EVE Search - Please, do something with laser turrets...pretty please :-)

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Please, do something with laser turrets...pretty please :-)

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Tahira	Posted - 2006.08.19 07:46:00 - [1] You know, I could wine and cry about how a 3-5 million SP character piloting a Raven is more effect in pretty much every facet of the game than I am (16 Million SP) in my Apoc. I could wine that it takes a GREAT deal longer to train guns period that missiles. There are a LOT of things you could say about missiles vs. guns, however, I only want to make one suggestion. Please add different types of damage crystals to lasers. I really hope this will be in the next patch, but if not, I am really surprised it isn't. Every other race gets some love with that. When it comes to the Amarr, we get ripped off on this. How is it that we could have survived so long on just Therm/EM damage? It's **** is what it is. Please add some kin/expl damage mods to lasers. Much appreciated.
Bhoki Tentor	Posted - 2006.08.19 07:58:00 - [2] and what about hybrids then? They're only thermal and kinetic, surely they would need other damage types as well then? Oh and you should boost projectiles then cause if hybrids and lasers would be able to do all damage types having them do less damage isn't justified... Then again we can force everyone to just fly noobship with civi guns and be done with all the flavour and call the game balanced... Lasers are fine as they are. It's the mid slot/low slot weight ratio that is out of whack causing people to favour armor tanking causing overall higher average em resists then before the tanking boost(which just made the issue stand out more with the boost to eanm)
Angelic Resolution The Arcanum	Posted - 2006.08.20 14:59:00 - [3] Originally by: Bhoki Tentor and what about hybrids then? They're only thermal and kinetic, surely they would need other damage types as well then? Oh and you should boost projectiles then cause if hybrids and lasers would be able to do all damage types having them do less damage isn't justified... Then again we can force everyone to just fly noobship with civi guns and be done with all the flavour and call the game balanced... Lasers are fine as they are. It's the mid slot/low slot weight ratio that is out of whack causing people to favour armor tanking causing overall higher average em resists then before the tanking boost(which just made the issue stand out more with the boost to eanm) Stop trolling dude. Otherwise I agree with the rest of your statement but tell me this: Do hybrid users need to train for an extra 2 weeks to use all their guns effectively? Nope. Fighting a projectile user is a real ***** if they use the right ammo, ever tried tanking 3 damage types effectively?
Darius Shakor Minmatar Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.08.20 15:14:00 - [4] Edited by: Darius Shakor on 20/08/2006 15:14:59 Amarr ships tank better than any others. It is only fair their weapons are worse against armour than any others. You take longer to kill but you live longer than any others. Fair by my book. Yes it is a little more complex than that I know and there are other issues with grid for fitting etc. But that is the basic of why they get no explosive mod. Answer me this. Why would a beam of light create an explosion? Or how can light form a solid piercing entity for kinetic damage? They can't. So shoving a crystal in there and suddenly the light makes an explosion makes no sense. ------ Shakor Clan Information Portal http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=3
Lucian Corvinus Gallente Expert Systems	Posted - 2006.08.20 15:23:00 - [5] Originally by: Tahira I could wine that it takes a GREAT deal longer to train guns period that missiles. There are a LOT of things you could say about missiles vs. guns, however, I only want to make one suggestion. Much appreciated. There are more sp in missiles than per turret group, so stop your whining, only problem is that missile users are not "forced" to train the smaller missile weapons before moving up to the bigger ones.

