Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Stamm
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:36:00 -
[1]
Simple enough.
It does too much damage at too much range.
Taking frequency crystals as an example...
The Aurora gives 100% to range compared to 60% from radio. And does ultraviolet damage (which is -12.5 (minus not plus) to range).
So either reduce the range to 60% bonus and the damage a touch. Or reduce the damage to the same as t1 long range ammo, but keep the 100% range.
|
MadGaz
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:38:00 -
[2]
Radio's suck beyond all doubt, don't nerf aurora aswell --------------------------- What can I put here without getting banned? |
chaos98
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:42:00 -
[3]
correct me if im wrong, but does it not also have a tracking gimp? so...it's supposed to be better than tech1, but it also gimps the ship, im not seeing a problem with it....
|
Ortu Konsinni
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:43:00 -
[4]
Originally by: chaos98 correct me if im wrong, but does it not also have a tracking gimp? so...it's supposed to be better than tech1, but it also gimps the ship, im not seeing a problem with it....
At the ranges people use the long range T2 ammo, tracking isn't really an issue. --- High quality pics of ALL EVE ships!
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:45:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Ithildin on 18/06/2006 17:44:54 I can do nothing but agree with the OP. Long range (long range turret) ammo completely obsoletes all T1 turrets, even best officer turrets. EDIT: Also, T2 long range ammo nerfs Caldari turret ships.
As for Radio, it does too low TH damage, need to do 3 EM and 2 TH on Radio S. (And then extrapolated up to the larger ammos, of course) New sig coming soonÖ Tuxford's good for EVE. |
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:46:00 -
[6]
T2 ammo needs to be balanced atm its stupidly overpowered,
-------------------Sig-----------------------
welcome to eve, a game for the unemployed, the t2 bpo winners, GTC sellers, macro miners and agent *****s |
CardboardSword42
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:47:00 -
[7]
Agreed It's not just a laser problem, Spike and Tremor also need to be looked at.
I'm Ex-Biomass, that makes me cool But now I'm KOS and it's all about the manlove
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:49:00 -
[8]
I can snipe slow-moving cruisers from 80km with Tremor L. Tracking REALLY isn't an issue.
Make Khanid Useful! |
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:49:00 -
[9]
Originally by: CardboardSword42 Agreed It's not just a laser problem, Spike and Tremor also need to be looked at.
NO ALL T2 AMMO NEEDS A NERF not just the long range sniper ammo
the only ones that might be acceptable are the blaster/ac/pulse ammo that does less dmg but more range [ie null does less dmg than AM but gives u a bit more range] the rest are pretty much ftw
-------------------Sig-----------------------
welcome to eve, a game for the unemployed, the t2 bpo winners, GTC sellers, macro miners and agent *****s |
Jenny Spitfire
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 17:53:00 -
[10]
I think 200++ km engagements seriously need looking into. Missiles over 200++ km dont even look or feel scary. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
Quote: Tier 3 Minmatar BS needs Target Painting for bonuses.
|
|
Hey You
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 18:04:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Hey You on 18/06/2006 18:05:04
Originally by: Gronsak
Originally by: CardboardSword42 Agreed It's not just a laser problem, Spike and Tremor also need to be looked at.
NO ALL T2 AMMO NEEDS A NERF not just the long range sniper ammo
the only ones that might be acceptable are the blaster/ac/pulse ammo that does less dmg but more range [ie null does less dmg than AM but gives u a bit more range] the rest are pretty much ftw
YES! NERF HAIL!
Oh, Conflag isn't overpowered. It drains cap like a *****. ------------------------------
|
Frools
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 18:10:00 -
[12]
t2 long range ammo should just give you more damage at the same range as +60% t1 ammo that way you dont completely obsolete t1 turrets but you still get a good advantage to using t2
|
Luc Boye
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 18:11:00 -
[13]
its the only defence against everybody and their mother fitting ECM tho.
|
wierchas noobhunter
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 18:12:00 -
[14]
get of from my spike or die _|_
join soar angelic
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 18:24:00 -
[15]
/me breaks the upraised finger
T2 amo should be T1 damage+special effect
|
Jenny Spitfire
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 18:25:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Luc Boye its the only defence against everybody and their mother fitting ECM tho.
Or buff up EWAR on battleships? So hard to jam or dampen sniping BS at 200++ km. T2 EWAR mods are hard to reach 200++ km. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
Quote: Tier 3 Minmatar BS needs Target Painting for bonuses.
|
Hey You
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 18:28:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Originally by: Luc Boye its the only defence against everybody and their mother fitting ECM tho.
Or buff up EWAR on battleships? So hard to jam or dampen sniping BS at 200++ km. T2 EWAR mods are hard to reach 200++ km.
YES! BOOST ECM! ------------------------------
|
Wizie
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 18:29:00 -
[18]
Agreed, a lot of the tech II ammo is either obscenely overpowered or completely useless.
----------------- Sig removed by some noob |
Lienzo
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:24:00 -
[19]
I see it as a problem that extends from a lack of specialization in the t1 mods themselves.
The fact that regulated ion blaster isn't more specialized to RoF or optimals, or tracking instead of simply being better all around that t1 ion blaster that there is any problem with further specialization from t2 mod components like ammo.
Also, if there was no decent t2 range ammo, inties might never die to an opening barrage unless they ran into a double web at close range. T2 long range ammo that nerfs the mobility or tanking of the shooter is ideal for the shooter's niche. Nobody needs to do more than one thing well at a time.
