EVE Search - Amarr

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Amarr

» 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 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 .. 98 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Dixon Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.21 17:59:00 - [1951] Originally by: Mila Prestoc Dixon - You missed the point. The actual best ammo for projectile against shields is Phased Plasma as Aramendel said (was sure I said it but must of cut it out while trimming post down) The problem is you can't just boost lasers due to a specific armour tank. That hurts the 3x hardener tanks and shield tankers forcing them to use said tank as well. I didn't miss any point, you however did. I don't want a boost to lasers, that would IMO just be stupid. EANMIIs is what I want nerfed, nothing else. - - - - - - I have no strong feelings one way or the other...
Kuolematon Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United	Posted - 2006.08.21 20:49:00 - [1952] EANMII nerf will not solve anything .. but creating something else to amarr will. Replace stupid "cap usage" on ships and reduce cap usage on lasers and put REAL damage bonus to amarr ships. Unnerf Amarr! "Just because you can utterly ruin another player's game doesn't mean that you must."
Miri Tirzan Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.21 21:02:00 - [1953] I still think the easiest fix is swap EM and Thermal damage. That will go along way to making Lasers equal to all other weapons that cannot switch damage types. svetlana - "whining gets you stuff. that is why humans got to the top of the food chain and all the other animals got nerfed."
Kaylana Syi Minmatar The Nest	Posted - 2006.08.22 05:02:00 - [1954] Originally by: Miri Tirzan I still think the easiest fix is swap EM and Thermal damage. That will go along way to making Lasers equal to all other weapons that cannot switch damage types. I don't think so. EM is, traditionally, best on shield tankers while Explosive is best on armor. Thermal and Kinetic are secondary resisted damage and can be tertiary. The problem isn't that amarr are terribly bad... its that shield tanking in pvp isn't good compared to a EANM tank + ECM. Give 'one' crystal higher thermal as an exception to the rule ( for both t1 and t2 crystals ) but EM should always be the best damage for amarr. Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
Xendie Out Siders Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.23 12:41:00 - [1955] nomatter what something needs to be done. some kind of fix has to be thought out to fix the amarr race. Quote: Nertzius > having fun being incompetitent?
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2006.08.23 13:29:00 - [1956] Edited by: Death Kill on 23/08/2006 13:29:43 What about just boosting the em damage of crystals, not THAT much but just enough to put Amarr back in the game. edit : Boosting the em damage as much as the eanII and passive tanking skils boosted em resistance. For the state for the state for the state
Pesadel0	Posted - 2006.08.23 13:45:00 - [1957] Edited by: Pesadel0 on 23/08/2006 13:47:14 Originally by: Kuolematon EANMII nerf will not solve anything .. but creating something else to amarr will. Replace stupid "cap usage" on ships and reduce cap usage on lasers and put REAL damage bonus to amarr ships. You had your time when all the people were going Armageddon's ,that time will not come again ,the ammarians only need the damage switched to thermal and a complete overhaul to SOME of their ships nothing more.
Nyxus GALAXIAN	Posted - 2006.08.23 13:48:00 - [1958] Originally by: Death Kill Edited by: Death Kill on 23/08/2006 13:29:43 What about just boosting the em damage of crystals, not THAT much but just enough to put Amarr back in the game. edit : Boosting the em damage as much as the eanII and passive tanking skils boosted em resistance. That would be a 50% damage increase. And while I would love to fly around in "pwn mode" with this it prolly isn't very balanced. Really EANIIs need to be nerfed back to 15%. Individual passives need to be boosted to 50% with skills. Actives could prolly be boosted a bit as well, 55% T1 and 60% T2 as Ithildin suggested. Otherwise we could change the base resists, 35% for Armor and 25% EM for shields. Or something along those lines. Either would get the job done really. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Kardim Resurrection R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.23 13:54:00 - [1959] honestly i hate hearing about the geddon in this thread, the geddon is more responsible for our situation now than any other amarr ship. the devs balanced our whole race against it
Nyxus GALAXIAN	Posted - 2006.08.23 14:14:00 - [1960] Originally by: Kardim honestly i hate hearing about the geddon in this thread, the geddon is more responsible for our situation now than any other amarr ship. the devs balanced our whole race against it QFT The Geddon is good, and needs to be considered without a doubt. It's just too bad that all the other Amarr ships suck because making adjustments may make the geddon a bit better. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants

Gariuys Evil Strangers Inc.	Posted - 2006.08.23 14:20:00 - [1961] Originally by: Jim McGregor Edited by: Jim McGregor on 21/08/2006 17:49:10 Ah never mind... I dont want to argue in this thread anyway. Yeah, personally I feel teaching a hungry lion how to fish while being covered in a thick layer of fresh blood would be a more productive use of my time.... accomplish very little on the learning front, but atleast the lions fed.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.23 14:21:00 - [1962] Originally by: Gariuys Originally by: Jim McGregor Edited by: Jim McGregor on 21/08/2006 17:49:10 Ah never mind... I dont want to argue in this thread anyway. Yeah, personally I feel teaching a hungry lion how to fish while being covered in a thick layer of fresh blood would be a more productive use of my time.... accomplish very little on the learning front, but atleast the lions fed. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Andreask14 Sensus Numinis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.23 14:22:00 - [1963] So, most of the ships are armor tankers. Many fit EANIIs. That means, most of the ships have a tank that takes 50% less damage from ANY source, scince the RANII armor tank hardens each resistance by approx. 50%. Before this EM wasnt hardned at all when armor tanking. Now, armor tanks take 50% less damage from ANY source! This means, that while EM has no disadvantage now, scince ALL SOUCES GET 50% LESS damage, it had a massive advantage before the EANIIs, when it did not get hardened at all. And while ALL DAMAGE TYPES get 50% less impact on EANII, EM still gets the best impact on shields, if you fit invul. field hardening, which many do. Additionally, Lasers do more raw damge than hyrids or projectiles thanks to their superior optimal, RoF (<- most important), higher damgage modifier and tracking. Strandad crystals do exactly the same base damage than lead hyrid charges, as do all other ammos of the same class, albeit the values may be split a litte between damage types. But it does NOT matter when you talk about equal hardeners. I am afraid we have to realize that, in fact, damage types are balanced, especially when talking about EANIIs. THINK ABOUT IT All damage types get hardened by 50%, but lasers STILL do more raw damage, at the expense of a little more cap use, that is 5% with optimal skills (50% less from ships boni, and 45% from standard crystal, while rails get 50% from the lead ammo and the guns have 50% less base cap use). Its tough luck, but the truth is, that while lasers did way more damge before the EANII boost, they are now IN LINE, and not underpowered with other turret weapons. TBH, things are very balanced on this side of things.
Kardim Resurrection R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.23 15:05:00 - [1964] honestly i thouht as u did that everybody gets 50% less dmg so must be even, but then started to do the math and was quite dissapointed. look to page 60 post 1794 sir for a good going over the numbers w/ this. hybrids cant be compared completly w/ lasers because blasters do so much more raw dps. and yes i know that lasers are oooo much better tracking, but when u get under the optimal the tracking isnt sufficient really and honestly most battles happen under the optimal of lasers, maybe save for a sniper ship but then amarr snipers really have some to be desired. personally i never trained projectiles as somehow around launch i picked up a slight r/p hatred of anything minmitar unless they are scrubbing my ships (: so cant really speak for them.
Nyxus GALAXIAN	Posted - 2006.08.23 15:22:00 - [1965] Quote: THINK ABOUT IT All damage types get hardened by 50%, but lasers STILL do more raw damage Apoc with EANIIx2 + DC 80EM/60Expl/62.5Kin/67.5Therm So lasers would need to do roughly 50% more base damage to make up the difference? I challenge you to run the numbers and post them here. I, and several others, have done so already. And Amarr gets the shaft big time because of EAN IIs +DC. Otherwise it's hypocritical to ask people to "THINK ABOUT IT" without doing so yourself. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.23 17:28:00 - [1966] Edited by: Aramendel on 23/08/2006 17:29:16 Originally by: Gariuys Originally by: Jim McGregor Edited by: Jim McGregor on 21/08/2006 17:49:10 Ah never mind... I dont want to argue in this thread anyway. Yeah, personally I feel teaching a hungry lion how to fish while being covered in a thick layer of fresh blood would be a more productive use of my time.... accomplish very little on the learning front, but atleast the lions fed. Actually Jimmys original post was an agreement that if shield exp resist is lower for all he cares armor em resist can be lowered, too. He then probably realised that if this is not done by simply removing the resistance (which would screw the balance somewhat in disfavour to hybrids since thouse would the suffer more resistances than laser/projectiles) but by switching it over to the other tanking system (aka EM res armor -> shield and exp res shield -> armor) it would be effeciently a nerf for projectiles for obvious reasons and quickly edited his post. At least this showed that Jimmy is quite aware of the problem and is just trolling. Originally by: Andreask14 ...This means, that while EM has no disadvantage now, scince ALL SOUCES GET 50% LESS damage, it had a massive advantage before the EANIIs, when it did not get hardened at all. Additionally, Lasers do more raw damge than hyrids or projectiles thanks to their superior optimal, RoF (<- most important), higher damgage modifier and tracking... "Not hardened at all" exept the base 60% (for non-minnie ships) EM resistance of armor. Armor resistances with 3 harderners were pretty equal pre-RMR. Sure lasers do more shield damage, but since we have peraps 1 in 5 pvp fitted ships doing a shieldtank this is of not much use. And, no, lasers do not really do more raw damage than hybrids. A megabeam with a 50% cap bonus does actually slightly less dps than a 425 rail with a 25% damage bonus. Some amarr ships have a ROF bonus, too, but those have a weaker tank than other ships of the same class. It is an tradeoff, no advantage. Also, pulse lasers have the best optimal and worst tracking of shortrange weapons, beam lasers the best tracking and worst optimal. I agree with Nyxus here, you obviously have not "THOUGHT ABOUT IT" youself.
Andreask14 Sensus Numinis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.23 17:33:00 - [1967] Ok, so i did a short rundown of the number. First, i compared Large Ion Blaster 1 to Mega Pulse laser 1. Lets assume these are fitted to an APOC each which is EANII+DC hardned. There are no other mods, skills or implants involved in this comparisons, just the guns and the hardeners. Also, both weapons are fitted with their most damaging ammo, Antimatter for the Blasters and Multifrequency for the Pulses. This means that the pulses get a range of 10k and the blasters a range of 2.5k, while the blasters have nearly double as much tracking. The raw damage done by one shot of the blaster is 135, and 144 for the pulse, thus the pulse does 7% more raw damage, judging only by the ammo and damage-modifier. Now we add the resistances. When one blaster shot tries to punch through resis of 62.5% kin and 67.5% therm at optimal range with no transversal, leaving a damage of 47,81. The pulse lasers damages for 36,3 after 80% of Em and 67.5% of therm resis. So, the blaster does 31% more damage after resis, assuming both weapons are mounted on an APOC with 0 transversal and the hits are of equal quality, that means both are in their optimal in this case, thus the ships are no farther than 2.5k from eachother. Also, signature radius and resolution is equal for both. --------------------- I did the same comparison between an APOC mounted with a 425mm Railgun and a Mega Beam Laser. This time, they use the longest range t1 ammo, thats Iron Charge and Radio Crystals. 76,8 km optimal vs 64 km optimal, so lets assume we shoot at 64km. The railgun has less tracking by a good margin, but i wont factor that in right now. Before resists the one 425mm does 55 points of raw damage, and the radio crystal does 60. So the radio does 9% more damage. After our EANII resists on an APOC, the 425mm does 19,52 points of damage to the armor and the beam laser with radio does 12. That means that the railgun does 62% more damage in a single shot on the EANII hardned armor of an APOC, when not factoring in and transversal, tracking, signatures, skill, boni and reloads. Shortrange blasters do 31% more damge in a single shot than pulses, long range rails do 62% more damage in a single shot than beams. HOWEVER When you use the turret guide and factor in tracking, you will see that pulses and beams have a higher chance to hit when any transversal is factored in, the blasters even never reach the peak hit-chance of a pulse, ever, not even AT their optimal. This means that the tracking speed/distance ratio of a balster is worth than that of a pulse. The beams have a better chance to hit up to their optimal, then the 425mm takes over of course. --------------------------------------- As we can see blasters do a third more damage than pulses versus a hardned apoc and 425mm do even two thirds more damage than a beam, in their respective optimals.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.23 17:59:00 - [1968] No offence, but you comparsion is like that pretty meaningless because forget a little thing. ROF. Ion Blaster Cannon has a 6.75, Mega Pulse 7.88 -> IBC dps boost vs MP of 14.5% 425 rail has 9.56, a mega beam 9.00 -> MB dps boost vs 425 of 6.2% Another thing is that the tracking/range issues are pretty much the reverse for shortrange and longrange. Beam has less range, more tracking than rail. Pulse has more range, but worse tracking than blaster. If you compare a beam vs the rail at the beam optimal obviously the beam has a tracking advantage. But the same is the case when you compare a blaster vs a pulse at the blaster optimal, there the blaster can hit better.
Nyxus GALAXIAN	Posted - 2006.08.23 18:30:00 - [1969] Wait......are you comparing a Rail Apoc vs a Megabeam Apoc? Don't you think that MAY be a bit skewed? A Rail Thron vs a Megabeam Apoc and a Blasterthron vs a Pulse Apoc would make a helluva lot more sense. You may not be saying that you are using a Rail Apoc, but I read it three times and can't be sure. Can you clarify a bit please? Thanks, Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Andreask14 Sensus Numinis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.23 18:33:00 - [1970] I said i didnt factor in RoF, and i addressed the optimal and tracking issues. The tracking guide says my calculations are absolutely right, it does give out the very same DPS. My calculations are right to the point, i checkedd them versus the item data base, the tracking guide and the in-game data. As we can see, hybrids, may it be blasters or rails, are superior to lasers in their optimal, they even do more damage when attacking an EANII hardned ship, and that without any boni or skills.

Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.23 18:38:00 - [1971] Edited by: Aramendel on 23/08/2006 18:44:29 Ah, yes, did not even notice this. Yes, the rails are on an apoc (or at least no BS which has a bonus for them). Iron is 12 kin, 8 ther, aka 20 base damage, with the base 2.75 damagemod of the t1 425 that are 55 damage as he wrote. So in addition to the ROF mods he can also increase the hybrid dps by 25%. --- /edit The thing is if you compare only one single stat of a weapon you have a very high chance to get wrong results. For example, do the same damage per salvo calculation with a 1400mm and you would get as result that those are WAY WAY stronger than any other weapon. Comparing only one stat does not give you a "base line", it gives you in most cases a wrong start.
Andreask14 Sensus Numinis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.23 18:49:00 - [1972] Listen, i did not want to check the actual outcome of a fight, all i wanted to know is what weapons do which amount of damage against a EANII tank. This comparison was about the tank, not the weapons, that is why one hit is enough to measure, scince a passive tank wont loose or gain effectiveness over time. My result is: The EANII+DC tank is more effective against lasers than against hybrids, scince the hybrid weapons do 31% and 62% more damage respectively WHEN they hit THAT TANK, on armor, on an apoc, per hit, without boni or skills. See, the comparison is about the tank, not the weapons.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.23 18:50:00 - [1973] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 23/08/2006 18:53:24 Originally by: Aramendel Actually Jimmys original post was an agreement that if shield exp resist is lower for all he cares armor em resist can be lowered, too. He then probably realised that if this is not done by simply removing the resistance (which would screw the balance somewhat in disfavour to hybrids since thouse would the suffer more resistances than laser/projectiles) but by switching it over to the other tanking system (aka EM res armor -> shield and exp res shield -> armor) it would be effeciently a nerf for projectiles for obvious reasons and quickly edited his post. At least this showed that Jimmy is quite aware of the problem and is just trolling. Umm no. I wrote something along those lines, then realized it was a really stupid idea and then deleted it after 30 seconds. I do that sometimes, talk before i think and also write before i think. :) So please dont include me on the support side for the idea... thanks. I really dont want to argue in this thread...its so pointless. If someone like me flies minmatar then my opinions are biased... and vice versa. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Nyxus GALAXIAN	Posted - 2006.08.23 18:58:00 - [1974] I went ahead and did the graph of damage for you. 1 weapon on an Apoc compared to 1 weapon on a Megathron. 1 Weapon comparison> Megabeam Apoc vs Rail Thron and Pulse Poc vs Blasterthron. Interesting, but not all that informative. Now pick a given range and apply those resistance numbers to the DPS accordingly. It makes Amarr users sad little bunnies. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.23 19:06:00 - [1975] Originally by: Andreask14 Listen, i did not want to check the actual outcome of a fight, all i wanted to know is what weapons do which amount of damage against a EANII tank. This comparison was about the tank, not the weapons, that is why one hit is enough to measure, scince a passive tank wont loose or gain effectiveness over time. .... See, the comparison is about the tank, not the weapons. Sorry, but that is an awfully flawed reasoning. You cannot compare the tank without looking at all weapon stats. The damage mod is only one stat of it. For example, comapre the tank with ACs and artys. You would conclude that arties deal more damage than ACs, yet when you take the ROF into account AC have an higher dps. No matter what you compare under which circumstances, you have to take all stats into account. You cannot just pick one and ignore the others. If you want "to know is what weapons do which amount of damage against a EANII tank" you have to do just that.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.23 19:08:00 - [1976] Originally by: Aramendel I have equal skills in amarr and minnie ships - so my opinions are unbiased then, right? Im leaving this thread now... bye.... --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
inSpirAcy Caldari The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.08.23 19:11:00 - [1977] Edited by: inSpirAcy on 23/08/2006 19:11:49 Originally by: Jim McGregor Im leaving this thread now... bye.... But you made the 2000th post! Edit: Oops, looks like Ara took that honour.
Nyxus GALAXIAN	Posted - 2006.08.23 19:15:00 - [1978] This is how Amarr really feel these days. OMG why does Tux hate us! Although really that should be Caldari and Gallente since they seem to be the pwnsall these days. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.08.23 19:31:00 - [1979] I've been thinking (ohnoes!), what if capacitor use on lasers were cut by 35% (lasers'll be the most capacitor intensive weapon - but not by too much - while in turn also have another bonus) and the cap use bonus changed. What kind of bonus'd Amarr ships have in it's place? Now, before you get all lyrical and stuff, I've gone ahead and made a quick calculation - damage bonus would be completely and utterly overpowered, so don't even go there. Nyxus: If you change the compensation skills to add 2% to active resistance hardener gain, and then make EAN an activated hardener, would that suffice you think? It'll nerf EAN2's maximum resistance output from 25% to 22%. At the same time, this has the desired effect on current active hardeners, as described earlier, without changing their stats. All that'd be left after this is to boost the passive plates a bit (the same is true for shields, although with shields the invulnerability fields need to be nerfed a wee bit - from 30% to 20%) Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death
inSpirAcy Caldari The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.08.23 19:34:00 - [1980] Originally by: Ithildin I've been thinking (ohnoes!), what if capacitor use on lasers were cut by 35% (lasers'll be the most capacitor intensive weapon - but not by too much - while in turn also have another bonus) and the cap use bonus changed. What kind of bonus'd Amarr ships have in it's place? 10% bonus to Energy Turret Heat per level. The lasers become, erm... less efficient, and their EM damage becomes more thermal.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 .. 98 :: 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.