Sharkbait	Posted - 2006.08.20 15:57:00 - [6] moving to ships and modules

Jenny Spitfire Caldari LoneStar Industries Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.20 15:59:00 - [7] Originally by: Sharkbait moving to ships and modules Bad boy. Sharkbait. Bad bad bad boy. --------- In the blindness, a streak fiery thread violently cuts the horizon. Bleeding golden mists, engulfing the blindness from within. Burning the darkness. The touch of dawn.
TribalBleb Turbulent	Posted - 2006.08.20 16:05:00 - [8] Originally by: Sharkbait moving to ships and modules omg thought we finally had a dev reply on this issue for a second there
Pesadel0	Posted - 2006.08.20 16:16:00 - [9] Originally by: Sharkbait moving to ships and modules Lol :) ,shark is ebil ebil :)
Princess Kane	Posted - 2006.08.20 16:17:00 - [10] I agree, there needs to be more damage types with lasers. Its pretty bad when the Apoc is only good for mining, while my corp mates enjoy hunting angels with any ship other then amarr. This defently needs some love when it comes to lasers.
Princess Kane	Posted - 2006.08.20 16:18:00 - [11] Edited by: Princess Kane on 20/08/2006 16:19:34
inSpirAcy Caldari The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.08.20 16:26:00 - [12] See that 67 page Amarr thread on the front page of this forum? Go read it.
ShadowKi Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.20 16:47:00 - [13] Originally by: Bhoki Tentor and what about hybrids then? They're only thermal and kinetic, surely they would need other damage types as well then? Oh and you should boost projectiles then cause if hybrids and lasers would be able to do all damage types having them do less damage isn't justified... Then again we can force everyone to just fly noobship with civi guns and be done with all the flavour and call the game balanced... Lasers are fine as they are. It's the mid slot/low slot weight ratio that is out of whack causing people to favour armor tanking causing overall higher average em resists then before the tanking boost(which just made the issue stand out more with the boost to eanm) Thing is, most ships don't have a 60% base armor resist to Kinetic or Thermal, while most ships do have a base armor 60% resist to EM, and actually have holes in their Thermal and/or Kinetic resists in both shields and armor. The problem occurs that a lot of people Armor tank in PvP, and therefore they are much harder to break with lazers than with Hybrids, with EM resist going 80%+ and Thermal and Kinetic resists much lower. Note that not all Laser crystals do thermal damage, and if they do its only upwards of about 45% thermal and the rest EM.
Gierling Gallente Celestial Fleet Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.20 16:51:00 - [14] EM is typically one of the best damage types against an armour tank. Very very few people double up EM, Thermal Kin and explosive tend to get cranked over 60% way before EM is.
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.08.20 17:02:00 - [15] All that needs be done is boost specific hardeners (especially passive specific hardeners) and reduce omni hardners slightly. A good way to do this is: * Compensation skills add 2% increase to active hardener resistances (when active) * Specific energized hardeners T2 boosted to 45% resistance base (T1 to 40%) * Specific passive platings T2 boosted to 35% (T1 to 30%) * Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane should become an active hardener. This promotes specific tanks over omni tanks, which would in turn decrease avarage tanked EM resistance on an armour tank from 80% to 60% - which would on avarage be the second best damage type to use against armour tanks. A mirror should be done for shield tanks, too. There. No need to fiddle with the current perfectly logical damage types. Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.20 17:05:00 - [16] Welcome to 5 months ago! EM is one of the weaker resistances if you use a 3 active harderner setup (exp, kin, therm; which was common pre-RMR). With RMR EAN2 got a boost, though. 2 EAN2 + a good DC (+ lvl4 in the armor comp skills) gives you 48% to all and 54-58% hull resistance (and a bit of shield resistance). And uses virtually no cap and less cpu. And due to the DC hull resistance bonus adds more effective HP even if you compare it vs 3 t2 active harderners for non-EM damage sources. Meaning: if you use a 3 harderner tank instead of 2 EAN2 + DC you either a) are clueless about the game mechanics (aka think 3 actives is still way to go) b) have low SP in mechanic skills (no t2 harderners) c) use only t1 fitted suicide ships (in which case 2 EAN2 + DC will be too expansive since those cost together about 15 mil)
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.20 17:13:00 - [17] I want the ability to block certain threads. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
LUKEC Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.20 17:45:00 - [18] Originally by: Gierling EM is typically one of the best damage types against an armour tank. Very very few people double up EM, Thermal Kin and explosive tend to get cranked over 60% way before EM is. Most armor tankers have 2x eanm II +dc giving them 80% em resist.(85% on minmatar ships) Wanna do different damage? Train drones. --------------------- Looking for frentix? Mail me.
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.08.20 17:50:00 - [19] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Ithildin * Compensation skills add 2% increase to active hardener resistances (when active) <- Problem -> *Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane should become an active hardener. Would essentially not change anything exept EAN2 giving somewhat better resistances in exchange for bigger fitting costs. Which do not stop people using omniharderners, see invul fields. No, it'd decrease EANII's maximum resistance boost from 25% to 22%. This is a nerf of up to 12%! I wrote nothing about boosting the base resistance at the same time, mind! At the same time all the specific alternatives have been boosted. Maximum resistance on a T2 active hardener would be, for instance, 60.5% instead of 55%. Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.20 17:58:00 - [20] Originally by: Ithildin No, it'd decrease EANII's maximum resistance boost from 25% to 22%. This is a nerf of up to 12%! I wrote nothing about boosting the base resistance at the same time, mind! At the same time all the specific alternatives have been boosted. Maximum resistance on a T2 active hardener would be, for instance, 60.5% instead of 55%. True, you are right, haven't thought it through accordingly. Although it is likely that CCP would boost EAN2 performanceif they would made it active.
Kai Jyokoroi 133rd Ghost Wing R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.20 18:18:00 - [21] In the words of Arnie in Kindergarten Cop, "stop whining!" Also, it is easy to tank all 4 types of damage. I do so every day. _____________ The day I receive my first moderator forum-sig hijack is the day I realise I have won Eve.
Lorth Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.08.20 18:22:00 - [22] Originally by: Sharkbait moving to ships and modules Meh ha ha ha
Thoris Levithar	Posted - 2006.08.20 18:24:00 - [23] Originally by: Aramendel Meaning: if you use a 3 harderner tank instead of 2 EAN2 + DC you either a) are clueless about the game mechanics (aka think 3 actives is still way to go) b) have low SP in mechanic skills (no t2 harderners) c) use only t1 fitted suicide ships (in which case 2 EAN2 + DC will be too expansive since those cost together about 15 mil) In the current situation wouldn't it be really smart to use 3 active hardeners again? As everyone knows, Amarr do poor damage because of their weapons mostly being EM/THM, so nobody flies them...so why boost up EM anyway? And active (tech 1!) hardeners give you better resists than DCS + EANM II's for your other resists (50% vs. 48%). Of course, you loose the hull resists (not sure how much people depend on them in PvP) and spend more cpu, but if thats not an issue, I'd say three active hardeners are the way to go again :)
inSpirAcy Caldari The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.08.20 18:27:00 - [24] Originally by: Thoris Levithar Of course, you loose the hull resists (not sure how much people depend on them in PvP) and spend more cpu, but if thats not an issue, I'd say three active hardeners are the way to go again :) That occurred to me while I was on the loo, earlier. But I think the DC is still motivation enough to use dual EANM.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.20 22:54:00 - [25] Originally by: Thoris Levithar In the current situation wouldn't it be really smart to use 3 active hardeners again? As everyone knows, Amarr do poor damage because of their weapons mostly being EM/THM, so nobody flies them...so why boost up EM anyway? And active (tech 1!) hardeners give you better resists than DCS + EANM II's for your other resists (50% vs. 48%). Of course, you loose the hull resists (not sure how much people depend on them in PvP) and spend more cpu, but if thats not an issue, I'd say three active hardeners are the way to go again :) Point is that even vs t2 actives the added hull resistance HP outweight the HP you gain from slightly higher armor resistances. It's not that people "depend" on hull resists. At least not voluntary. But, unless we go into faction stuff we have no real continously tankable dps in PvP. Meaning if you encounter an equal ship 1v1 (nevermind 2v2, etc) your tank WILL break and you WILL go into structure. And if your tank breaks after 45 seconds and your strcuture lasts 20 you will win vs a ship whose tank will break after 50 and structure lasts 10. Essentially a DC is like if you would fit a good plate for your ship size.
HippoKing Caldari Beagle Corp	Posted - 2006.08.20 23:03:00 - [26] Originally by: Sharkbait moving to ships and modules Oh god, I take back the comment I made in the WoW TCG Leeroy thread. Almost making team amarr think they'd got a dev reply, and then denying them that Beautiful
Dethis Caldari Eve University	Posted - 2006.08.20 23:10:00 - [27] Edited by: Dethis on 20/08/2006 23:12:11 Is another thread really needed? -------- Kill em all and let god sort em out
Dahak2150	Posted - 2006.08.21 01:15:00 - [28] Originally by: Bhoki Tentor and what about hybrids then? They're only thermal and kinetic Save that hybrid damage types are more balanced. They don't suck against either type of tank. They are, granted, slightly skewed towards armor, having higher kinetic than thermal, but that seems to be OK considering the ration of shield vs. armor tanks in PVP. ---------- My sig is boring.
Laocoon Veto.	Posted - 2006.08.21 09:54:00 - [29] Originally by: Dethis Edited by: Dethis on 20/08/2006 23:12:11 Is another thread really needed? LMFAO - Lao Veto. Corp
ELECTR0FREAK Eye of God Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.08.21 10:13:00 - [30] Edited by: ELECTR0FREAK on 21/08/2006 10:14:54 Originally by: Tahira You know, I could wine and cry about how a 3-5 million SP character piloting a Raven is more effect in pretty much every facet of the game than I am (16 Million SP) in my Apoc. I could wine that it takes a GREAT deal longer to train guns period that missiles. You could, but you'd be wrong. First off, there are actually more skill points total under Missiles than there are for training any one race's guns and Gunnery skills all the way. Yep thats right. Maxing out missile skills takes longer than maxing out turret skills. Secondly, you could "wine" ("grape" job spelling btw) about shortcomings that turrets have vs missiles but I'm sure you'd be happy to leave out those downsides that missiles have towards turrets. What it really comes down to is, with Amarr turrets, you have the best base damage and tracking weapon available (on mid to long range turrets). You have no ammunition costs, and you can change your optimal range in a matter of seconds. These are the advantages the Amarr have. Yes, they have the downsides of being limited to 2 damage types and having their guns eat energy, but that's the downside to being Amarr. Railgun users have a similar limitation but with ammo constraints, slower tracking, and reload time issues. Minmatar gain damage versatility but suffer lower DPS and tracking. As for missiles, don't even go there. There is no wrecking shot for missiles, nor instant damage, as well as a multitude of other disadvantages, and I'm glad you didn't "wine" about missiles because I'd have to direct you to the link in my sig to learn how they work before you continued to complain. I've got an Amarr character with 43 million skillpoints, 11.3 of which are in Gunnery. I've got a missile pilot with 30, and I personally discovered the missile damage formula. I think I'm well qualified to tell you that both have their advantages and disadvantages, and having different damage types for Amarr would damage gameplay balance. Discoverer of the Missile Damage Formula

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.