I also see no reason to not allow t2 ammo to be used in t1 weapons. I don't have a L60 elf with an Epic loincloth in warcraft online for exactly this reason.
Assault Missile Launcher Improvement
|
Kaeten
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:26:00 -
[20]
When they remove the ability that ravens have which is doing the smae constant damage at those extrememe ranges then I can say we can talk, until then...
High-Sec Piracy Recruitment |
|
Dragerest
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:32:00 -
[21]
yes nerf t2 ammo, i mean i trained for weeks to use t2 guns and ammo and i don't like how they blow stuff up better than t1. it just isn't fair.
|
Kaeten
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:34:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Dragerest yes nerf t2 ammo, i mean i trained for weeks to use t2 guns and ammo and i don't like how they blow stuff up better than t1. it just isn't fair.
High-Sec Piracy Recruitment |
Fistme
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:40:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Kaeten When they remove the ability that ravens have which is doing the smae constant damage at those extrememe ranges then I can say we can talk, until then...
No one is going to sit around and let 35 torpedos from a fleet of ravens hit them. However you don't really have that option when you are getting called primary by a blob of turret ships 200k away.
I think most of us would love to see large mixed fleets engage eachother at a variety of ranges with a variety of tactics. Nerfing the hell out of the long range tech 2 ammo is a good start. Either need to nerf the range, or nerf the damage, ideally both by a good amount.
|
Hey You
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:41:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Fistme
Originally by: Kaeten When they remove the ability that ravens have which is doing the smae constant damage at those extrememe ranges then I can say we can talk, until then...
No one is going to sit around and let 35 torpedos from a fleet of ravens hit them. However you don't really have that option when you are getting called primary by a blob of turret ships 200k away.
I think most of us would love to see large mixed fleets engage eachother at a variety of ranges with a variety of tactics. Nerfing the hell out of the long range tech 2 ammo is a good start. Either need to nerf the range, or nerf the damage, ideally both by a good amount.
So turret ship have one advantage over missile users? NERF! ------------------------------
|
Dragerest
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:45:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Fistme
Originally by: Kaeten When they remove the ability that ravens have which is doing the smae constant damage at those extrememe ranges then I can say we can talk, until then...
No one is going to sit around and let 35 torpedos from a fleet of ravens hit them. However you don't really have that option when you are getting called primary by a blob of turret ships 200k away.
I think most of us would love to see large mixed fleets engage eachother at a variety of ranges with a variety of tactics. Nerfing the hell out of the long range tech 2 ammo is a good start. Either need to nerf the range, or nerf the damage, ideally both by a good amount.
main?
|
Stamm
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:54:00 -
[26]
Can we please ignore launchers?
This thread is about T1 ammo versus T2.
Here's something else to back up my arguement.
Look at the difference between T1 and T2 stuff. Generally it's harder to fit, but does 20% extra damage and range.
By that logic the T2 Aurora should do 20% range and 20% damage over a Radio. If they want to flavour it more then have it do the same range and more damage, or higher range and the same damage. But not a massive amount more range, and a MASSIVE amount more damage.
Also please note I'm using frequency crystals as an example. All turret T2 ammo is in the same position.
|
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:58:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Wizie Agreed, a lot of the tech II ammo is either obscenely overpowered or completely useless.
qft
|
Dragerest
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:58:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Stamm Can we please ignore launchers?
This thread is about T1 ammo versus T2.
Here's something else to back up my arguement.
Look at the difference between T1 and T2 stuff. Generally it's harder to fit, but does 20% extra damage and range.
By that logic the T2 Aurora should do 20% range and 20% damage over a Radio. If they want to flavour it more then have it do the same range and more damage, or higher range and the same damage. But not a massive amount more range, and a MASSIVE amount more damage.
Also please note I'm using frequency crystals as an example. All turret T2 ammo is in the same position.
whats the point of T2 than?
|
Wrayeth
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 19:59:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Wrayeth on 18/06/2006 19:59:36 Right now Tremor L is by no means overpowered. It:
A.) Has less range than Spike L or Aurora L. B.) Inflicts less damage per second than the above two. and C.) Misses. A lot. 1400 tracking sucks to begin with, and Tremor just makes it worse. Earlier today I was about 120km from a wolf and shot it with six 1400 II's loaded with Tremor; every shot missed. My friend with tachyon laser II's and Aurora hit with every shot. The worst part about this is that I was running two tracking computer II's, and he was only running one.
EDIT: He was also 20km closer to the wolf, so that should've made it harder for him to hit as well. -Wrayeth
"Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
|
Hey You
|
Posted - 2006.06.18 20:13:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Hey You on 18/06/2006 20:13:39
Originally by: Stamm
Originally by: Wrayeth Edited by: Wrayeth on 18/06/2006 19:59:36 Right now Tremor L is by no means overpowered. It:
A.) Has less range than Spike L or Aurora L. B.) Inflicts less damage per second than the above two. and C.) Misses. A lot. 1400 tracking sucks to begin with, and Tremor just makes it worse. Earlier today I was about 120km from a wolf and shot it with six 1400 II's loaded with Tremor; every shot missed. My friend with tachyon laser II's and Aurora hit with every shot. The worst part about this is that I was running two tracking computer II's, and he was only running one.
EDIT: He was also 20km closer to the wolf, so that should've made it harder for him to hit as well.
A) False. B) False. C) False.
A) False. B) False. C) False.
I can make statements without proof too! ------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |