on a large secure container. It's forum section dealing with overall game combat balance.
If you don't like it someone doesn't find the requests for ship that can fit all heaviest guns, perfect tank, and can cover distance to any target in less time it takes to say "and i want a pony too" very reasonable ... tough. But you'll have to discuss it with rational counter-arguments why all these things packed together would be a good thing, rather than try to count other people's screws.
Deimos IS slow and sluggish compaired to other ships that have a range in the 10km area... that ships with 200km range are slower then a deimos isn't a total suprise and so completely irrelevant that all you're doing in this thread is add a page of completely useless garbage. You have no arguments why blasters or the deimos in their current form do not need help.
~{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 |
Aloysius Knight
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 07:12:00 -
[98]
well don't forget the munnin in this lovin 
/me wishs his could fit 720mms wiht out needing 2 rcu
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 13:39:00 -
[99]
"You have no arguments why blasters or the deimos in their current form do not need help."
Go back through the thread and show me where is it that i said blasters in general and Deimos do not need any help.
What am disagreeing with is the idea of boosting things by changing at the same time both the turrets and ships using them. Because changing multiple factors at once is just asking for a mess where you don't even know in the end which of these factors is throwing things past the point of balance and out of whack. So i'd rather the guns to be adjusted first with some very tiny ship tweaks where necessary, and then optionally more radical changes be done to the ships that still need help, _if_ they actually still need help.
Stop acting hysterical just because someone didn't agree with all ideas how to make your favourite ship a new pwnboat of the month, in a single thread. It doesn't automagically mean they are against any changes at all, so let that strawman go.
|
smallgreenblur
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 13:42:00 -
[100]
Originally by: j0sephine
"You have no arguments why blasters or the deimos in their current form do not need help."
Go back through the thread and show me where is it that i said blasters in general and Deimos do not need any help.
What am disagreeing with is the idea of boosting things by changing at the same time both the turrets and ships using them. Because changing multiple factors at once is just asking for a mess where you don't even know in the end which of these factors is throwing things past the point of balance and out of whack. So i'd rather the guns to be adjusted first with some very tiny ship tweaks where necessary, and then optionally more radical changes be done to the ships that still need help, _if_ they actually still need help.
Stop acting hysterical just because someone didn't agree with all ideas how to make your favourite ship a new pwnboat of the month, in a single thread. It doesn't automagically mean they are against any changes at all, so let that strawman go.
Agreed, balance the blasters and then look at the deimos after, if it still needs changing.
sgb
C6 is recruiting ... visit www.c6-eve.com or join channel c-6 for details. |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 13:49:00 -
[101]
"I would like to see a nosferatu counter introduced (..)"
Good luck with that, 20-odd pages long nosferatu threads ---> that way :s
"and I would like to see some sort of anti-missile system that isn't broken."
Am thinking, since current problem with anti-missile systems comes from the defender missiles being subjected to the same rules the other missiles obey... i.e. travel time which means with current missile speeds defenders need lot of room to just get to their target... some sort of anti-missile drone thingie similar to sentry drones could do a better work?
These wouldn't suffer the travel time penalty, and could be triggered by missiles entering 20 km or whatever range to your ship, maybe possible to extend with skills. For extra points they could borrow page from logistics drones, and have ability to be assigned to other ships, as their anti-missile system... o.O;
"I would also like to see transverse fixed, so that you don't end up missing targets which are perfectly still when you orbit them."
If i understand it right this isn't currently doable because of type of info received by turrets and other game entities... i.e. a turret has no way to tell that it actually remains stationary in relation to ship they're mounted on, if this ship is orbitting something ^^;;
|
Kaleeb
|
Posted - 2006.04.26 14:24:00 -
[102]
Completely agree digi
 |
Nebuli
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 03:06:00 -
[103]
W00t blaster fixs at last wooohooo /emote does a dance.
Any chance we can get even a rough timeframe for when we are likely to see this in-game, I'm getting all excited now.
Dreads are out!! who cares..
Titans/motherships/carriers all out!!! couldnt care less tbh...
They are fixing blasters!!! omg omg omg omg, major excitement ensues.
Seriously this is the best news I have had in, well, I realy dont know, think the server upgrade is the only thing since I have played (release) that has got me so excited lol.
CEO - Art of War |
EL TITAN
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:20:00 -
[104]
lol i agree a blastertron needs boosting, but the diemos is fine as it is tbh.
many people forget a muninn needs 2x RCU II to fit guns and a mwd, and you cant even tank it in any way at all, now THAT needs addressing (sp) ;o
_________________________________________________
<3 hi |
Gary Goat
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:29:00 -
[105]
Quote:
many people forget a muninn needs 2x RCU II to fit guns and a mwd, and you cant even tank it in any way at all, now THAT needs addressing (sp) ;o
I'm guessing thats with 720's right? Deimos has exactly the same problem for neutrons but it needs the mwd to get in close. MWD isnt nessisary on the munin so you can ditch that to free up extra power grid if you want.
A viable neutron setup on the deimos requires 2xRCU II's and a PDU II. That leaves 3 low slots left to fit a tank and damage mods.
Devs please read |
EL TITAN
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:32:00 -
[106]
Edited by: EL TITAN on 27/04/2006 18:33:18
Originally by: Gary Goat
Quote:
many people forget a muninn needs 2x RCU II to fit guns and a mwd, and you cant even tank it in any way at all, now THAT needs addressing (sp) ;o
I'm guessing thats with 720's right? Deimos has exactly the same problem for neutrons but it needs the mwd to get in close. MWD isnt nessisary on the munin so you can ditch that to free up extra power grid if you want.
A viable neutron setup on the deimos requires 2xRCU II's and a PDU II. That leaves 3 low slots left to fit a tank and damage mods.
no you need a mwd on a muninn too, to move with gangs or solo.
Also dont forget we cant TANK AT ALL even with 2x RCU II's no med rep fits at all or any large shield extenders. Id like to change my original statement though, the diemos does need PG fixing too, but the Muninn needs it alot more, we minmatar pilots are just warriors though and dont see us whining about it much ;p (RP)
PS: yeah I know im caldari, but i fly minnie ships, minnie ships all the way woot! ;o
_________________________________________________
<3 hi |
LUKEC
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:42:00 -
[107]
Edited by: LUKEC on 27/04/2006 18:44:31
Originally by: EL TITAN
Edited by: EL TITAN on 27/04/2006 18:33:18
Originally by: Gary Goat
Quote:
many people forget a muninn needs 2x RCU II to fit guns and a mwd, and you cant even tank it in any way at all, now THAT needs addressing (sp) ;o
I'm guessing thats with 720's right? Deimos has exactly the same problem for neutrons but it needs the mwd to get in close. MWD isnt nessisary on the munin so you can ditch that to free up extra power grid if you want.
A viable neutron setup on the deimos requires 2xRCU II's and a PDU II. That leaves 3 low slots left to fit a tank and damage mods.
no you need a mwd on a muninn too, to move with gangs or solo.
Also dont forget we cant TANK AT ALL even with 2x RCU II's no med rep fits at all or any large shield extenders. Id like to change my original statement though, the diemos does need PG fixing too, but the Muninn needs it alot more, we minmatar pilots are just warriors though and dont see us whining about it much ;p (RP)
PS: yeah I know im caldari, but i fly minnie ships, minnie ships all the way woot! ;o
How much rcus need deimos with neutrons & mwd?
Actually it fits...with 1 rcu with 0.5 pg left :P
Die, die, die. |
Wizie
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:48:00 -
[108]
Edited by: Wizie on 27/04/2006 18:49:29
People still fly Munins?
I have seen only 2 uses for it. Roaming gangs (not seeking a fair fight)... or sniping in a system where you can dock and don't have to move around much.
As for the Deimos, it definitely needs a buff of sorts. Whether it comes from the blasters being tweaked.. or the deimos getting a bit of a pg boost.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:54:00 -
[109]
Munnin is quite a quick ship, and if you have a cloud of frigs holding a BS down and jamming it, a Munnin can very swiftly smash its tank from range.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 18:56:00 -
[110]
Originally by: smallgreenblur
Agreed, balance the blasters and then look at the deimos after, if it still needs changing.
sgb
Given only heavy blasters need changing, snort. Change SMALL blasters? Right, like the Tarranis and Ishkur need ANOTHER boost. Change MEDIUM blasters? One ship's the issue there, the underpowered Deimos. Better to change 1 ship than an entire weapon type.
LARGE blasters need fixing. Or don't fix blasters at all.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Gary Goat
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 19:08:00 -
[111]
Edited by: Gary Goat on 27/04/2006 19:11:35
Quote:
Actually it fits...with 1 rcu with 0.5 pg left(AWU 4) :P
Deimos's pg with an RCU II: 1236.25pg
5x Heavy Neutron II's
217.12*5 = 1085.6pg
10mn mwd II = 165pg
1085.6 + 165 = 1250.6pg
It doesnt fit with a t2 mwd. If you want a repairer as well...
Deimos with 2 RCU II's = 1421.69pg
1421.69 - 1250.6 = 171.09pg left.
Med armor repairer II = 173pg
Deimos is in exactly the same boat as the munin fitting wise. Add to that the deimos's base speed is 34 less then the munin, its 500,000kg heavier and its guns have an optimal of about 2km and i think we can see which one is in most need of the boost.
Devs please read |
LUKEC
|
Posted - 2006.04.27 19:19:00 -
[112]
it fits with AWU lvl4 and mwd t1
However it has still 5+2+1 empty slots
Die, die, die. |
Gabriel Karade
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 08:12:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 28/04/2006 08:13:57
Long range turrets still work far too well at all ranges, plus the fact there is no real line-of-sight for weapons, doesn't help close range Battleships
Blaster-boats would work in more fleet situations if weapons fire was actually obstructed by objects being in the path of the projectile/beam and if long range turrets had a more significant penalty at close range (they track too well). Sure you'd loose ships on the way in, but once in contact, long range Battleships would (and should) become nigh on useless.
I would love to see a situation where a FCÆs nightmare is when a pack of Blasterthrons close in and mix it up with your long range Battleships.
----------
- Office Linebacker -
|
Hellspawn01
|
Posted - 2006.04.28 09:02:00 -
[114]
You want to compare a deimos with a blasterthron? Fine.
A deimos can fit 5x Ions II, 1x medium Nos, named MWD, med armor rep II only with RCU II and advanced weapon upgrades lvl4. I have lvl5 with 2x RCU II and a 800mm plate with the above fitted with 5 grid spare.
A blasterthron with the standard setup of 7x Ions II, heavy nos, standard mid slots and dual rep needs at least a CPU and a RCU II to fit with only named and T2 stuff.
A cap change for blasters woud give us more cap to tank. The grid reduction would leave us with something like a damage mod or a cap relay for more tanking. A tracking bonus would help for orbiting the target at close range.
If you compare the gun classes with each other like Tachyons/mega pulse, 425mm Rails/neutron blasters and 1400/800mm ACs, then you see a big unbalance between the races and the used grid to fit them.
425mm Rail 2500
Neutron blaster cannon 2250
Tachyon Laser 3750
Mega Pulse 2500
1400mm Howitzer 3250
800mm AC 2000
I think the above speaks for itself.
Ship lover |
shakaZ XIV
|
Posted - 2006.04.29 02:17:00 -
[115]
Quote:
Quote:
Originally by: MeridiusAnother boost to the Taranis.
Indeed that's the only thing I got from this thread (and I fly taranis lots)
Yup, bit over the top imo. (/me also flies taranis a lot - they do not need boosting, taranis already has the least "bad points" of all inties, afaik only one: low speed)
I think most people here agree that the problem is with the Deimos, and to some extent with the thron (though im personally of the opinion that thron is fine from a dmg/tank pov,  just a bit impractical in many situations, due to low speed and gun range).
Deimos is supposed to be a pretty straight-forward (predictable as hell) high damage blastership (afaik), but it's fitting req's are too tight to make it shine. Doesn't sound too hard to fix?
I'd like to see medium/large neutrons and ions be worth fitting, cause atm they arent really. (dmg mod + electron > grid mod + ion, same for ion vs. neutron...so why fit neutron?)
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |