EVE Search - Blasters balance post with pictures and stuff

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Blasters balance post with pictures and stuff

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 13 post(s)

Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 12:58:00 - [1] Ok as you know blasters are getting some love. They weren't quite complete but a step in the right direction. SiSi has been having its own problems so the changes haven't been ported over to it, so I'm taking another look at the changes. I think it was Rod Blaine that complained that I didn't really explain the reasons behind the changes that well so I'm trying to do it a bit better here. DOT approach Lets just take a look at raw damage over time for a second. Personally I don't think the dot graph makes any sense without the racial bonuses so the graph shows the result with ships bonuses at level 5. As you can see Blasters on a megathron give you the best dot. The 800mm repeating artillery on Tempest isn't far behind but keep in mind that it gets two damage bonuses so when only thinking of damage over time it gets reletively the most increase for each skill level it trains. So with racial battleship at level 4 the difference is a bit larger and this is not factoring reloading time which The mega pulse on an Armageddon don't look to bad, especially considering it has much superior range than the neutron blasters. Lasers kind of have a build in damage bonus that they get at the cost of cap, which is why you could argue that the laser cap bonus is similar to damage bonus for the other turrets and that the energy pulse lasers on an armageddon is kind of like getting two damage bonuses. So although mega pulse lasers look pretty sweet for the armageddon they don't look all that great on the apocalypse. We're really only discussing turret balance here but for completion I've put in the torpedoes on a raven there as well. Now Ships tend to move around in combat so lets put tracking into this. Tracking This is assuming a target with 350m signature radius and transversal velocity of 125m/sec The turrets here look pretty much ok, or at least they look how they should look. Blasters on a mega do the most damage close up followed by artillery and then pulse lasers. Blasters should be better than the other turrets up close so the question is really are they good enough. Blaster boats need to get close to do their killing and unless they are lucky enough to start at 5km away from its opponent it is going to need to make that hard sprint towards its opponent, where its taking damage, not doing damage and wasting cap. Its only consolation is that when it gets close its guns do more damage over time and track better. The only problem is that blasters usually web their targets, if the blaster boat is webbed in return. As you might imagine then two webbed battleship hit each other pretty easily so the tracking advantage on the blasters is pretty much gone. Blasters still do more damage but probably not enough to compensate for the damage it took in the way in. Why am I ranting about webbers? I'm just saying that even with wastly improved tracking blasterboats will still have issues. Ok I might imagine that some of you might be screaming now "OMG ISN'T HE GONNA COMMENT ON TEH TORPEDOES!!!!111". Well I think it starting to dawn on some people why Torpedo raven is so powerful. In a battleship fight the speed of the opponents ship doesn't really factor in for torpedoes. In fact the target needs to go over 1000m/sec before you start to see a damage reduction on torpedoes because of targets speed. On the other hand then signature radius affects torpedoes much worse than turrets and the torpedo user can't simply slow its target down to compensate, it needs to use target painters which are far less effective for missile users than webifiers are for turret users. Moral of story, missiles are different than turrets. Doesn't change the fact that by only looking at this graph then I'd put my money on the Raven but that doesn't have so much to do ... _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 12:58:00 - [2] Blasters. Fitting Lets take a look at grid first. 7 neutron blaster cannons II take up 16 541 MW ignoring the advanced weapon upgrade skill. With engineering level 5 the megathron has 19 375MW to play with so that leaves 2 834MW. Using the same logic on mega pulse lasers on armageddon and apocalypse we find out that Apoc has 5125MW and Armageddon has 1 375MW. Gridwise I think blasters are fine, it is somewhat easier to fit mega pulse on an apoc but it doesn't really do the same damage as blasterthron, and although arma gets pretty close to the damage output its a bit harder to fit than mega. CPU Using the same logic as with the grid then megathron with blasters has 204.5 tf left, apoc 254 tf and arma 191.5 tf. This is with the 10% reduction in cpu. I guess the cpu left is a bit low. Giving it a 15% reduction gets it down to 62tf which it leaves it with 253.5 tf left which is pretty similar to apocalypse with mega pulse lasers. Cap I said I would lower the cap by 15%. Ignoring bonuses then that brings neutron blasters down to 2.8 cap/sec. Mega pulse laser with amarr battleship level 5 use 2.53 cap/sec. Ok I'll admit it maybe a was a bit to conservative since I would think even at level 5 neutron blasters should still use less cap/sec than megapulse lasers. Reducing it to 25% lowers it to about 2.5 which is about the same as mega pulse lasers and 30% brings it down to 2.3 cap/sec. So what does that mean. Well the cap need will be reduced further, probably by 30% rather than 25%. CPU need decreased by about 15% instead of 10%. Tracking very possibly boosted a bit but it's hard to pin down a number and it really won't fix everything about blasters. So this was a little glimpse into my twisted mind, flame away. p.s. Happy Birthday _______________

Katamarino	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:02:00 - [3] All seems to make a lot of sense
SasRipper	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:02:00 - [4] Edited by: SasRipper on 06/05/2006 13:02:36 still they use 2 much cap tbh by the time you compesate for mwding to target and the cap used to rep on the way to the target they sent the gank squad after my sig
golden dreamer	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:03:00 - [5] Edited by: golden dreamer on 06/05/2006 13:04:06 blasters are getting the love they need
Orvas Dren	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:03:00 - [6] I love you man.
wierchas noobhunter	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:08:00 - [7] yes <3 nice mode ON/off Naughty - don't discuss moderation on the forums! - Cathath
Ben Hump	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:12:00 - [8] Edited by: Ben Hump on 06/05/2006 13:12:40 i feel the love but what about autocannons they track nicely and hit from for away with emp (wich is good) but 6x 800mm II temp would never outdamage a 7x neutron blaster II mega but i think the ions vs the dual 650mm II are a closer fight but there is one thing javelin torp or rage torp ravens are fkn evil even if u have 2 defenders (f.ex) would never kill one single torp from a raven if u are 5000m away from him (boost defenders) edit: happy birthday everyone May contain traces of irony "Yes Mister Tristan"
keepiru	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:12:00 - [9] Yes, the other problems are more related to the ship & modus operandi of the setup than the blasters - they dont look easy to fix though im sure some people will proclaim some "obvious" solutions. Looking good, step in the right direction if nothign else. And happy birthday. ---------------- Official ISD cake & bree reserve thief. Barricades a speciality! Last stands on request.
keepiru	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:15:00 - [10] Originally by: Tuxford Tracking very possibly boosted a bit but it's hard to pin down a number Especially with the tracking bonus boost... ---------------- Official ISD cake & bree reserve thief. Barricades a speciality! Last stands on request.
Nebuli	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:23:00 - [11] Certainly a step in the right direction, at last I might add. As for the raven thing, tbh I think Blasterthron will never be able to beat a torp/cap injected raven, think its best to just run away from them, after extensive testing over months and months of playing with set ups my fully tech II fitted thron with my char being around since 2003 so pretty good skills vs a 6 month old alt with tech I fittings, even starting in optimal = dead Blasterthron heh. But as long as it can stand a fighting chance against other BS, and thats all we are asking realy a fighting chance against other pvp fitted BSs then I'll be happy, as atm its killing npc'ers or badly fitted/skilled BS pilots only, anything else and you just get killed heh. CEO - Art of War
Raptornas	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:23:00 - [12] Orgasms Ta very much Mr Tux sir. __
errorist	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:25:00 - [13] *gives tuxford a big carebearish hug all of us gallente pilots are in love with your idea i think :D now we can finally fitt full neuts If something is hard going, its not worth doing
Ithildin	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:35:00 - [14] Tuxford, can you do the CPU and Powergrid comparisons again, but this time fit an MWD on the Megathron and nothing else on the Geddon/Apoc. They've got the range for not needing an MWD, the Megathron doesn't. New sig coming soonÖ Drone musing (MC-boards)
Termy	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:40:00 - [15] Originally by: Ithildin Tuxford, can you do the CPU and Powergrid comparisons again, but this time fit an MWD on the Megathron and nothing else on the Geddon/Apoc. They've got the range for not needing an MWD, the Megathron doesn't. and injector... ----------- Not Blue = Shoot It
GoGo Yubari	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:41:00 - [16] Also, somehow using 800mm autocannons as a comparison seems iffy. They suck, you know.

Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:42:00 - [17] Originally by: Ithildin Tuxford, can you do the CPU and Powergrid comparisons again, but this time fit an MWD on the Megathron and nothing else on the Geddon/Apoc. They've got the range for not needing an MWD, the Megathron doesn't. But the megathron really has the advantage with an mwd since its can control the range. Anyways the tech 2 mwd takes 1375 MW and 75tf. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:44:00 - [18] Originally by: GoGo Yubari Also, somehow using 800mm autocannons as a comparison seems iffy. They suck, you know. They still do more damage over time than dual 625mm although when you factor in the reloading just barely and further factor in the human response probably worse than the dual 625mm. _______________

GoGo Yubari	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:46:00 - [19] Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: GoGo Yubari Also, somehow using 800mm autocannons as a comparison seems iffy. They suck, you know. They still do more damage over time than dual 625mm although when you factor in the reloading just barely and further factor in the human response probably worse than the dual 625mm. And though the figure gives them nice tracking nearby, they really hit everything but the target. Nevertheless, they end up being the least used autocannons.
Ithildin	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:52:00 - [20] Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Ithildin Tuxford, can you do the CPU and Powergrid comparisons again, but this time fit an MWD on the Megathron and nothing else on the Geddon/Apoc. They've got the range for not needing an MWD, the Megathron doesn't. But the megathron really has the advantage with an mwd since its can control the range. Anyways the tech 2 mwd takes 1375 MW and 75tf. No, it hasn't got an advantage. The acceleration and agility on the Megathron is too low for the Megathron to truely dictate range. At the same time the signature radius even when the MWD is not active makes anything but the slowest tracking long range turrets fail to hit (large signature radius, as well as very low speed and agility). In theory and on paper, this isn't exactly true. In practice, however, all you can truely rely on is that you do more damage per second (after tanking and resistance) that the enemy dies before you do. Additionally, if the MWD is also fitted on Apoc/Geddon, the Megathron is in for a serious hurting. The advantage of the MWD only works for the short range turret ship if the enemy doesn't have an MWD. (The same goes for webbifier - it's only an advantage for the short range ship if the enemy doesn't have foresight to fit one) As such, I claim with solid basis, that the MWD is not an advantage. It is a necessity and should be taken into account for both capacitor and fitting reasons. MWD is an advantage for long range ships, if they can/care to fit one. For close range - necessity. New sig coming soonÖ Drone musing (MC-boards)

Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 13:52:00 - [21] Originally by: GoGo Yubari Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: GoGo Yubari Also, somehow using 800mm autocannons as a comparison seems iffy. They suck, you know. They still do more damage over time than dual 625mm although when you factor in the reloading just barely and further factor in the human response probably worse than the dual 625mm. And though the figure gives them nice tracking nearby, they really hit everything but the target. Nevertheless, they end up being the least used autocannons. Of course noone uses them. If you can choose between two weapons that do the same damage but one is easier to fit then of course you choose the one that is easier to fit. But for looking at dot not factoring in reload or fitting I can just as well use 800mm. _______________


Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:00:00 - [22] By my numbers megathron is the second lightest tech 1 battleship with the third highest base speed. So apart from Typhoon and Tempest its the fastest one with mwd. So even when the arma or apoc fit an mwd mega still dictates the range. _______________

keepiru	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:03:00 - [23] Originally by: Ithildin As such, I claim with solid basis, that the MWD is not an advantage. It is a necessity and should be taken into account for both capacitor and fitting reasons. Even assuming something like that was to happen, the thing that worries me is that pans out across classes, cases in point their effect on the taranis (bad, its strong enough), deimos (good, being able to fit it as well as a brutix is a necessity i think) and the brutix itself (i fly one, and i think that while full ion racks with mwd & injector & dual reps would be nifty, its strong enough). Any grid reduction would probably require a good look at the grid of all blasterships... ---------------- Official ISD cake & bree reserve thief. Barricades a speciality! Last stands on request.
Ithildin	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:13:00 - [24] Tux, the speed difference with the MWD going needs to be a lot higher than 5-10 m/s. We're talking about time until the Megathron gets in proper range, not effective/percentual differences. Keepiru, I'm talking about how blaster fitting affects the Megathron, not how the MWD fitting affects the Megathron. New sig coming soonÖ Drone musing (MC-boards)
Xune	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:16:00 - [25] Originally by: Tuxford By my numbers megathron is the second lightest tech 1 battleship with the third highest base speed. So apart from Typhoon and Tempest its the fastest one with mwd. So even when the arma or apoc fit an mwd mega still dictates the range. it might be.. but still the differance is to low realy.. if ou ask me the vindicator got the right acceleration/agility... mega should get the same.
keepiru	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:18:00 - [26] So, uh... are you saying the thron should get more grid, or that blasters should take less? I though you meant the latter, but now im not so sure. ---------------- Official ISD cake & bree reserve thief. Barricades a speciality! Last stands on request.
Dreez	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:20:00 - [27] Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Ithildin Tuxford, can you do the CPU and Powergrid comparisons again, but this time fit an MWD on the Megathron and nothing else on the Geddon/Apoc. They've got the range for not needing an MWD, the Megathron doesn't. But the megathron really has the advantage with an mwd since its can control the range. Anyways the tech 2 mwd takes 1375 MW and 75tf. Can you give me a valid reason & explanation to why you made the Blasterthron slower in the last patches ?. A while back, with my Nawskills, i did over 1km/s in 2 bursts with a Quad-Lif MWD. Now i have to drain about 50% of my cap to even get over that speed. Also, answer me this. Do you concider it fair that a Blasterthron which is sacrifising so much, will always be nr:2 in CQC against the torp-raven ?. Your figures are good when it comes to damage, but you¦ll need take in concideration, that hybrid damage overall, is the most resisted damage and thereby lowering the DPS by a huge amount. And last but not least. Where are our most destructive turrets ?. Current Location: After 2 years of waiting, getting ready for another hunt.
Ithildin	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:22:00 - [28] No, I'm saying that the comparison isn't very good considering that the Megathron needs an MWD while the Pulse Apoc/Geddon does not. New sig coming soonÖ Drone musing (MC-boards)

Tuxford	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:22:00 - [29] Originally by: Xune Originally by: Tuxford By my numbers megathron is the second lightest tech 1 battleship with the third highest base speed. So apart from Typhoon and Tempest its the fastest one with mwd. So even when the arma or apoc fit an mwd mega still dictates the range. it might be.. but still the differance is to low realy.. if ou ask me the vindicator got the right acceleration/agility... mega should get the same. Vindicator has the same velocity as a mega but the is heavier. Of course I can just go ahead and increase the mass on the mega if you want that I know it is not much of a difference but given that both ships have the same stuff fitted (mwd, webber) then the armageddon can't get away from the mega once its in range. _______________

Ithildin	Posted - 2006.05.06 14:23:00 - [30] Originally by: Tuxford Originally by: Xune Originally by: Tuxford By my numbers megathron is the second lightest tech 1 battleship with the third highest base speed. So apart from Typhoon and Tempest its the fastest one with mwd. So even when the arma or apoc fit an mwd mega still dictates the range. it might be.. but still the differance is to low realy.. if ou ask me the vindicator got the right acceleration/agility... mega should get the same. Vindicator has the same velocity as a mega but the is heavier. Of course I can just go ahead and increase the mass on the mega if you want that The Vindicator has about 33% better agility than any other battleship. New sig coming soonÖ Drone musing (MC-boards)

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.