| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1874
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 11:57:00 -
[151] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: My point was clearly made. A lock time of 106mm for a Raven (or any other battleship) is too low for any chance of non-consentual pvp against non-BS subcaps.
If you can't fathom the point from my original post then its not my points that are lacking.
Ignoring the knee-jerk reactionary 'troll' comment, I'm getting the part where you think 106mm is a locking time instead of a scan resolution. I get that you're confused about the purpose of a battleship. What I don't get is why you would make this point if it was anything other than complaining. Why SHOULD a battleship be able to lock things faster? You say you're making a point, but you're not providing clarity on the follow through or destination of this point, or why this point matters. So let's bottom line it, shall we? Because, quite frankly, you're talking to people here with far more battleship experience than you so, whatever your problem is, I'm sure we can clear it up. Provided you're not just trolling, of course.  EvE is supposed to be a non-consentual PVP game.
Battleships are no good solo because they lack the ability to force smaller ships into engagements. Any engagement that a battleship enters into consensually is usually going to be one the opponent feels they are capable of winning easily.
A lock time based on the scan resolution of 106mm is about 150mm short of what is required to lock down a BC before it can run away.
Obviously my point is that its much too slow. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1874
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:00:00 -
[152] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:The Golem is by far my favorite death machine at the moment. The golem is not a battleship. . derp I'm correct. Marauders are not battleships they're marauders. They're simply based on a battleship hull. In the same way that T3's are not cruisers, they're strategic cruisers. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
399
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:05:00 -
[153] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Ralph King-Griffin wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:The Golem is by far my favorite death machine at the moment. The golem is not a battleship. . derp I'm correct. Marauders are not battleships they're marauders. They're simply based on a battleship hull. In the same way that T3's are not cruisers, they're strategic cruisers.
If in doubt...do...excessively. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3197
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:15:00 -
[154] - Quote
Remember guys, the Golem is not a battleship, and pocos totally are sov assets.
I wonder how much longer he can keep denying that he illicitly bought his character, though. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|

Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
399
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:16:00 -
[155] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: They're not cruisers. They're Strategic Cruisers.
re read that. If in doubt...do...excessively. |

Remiel Pollard
Stirling Iron Society A Rather Intimidating Group of Individuals
2707
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:17:00 -
[156] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:
These kinds of responses are the spiritual text-based equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!"
And you use them often.
Likewise so are 'You're mom" insults. If you can't act at least as mature as my 7 year old I'm going to ignore you.
Not even close. That was a witty quip, I'll agree not in the best taste, but it was hardly the epitome of ignorance. That's your forte. You don't scare me. I've been to Jita. |

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1874
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:21:00 -
[157] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:
These kinds of responses are the spiritual text-based equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!"
And you use them often.
Likewise so are 'You're mom" insults. If you can't act at least as mature as my 7 year old I'm going to ignore you. Not even close. That was a witty quip, I'll agree not in the best taste, but it was hardly the epitome of ignorance. That's your forte. Yawn. Get back on topic or GTFO of this thread. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
2941
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:23:00 -
[158] - Quote
What should the meta for BSes look like Infinity Ziona? Oh god. |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3197
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:24:00 -
[159] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:
These kinds of responses are the spiritual text-based equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!"
And you use them often.
Likewise so are 'You're mom" insults. If you can't act at least as mature as my 7 year old I'm going to ignore you. Not even close. That was a witty quip, I'll agree not in the best taste, but it was hardly the epitome of ignorance. That's your forte. Yawn. Get back on topic or GTFO of this thread.
Says the person who starts a post by saying the Golem is not a battleship? I've said this before, but you really are the biggest hypocrite I have ever encountered in my life. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|

Remiel Pollard
Stirling Iron Society A Rather Intimidating Group of Individuals
2707
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:30:00 -
[160] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote:
These kinds of responses are the spiritual text-based equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and yelling "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!"
And you use them often.
Likewise so are 'You're mom" insults. If you can't act at least as mature as my 7 year old I'm going to ignore you. Not even close. That was a witty quip, I'll agree not in the best taste, but it was hardly the epitome of ignorance. That's your forte. LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!
That's just because you're too busy ignoring everyone.
You don't scare me. I've been to Jita. |

Garia666
CyberShield Inc Triumvirate.
68
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:31:00 -
[161] - Quote
Orpheus Nyberg wrote:I'm still fairly new to Eve and I just was curious if there is ever much 1v1 PVP among the large size ships like Cruisers, Battlecruisers, and Battleships. I have seen plenty of discussion about frigate and destroyer 1v1 fights, fittings, etc. but not anything besides that. If this is a somewhat occurring matter, where does it usually happen as far as security zones? Also any other information relative to this subject would interest me as well.
Thanks for reading.
The geddon was one of the best large solo pvp ships untill they rapred it. as an ship oftenly used now you see them rarly.
|

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1874
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:37:00 -
[162] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:What should the meta for BSes look like Infinity Ziona? Much like it does now. Battleships are weak in lots of areas against smaller ships, significantly in terms of application of damage and mobility.
Battleships should be given an increased ability to force an engagement, which would mean a significant boost to scan resolution, 150 to 200mm. This along with a sebo with scan res script would allow them to force engagements on battle-cruisers and most cruisers.
Edit: it just struck me as very odd all these usually pro-ganking non-consensual pvp people are so against BS being able to force people to pvp.. Why is that? Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
10445
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:43:00 -
[163] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Riot Girl wrote:What should the meta for BSes look like Infinity Ziona? Much like it does now. Battleships are weak in lots of areas against smaller ships, significantly in terms of application of damage and mobility. Battleships should be given an increased ability to force an engagement, which would mean a significant boost to scan resolution, 150 to 200mm. This along with a sebo with scan res script would allow them to force engagements on battle-cruisers and most cruisers.
But they can already get plenty of engagements with cruisers. Locking times are not what you have put down. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1874
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:45:00 -
[164] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Riot Girl wrote:What should the meta for BSes look like Infinity Ziona? Much like it does now. Battleships are weak in lots of areas against smaller ships, significantly in terms of application of damage and mobility. Battleships should be given an increased ability to force an engagement, which would mean a significant boost to scan resolution, 150 to 200mm. This along with a sebo with scan res script would allow them to force engagements on battle-cruisers and most cruisers. But they can already get plenty of engagements with cruisers. Locking times are not what you have put down. Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3197
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:50:00 -
[165] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Riot Girl wrote:What should the meta for BSes look like Infinity Ziona? Much like it does now. Battleships are weak in lots of areas against smaller ships, significantly in terms of application of damage and mobility. Battleships should be given an increased ability to force an engagement, which would mean a significant boost to scan resolution, 150 to 200mm. This along with a sebo with scan res script would allow them to force engagements on battle-cruisers and most cruisers. But they can already get plenty of engagements with cruisers. Locking times are not what you have put down. Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with. The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't.
No, you didn't, you bought your character illicitly. I've played this game for near a decade, and quit for quite a while in between subs. I have MASSIVE gaps in my knowledge of this game.
But I can't hold a candle to your sheer ignorance. Do you even play this game?
Oh, and I betcha I probably have more flight time in battleships than you do, let alone Baltec, who literally does not fly anything else. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
10445
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 12:50:00 -
[166] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with.
The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't.
So tell me why that golem in the vid was locking cruisers at 8 seconds when you say that is the locking time on battleship sized targets?
As someone who flys BS almost all the time I simply do not see the number that you have stated. Its doesn't even take 19 seconds to lock a drone. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1874
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:00:00 -
[167] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Riot Girl wrote:What should the meta for BSes look like Infinity Ziona? Much like it does now. Battleships are weak in lots of areas against smaller ships, significantly in terms of application of damage and mobility. Battleships should be given an increased ability to force an engagement, which would mean a significant boost to scan resolution, 150 to 200mm. This along with a sebo with scan res script would allow them to force engagements on battle-cruisers and most cruisers. But they can already get plenty of engagements with cruisers. Locking times are not what you have put down. Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with. The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't. No, you didn't, you bought your character illicitly. I've played this game for near a decade, and quit for quite a while in between subs. I have MASSIVE gaps in my knowledge of this game. But I can't hold a candle to your sheer ignorance. Do you even play this game? Oh, and I betcha I probably have more flight time in battleships than you do, let alone Baltec, who literally does not fly anything else. If you think I illegally bought my character than submit a petition to CCP. Since CCP has all my details from 2003 I'm sure they'd be happy to check for you. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

Markku Laaksonen
EVE University Ivy League
397
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:02:00 -
[168] - Quote
Come on guys, that 'your mom' joke was funny. Your mom's so fat she's a marauder class battleship? C'mon, that's grade A stuff.
Sorry, marauders aren't battleships.  DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/
EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
|

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1874
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:04:00 -
[169] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with.
The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't.
So tell me why that golem in the vid was locking cruisers at 8 seconds when you say that is the locking time on battleship sized targets? As someone who flys BS almost all the time I simply do not see the numbers that you have stated. Because 8 seconds is about how long it takes for a battleship to lock a cruiser. Which is about 3 seconds too long to lock one that wants to leave before you lock it.
Factor in your warp in, that 3 second delay where you just sit there at the end of warp and you have no chance to lock a cruiser before it warps away. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1874
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:05:00 -
[170] - Quote
Markku Laaksonen wrote:Come on guys, that 'your mom' joke was funny. Your mom's so fat she's a marauder class battleship? C'mon, that's grade A stuff. Sorry, marauders aren't battleships.  It was okay. Your mums so fat your dad has to light a cyno on the front lawn to get her out of the house... That's better, not mine though :) Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
10446
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:09:00 -
[171] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with.
The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't.
So tell me why that golem in the vid was locking cruisers at 8 seconds when you say that is the locking time on battleship sized targets? As someone who flys BS almost all the time I simply do not see the numbers that you have stated. Because 8 seconds is about how long it takes for a battleship to lock a cruiser. Which is about 3 seconds too long to lock one that wants to leave before you lock it. Factor in your warp in, that 3 second delay where you just sit there at the end of warp and you have no chance to lock a cruiser before it warps away.
I'll quote you.
Infinity Ziona wrote: Raven locking:
A frigate: 19s (Frigate warps in 3s) - consensual pvp only A destroyer: 14 s (destroyer warps in 4s) - consensual pvp only A cruiser: 12 s (cruiser warps in 5s) - consensual pvp only A battlecruiser: 9.5 seconds (battlecruiser warps in 9 seconds) - consensual pvp only A battleships: 8 seconds (battleships warps in 11 seconds) - non-consensual pvp possible
I do not see these numbers in game when fighting people. 8 seconds is is closer to locking a cruiser, not a battleship. Your numbers do not correspond to what I see in game. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1875
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:13:00 -
[172] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with.
The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't.
So tell me why that golem in the vid was locking cruisers at 8 seconds when you say that is the locking time on battleship sized targets? As someone who flys BS almost all the time I simply do not see the numbers that you have stated. Because 8 seconds is about how long it takes for a battleship to lock a cruiser. Which is about 3 seconds too long to lock one that wants to leave before you lock it. Factor in your warp in, that 3 second delay where you just sit there at the end of warp and you have no chance to lock a cruiser before it warps away. I'll quote you. Infinity Ziona wrote: Raven locking:
A frigate: 19s (Frigate warps in 3s) - consensual pvp only A destroyer: 14 s (destroyer warps in 4s) - consensual pvp only A cruiser: 12 s (cruiser warps in 5s) - consensual pvp only A battlecruiser: 9.5 seconds (battlecruiser warps in 9 seconds) - consensual pvp only A battleships: 8 seconds (battleships warps in 11 seconds) - non-consensual pvp possible
I do not see these numbers in game when fighting people. 8 seconds is is closer to locking a cruiser, not a battleship. Your numbers do not correspond to what I see in game. That's without sensor booster. With sensor booster its around 8 seconds.
Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3197
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:14:00 -
[173] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with.
The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't.
So tell me why that golem in the vid was locking cruisers at 8 seconds when you say that is the locking time on battleship sized targets? As someone who flys BS almost all the time I simply do not see the numbers that you have stated. Because 8 seconds is about how long it takes for a battleship to lock a cruiser. Which is about 3 seconds too long to lock one that wants to leave before you lock it. Factor in your warp in, that 3 second delay where you just sit there at the end of warp and you have no chance to lock a cruiser before it warps away. I'll quote you. Infinity Ziona wrote: Raven locking:
A frigate: 19s (Frigate warps in 3s) - consensual pvp only A destroyer: 14 s (destroyer warps in 4s) - consensual pvp only A cruiser: 12 s (cruiser warps in 5s) - consensual pvp only A battlecruiser: 9.5 seconds (battlecruiser warps in 9 seconds) - consensual pvp only A battleships: 8 seconds (battleships warps in 11 seconds) - non-consensual pvp possible
I do not see these numbers in game when fighting people. 8 seconds is is closer to locking a cruiser, not a battleship. Your numbers do not correspond to what I see in game.
That's because he made those numbers up. That, or took them off the E-uni wiki based on minimum skills. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|

Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:15:00 -
[174] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with.
The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't.
No, you didn't, you bought your character illicitly. I've played this game for near a decade, and quit for quite a while in between subs. I have MASSIVE gaps in my knowledge of this game. But I can't hold a candle to your sheer ignorance. Do you even play this game? Oh, and I betcha I probably have more flight time in battleships than you do, let alone Baltec, who literally does not fly anything else. Amusing. How low must a troll sink to try and discredit their opponent. Even more amusing when it blatantly shows their ignorance.
I think you should keep out this discussion Kaarous before you make even more a fool of yourself.
|

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
10446
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:15:00 -
[175] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: That's without sensor booster. With sensor booster its around 8 seconds.
I'm not using one. Equally, a BS can be in warp a lot faster than in 11 seconds. None of the numbers you are posting have any relevance to what happens in game. Before the warp speed changes I was well known for out running cruiser fleets in my mega, with the changes its possible for me leave them in my dust when roaming. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3197
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:19:00 -
[176] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with.
The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't.
No, you didn't, you bought your character illicitly. I've played this game for near a decade, and quit for quite a while in between subs. I have MASSIVE gaps in my knowledge of this game. But I can't hold a candle to your sheer ignorance. Do you even play this game? Oh, and I betcha I probably have more flight time in battleships than you do, let alone Baltec, who literally does not fly anything else. Amusing. How low must a troll sink to try and discredit their opponent. Even more amusing when it blatantly shows their ignorance. I think you should keep out this discussion Kaarous before you make even more a fool of yourself.
A fool of myself? I'm not the one claiming made up lock times. I'm merely calling the person who did, a liar. Which he is, unless pocos became sov assets in the last few hours.
White knight for the liar some more though, it's really impressive.
Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|

Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1875
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:22:00 -
[177] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: That's without sensor booster. With sensor booster its around 8 seconds.
I'm not using one. Equally, a BS can be in warp a lot faster than in 11 seconds. None of the numbers you are posting have any relevance to what happens in game. Before the warp speed changes I was well known for our running cruiser fleets in my mega, with the changes its possible for me leave them in my dust when roaming. You can argue with the data all you want but that's how the game is coded. Whether you "feel" its faster is irrelevant. Go eject a cruiser in space and target it with a base Raven and see for yourself. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |

Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:26:00 -
[178] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:A fool of myself? When it comes to a test of battleship knowledge between Infinity and some random 2012 FW fweddit scrub, I think most people will listen to Infinity. (except for obvious goonswarm proponents with an axe to grind)
The fact that you ask if he has even played the game is amusing in the highest and makes you look a complete fool. I suggest you stick to FW. |

baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
10446
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:27:00 -
[179] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: You can argue with the data all you want but that's how the game is coded. Whether you "feel" its faster is irrelevant. Go eject a cruiser in space and target it with a base Raven and see for yourself.
I have flown battleships for 3 years almost exclusively, it does not take 8 seconds to lock another battleship. You have made a mistake. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |

Chopper Rollins
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
582
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:28:00 -
[180] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:baltec1 wrote:... But they can already get plenty of engagements with cruisers. Locking times are not what you have put down. Except the math and the game says they are. Sorry but its not something that can be argued with. The difference between you and I is I have flown battleships solo since 2003 and, you haven't.
THERE is where you really should have stopped. Came to thread looking for insight, found Unfunnity self-destructing again.
Edit: Sock puppet begone. Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |