Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
502
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 00:53:00 -
[121] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:could the harbinger get some much needed fitting so it can actually fit a warfare link or a Nos please .. it needs some help too be useful
I would like to fit heavy beams on a Harbinger instead of the focused mediums.
signature
|
Eric Shang
Living Asylum
171
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 15:23:16 -
[122] - Quote
Fozzie I was wondering why pulses and beams are a bit well weird.
All ranges are lvl 5 skills
Pulse: Multi (3.8 + 2.5) = dps range of 3.8 - 6.3KM Conflag (3.8 + 2.5) = dps range of 3.8 - 6.3KM Scorch (11 + 2.5) = dps range of 11 - 13.5KM
Beam: Multi (7.5 + 5) = dps range of 7.5 - 12.5KM Gleam (3.8 + 5) = dps range of 3.8 - 8.8KM Aurora ( 27+ 5) = dps range of 27 - 32KM
If you look at the gleam and the scorch.
Why is there a short range beam ammo that is brawler range and then there is a pulse ammo that is overheated web range at its base.
I have been finding this very confusing.
Pulse: Multi (3.8 + 2.5) = dps range of 3.8 - 6.3KM Conflag (3.8 + 2.5) = dps range of 3.8 - 6.3KM Scorch (3.8 + 5) = dps range of 3.8 - 8.8KM
Beam: Multi (7.5 + 5) = dps range of 7.5 - 12.5KM Gleam (11 + 2.5) = dps range of 11 - 13.5KM Aurora ( 27+ 5) = dps range of 27 - 32KM
I would have said this would have been a bit more acurate.
It means pulse are there for close range and beam are there for long range.
Member of The Bastards - http://www.the-bastards.net/
My Pirate Journey:
http://ericshangthepirate.wordpress.com/
|
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
250
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 20:05:56 -
[123] - Quote
You think making Scorch so that it barely has any more range than Multi is something that would be good? Your numbers would be utterly terrible, why would anyone ever use Scorch? |
almanac Omaristos
Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking
4
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 20:22:39 -
[124] - Quote
Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1018
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 21:38:59 -
[125] - Quote
almanac Omaristos wrote:Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons.
lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection..
i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bati brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room..
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
almanac Omaristos
Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking
4
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 22:12:34 -
[126] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:almanac Omaristos wrote:Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection.. i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bait brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room..
everything you said up until the second paragraph was pure genus
but the third paragraph not so much ... drones are a good thing, they made amarr much much better
shh.. we don't need to talk about nerfing the prophecy
solo prophecy for the win:D |
almanac Omaristos
Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking
4
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 22:17:37 -
[127] - Quote
Vibrance Sovereign wrote:The problem is not in scorch, or pulses.
The problem is in the ammo penalties.
Autocannons: optimal is insignificant so the range penalties/bonuses of T1 ammo is irrelevant T2 ammo gives a boost of ~50% range over the "standard" range
Blasters: optimal is important, but a large part of the range comes from falloff so the range penalties/bonuses of T1 ammo don't matter very much T2 ammo boosts falloff, and returns the lost optimal, its a 40% bonus over the "unmodified" range of the guns, but a larger bonus considering anti-matter as the "standard" since the optimal is not insignificant
Pulse: optimal is very important, so the range penalties/bonuses of T1 ammo very much matter
Scorch ammo gives a boost of 50% optimal range over the "unmodified" range, but considering multifrequency to be "standard" its actually more like 3x
If you look at the stats of the guns themselves, which is probably how the balance started, they seem fine. But lasers lose massive range when going for high damage ammo, whereas blasters lose only a little, and autos almost nothing. Further diverging from the stats unmodified by ammo, the already high tracking autos get tracking boosts (no other T1 ammo gives tracking boosts) The T1 ammo is defective, not the T2 scorch. On top of this, is the TE/TC which boosts the effective range of autos and blasters far more than it does for lasers.
If high damage T1 ammo has an optimal penalty, but no falloff penalty for projectiles, then high damage T1 laser crystals should have a falloff penalty, but no optimal penalty. Hyrbids should have a split optimal/faloff penalty, just like the T2 ammo has a split optimal/falloff boost.
Scorch is not OPd. Either the other T1 ammos are OPd, or the T1 crystals and under powered.
This boosts T1 crystals a little, while leaving scorch mostly alone.... I'd still like to see a complete overhaul of optimal vs fallof vs tracking modifiers. Then base the guns on that, or make it so all the ammo sleections have similar relative effects to the unmodified stats.
Scorch was fine, not whining about the changes. Am whining about the focus wasted on this instead of other things
You the real MVP CCP listen to this guys
fix everything about lasers please :)
|
Reynas Arthie
The Church of Awesome Caldari State Capturing
9
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 22:24:09 -
[128] - Quote
Lasers are all wrong right now!
Right now they are back asswards.
Pulse lasers SHOULD be massive ALPHA weapons with huge cap usage but decent tracking with low rof to help with overall cap usage and dps balancing.
Beam laser SHOULD be dps lasers with NO 'alpha'. i.e. they do damage each second. Effectively very low damage but with very fast rof (1 second).
|
almanac Omaristos
Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking
4
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 22:32:08 -
[129] - Quote
Reynas Arthie wrote:Lasers are all wrong right now!
Right now they are back asswards.
Pulse lasers SHOULD be massive ALPHA weapons with huge cap usage but decent tracking with low rof to help with overall cap usage and dps balancing.
Beam laser SHOULD be dps lasers with NO 'alpha'. i.e. they do damage each second. Effectively very low damage but with very fast rof (1 second).
OMG *little girl scream*
I like the idea of having close range alpha lasers with good tracking this is the best one so far CCP listen to this guy too |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1018
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 22:32:46 -
[130] - Quote
almanac Omaristos wrote:Harvey James wrote:almanac Omaristos wrote:Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection.. i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bait brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room.. everything you said up until the second paragraph was pure genus but the third paragraph not so much ... drones are a good thing, they made amarr much much better shh.. we don't need to talk about nerfing the prophecy solo prophecy for the win:D
so you like the prophecy as it is .. i just think its a bit a poor mans bastard myrmidon .. what do you think about the oracle ABC's becoming T2 too allow 4 of the CBC's too become proper ABC's?
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
|
almanac Omaristos
Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking
4
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 22:35:45 -
[131] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:almanac Omaristos wrote:Harvey James wrote:almanac Omaristos wrote:Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection.. i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bait brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room.. everything you said up until the second paragraph was pure genus but the third paragraph not so much ... drones are a good thing, they made amarr much much better shh.. we don't need to talk about nerfing the prophecy solo prophecy for the win:D so you like the prophecy as it is .. i just think its a bit a poor mans bastard myrmidon .. what do you think about the oracle ABC's becoming T2 too allow 4 of the CBC's too become proper ABC's?
okay way to many I really don't understand what you just said
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1018
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 22:39:36 -
[132] - Quote
almanac Omaristos wrote:Harvey James wrote:almanac Omaristos wrote:Harvey James wrote:almanac Omaristos wrote:Lasers as a weapon system defiantly need more work. I would suggest also looking at conflag ammo as it needs a buff so that pulse lasers may be on par with the other weapons systems close range weapons. lasers need better tracking for sure.. you don't see many brawling laser ships .. its all about mobile scorch omens/Apocs/ slicer. that and the tanky brawling ships like maller abbadon etc .. are so poorly designed , they need cap mods just too use the guns, the dps is low and then you add trying to tracking something... or you get cap use bonuses and less tanky ships, which don't offer much in mobility, tank, dps or application/projection.. i also think the prophecy should be put back to a laserboat.. its just used as a bait brick like it used too but now it has drones for dps so the trade off is no longer there and the harbinger is too light on tank or useful bonuses too fill that maller to abbadon gap , harbi needs a proper apoc style mobility/projection too be useful, but ofc the oracle is in the way of it becoming a proper ABC as it needs too be useful.. so move ABC's to T2 too make room.. everything you said up until the second paragraph was pure genus but the third paragraph not so much ... drones are a good thing, they made amarr much much better shh.. we don't need to talk about nerfing the prophecy solo prophecy for the win:D so you like the prophecy as it is .. i just think its a bit a poor mans bastard myrmidon .. what do you think about the oracle ABC's becoming T2 too allow 4 of the CBC's too become proper ABC's? okay I really don't understand what you just said
basically making the oracle, talos etc into T2 bc's and then moving harbinger,drake, brutix and hurricane into the Attack bc category with the improved mobility/projection etc..
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
almanac Omaristos
Hollow Blood Hunters Surely You're Joking
4
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 22:55:40 -
[133] - Quote
no not really, that would just be confusing for starters.
In all honesty its lasers that need the biggest changes right now they are the most untouched weapon system by ccp. The entire line needs a rework as they are indeed broken, the only thing laser have going for them right now is range, and even that's out done by sentries.
What lasers are missing is some awesome close range weapon system that can match blasters and auto cannons (rockets and HAMS are fine right now) currently amarr ships more specifically the t1 frigs and destroyers are heavily out match by the other races counter parts .
CCP should keep playing with small lasers and figure out a way to make them awesome.
AMARR MASTER RACE!!! |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
505
|
Posted - 2014.12.03 23:50:10 -
[134] - Quote
almanac Omaristos wrote:-snip- CCP should keep playing with small lasers and figure out a way to make them awesome.
AMARR MASTER RACE!!!
That is easy, increase tracking on pulse lasers to counter the shortcomings of the Amarr ship slot layouts. Bring down capacitor usage by a bit on beams and voil+á, lazors awesome.
signature
|
Shelom Severasse
The Maythorn
32
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 00:43:23 -
[135] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Schneevva wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Faren Shalni wrote:Why does scorch need nerfing even if slightly?
when rails (mid to super long range), sentries (everything), beams (mid to long range), Arty's (Short-mid to Long Range) and blasters (Brawling) do its job better
absurd tracking at range destroys small ships. Then get closer. All weapons track better at long range. They also track well at close range. The problem with Scorch was that it gave you incredible range on a gun with good tracking, which means it tracked incredibly well at range whereas actual long range guns did not. It was the only reason things like the Slicer worked at all. Now, none of this fixes the fact that barring scorch, pulse lasers are fairly awful. That's the main reason I dislike this change, lasers are now being brought "into line" with other turrets, while also very clearly not being in line because of their massive and utterly pointless cap penalty, which CCP tacitly admits to with their constant attempts to band aid over. No that is NOT the reason why pulses have issues. THe main problem with pulses is that high damage cristals have same penalty as the other types of high damage ammunitions ( antimatter and EMP).. what you ask? How can that be an disadvantage? Because the MAIN advantage of pulses over other weapons is RANGE. Result.. High damage ammunition penalty is FUNCTIONALLY much HIGHER on pulse lasers than on Blasters and AC. On AC the bonuses and penalties of T1 ammo were fixed long ago by making a tracking vs damage tradeoff. On blasters you use AM or NOTHING of t1 ammunition. The AM range penalty is irrelevant since you will already need to be very close. Reduce MF range penalty to 30% and scale the other crystals .. and pulse lasers will be in a much more healthy place because they will be able to use their main advantage. That of REMOVE COMPLETELY the range penalty on T1 ammunition and exchange it for TRACKING vs Damage scaling. would like to try this out, but it sounds interesting |
Kalihira
Ultramar Independent Contracting
26
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 14:16:17 -
[136] - Quote
So when are you going to increase the base damage of mainly medium and also large pulses hmm? Pigeonholed into one damage type and high cap consumption could come with a bigger advantage then just good range. Tweak scorch at the same time so it doesnt become overpowered and I would call it balanced..... |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1019
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 14:27:18 -
[137] - Quote
cap usage just isn't a viable bonus too a ship, it needs removing entirely.. just build the cap regen into the ships inatead if the point is too stop off races using them. then tracking bonuses or something useful instead in their place. its the only weapon system that has too waste a bonus too use it.
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
Kalihira
Ultramar Independent Contracting
26
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 14:47:01 -
[138] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:cap usage just isn't a viable bonus too a ship, it needs removing entirely.. just build the cap regen into the ships inatead if the point is too stop off races using them. then tracking bonuses or something useful instead in their place. its the only weapon system that has too waste a bonus too use it.
I completely agree. Reducing cap usage across the board might be even better beceause it would also make lasers more viable on non amarr hulls. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1020
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 14:48:49 -
[139] - Quote
Kalihira wrote:Harvey James wrote:cap usage just isn't a viable bonus too a ship, it needs removing entirely.. just build the cap regen into the ships inatead if the point is too stop off races using them. then tracking bonuses or something useful instead in their place. its the only weapon system that has too waste a bonus too use it. I completely agree. Reducing cap usage across the board might be even better beceause it would also make lasers more viable on non amarr hulls.
i doubt the Amarr Empire would allow such heresy
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
Kalihira
Ultramar Independent Contracting
26
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 14:56:34 -
[140] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Kalihira wrote:Harvey James wrote:cap usage just isn't a viable bonus too a ship, it needs removing entirely.. just build the cap regen into the ships inatead if the point is too stop off races using them. then tracking bonuses or something useful instead in their place. its the only weapon system that has too waste a bonus too use it. I completely agree. Reducing cap usage across the board might be even better beceause it would also make lasers more viable on non amarr hulls. i doubt the Amarr Empire would allow such heresy
F*ck the Amarr! I will shoot their boats with laser fitted minnie boats! |
|
Eric Shang
Living Asylum
171
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 16:12:11 -
[141] - Quote
Mr Floydy wrote:You think making Scorch so that it barely has any more range than Multi is something that would be good? Your numbers would be utterly terrible, why would anyone ever use Scorch?
Increase the range to 10 so its overheated scram range and you golden.
Short range: (frigate level)
Pulse Lasers Blasters Autocannons Rockets
Long range: (frigate level) Beam Rail Artie Light Missle
How can you make scorch hit so far when it is to be a short range ammo and then you have gleam thats long range ammo but hits like its a pulse ammo?
There is a fault here.
Member of The Bastards - http://www.the-bastards.net/
My Pirate Journey:
http://ericshangthepirate.wordpress.com/
|
Schneevva
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
5
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 02:08:05 -
[142] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:
No that is NOT the reason why pulses have issues. THe main problem with pulses is that high damage cristals have same penalty as the other types of high damage ammunitions ( antimatter and EMP).. what you ask? How can that be an disadvantage? Because the MAIN advantage of pulses over other weapons is RANGE.
Result.. High damage ammunition penalty is FUNCTIONALLY much HIGHER on pulse lasers than on Blasters and AC. On AC the bonuses and penalties of T1 ammo were fixed long ago by making a tracking vs damage tradeoff. On blasters you use AM or NOTHING of t1 ammunition. The AM range penalty is irrelevant since you will already need to be very close.
Reduce MF range penalty to 30% and scale the other crystals .. and pulse lasers will be in a much more healthy place because they will be able to use their main advantage. That of REMOVE COMPLETELY the range penalty on T1 ammunition and exchange it for TRACKING vs Damage scaling.
This is no different from saying that "blasters give functionally more damage from the same ammo type because they all have the same base damage and blasters have a higher damage mod". Or that it's unfair that close range t2 ammo gives a penalty tracking on blasters because blasters have more tracking to lose.
It's nonsense. Lasers still end up with more range and better ratio of optimal/to falloff than the others (and this will only be increased with the next patch) , and don't try to pretend that falloff is identical to optimal, or that Conflag isn't insanely good. |
Nevil Kincade
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
2
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 04:57:55 -
[143] - Quote
since you asked what we think:
Due to laser cap consumption many Amarr ships loose a full ship hull skill bonus slot to a laser cap consumption bonus where other races get nice things like DMG, ROF or tracking which i find perverse. Those ships that have been reworked in the past to get an actually useful bonus suffer from the high cap use. considering the neut vulnerability, horrible tracking and the predictable dmg pattern laser platforms are hardcountered too easy in too many ways (especially in fleet doctrines). most of them lack the speed to keep the desired range to make use of the lasers advantageous optimal range and do not have the cap to keep burning and firing their guns at the same time anyway. this usually results in fitting a cap booster occupying one of the sparse mid slots which amarr usually have the fewest of to begin with. thus the ships utility is being crippled and range control made impossible while excessive amounts of power grid are required for the cap booster. so what i'm asking for is the same amount of ship hull bonuses any other platform gets and the ability to fire my weapon system constantly like any other ship so that the cap booster can stay an optional counter to neuts. this can be achieved by drastically reducing laser cap consumption.
|
Ashlar Vellum
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
128
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 09:03:19 -
[144] - Quote
Eric Shang wrote:Mr Floydy wrote:You think making Scorch so that it barely has any more range than Multi is something that would be good? Your numbers would be utterly terrible, why would anyone ever use Scorch? Increase the range to 10 so its overheated scram range and you golden. Short range: (frigate level) Pulse Lasers Blasters Autocannons Rockets Long range: (frigate level) Beam Rail Artie Light Missle How can you make scorch hit so far when it is to be a short range ammo and then you have gleam thats long range ammo but hits like its a pulse ammo? There is a fault here. Then you will have a weapon system with poor tracking, extensive cap use, and none flexible damage type that will fail at close range and won't have enough damage in scram kite range.
btw Scorch=Xrays/Gamma on beams, not gleam; and gleam is not a long range ammo it's a short range ammo for long range guns.
|
Goldensaver
Lom Corporation Shadow of xXDEATHXx
407
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 23:10:33 -
[145] - Quote
Ashlar Vellum wrote: btw Scorch=Xrays/Gamma on beams, not gleam; and gleam is not a long range ammo it's a short range ammo for long range guns.
Exactly. Each short range weapon system has a high damage, lower tracking, low range ammo for use in a close orbit against larger enemies where the tracking/range penalty is moot and the damage is more important to break tanks. They also have a lower tracking, longer range ammo with decent damage for use against enemies hanging outside of the base range. In the case of lasers, it's a bit imbalanced compared to the other ammo types, but that's because the other ammo types besides MF/Conflag are worthless.
On the other hand, long range guns have two types of T2 ammo. A short range, high tracking "oh ****" ammo type for use against enemies who have gotten under your guns, and a long range, low tracking ammo meant for extreme range sniping. |
Commander Haruhi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 17:50:24 -
[146] - Quote
I'm very much for having pulse lasers be very high alpha, very low RoF close range weapons and beams be very low cycle time / RoF, very low alpha long range weapons.
It would differentiate them from the minmatar in particular with their high alpha long range guns and fast RoF "short"-range guns.
I mean, if you're gonna have lasers, why not have a continous beam of amarrian facemelting? |
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
251
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 11:16:21 -
[147] - Quote
A shake up of lasers to change the beams into a continues beam of facemelt gets my vote :D |
Schneevva
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
5
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 00:57:53 -
[148] - Quote
Goldensaver wrote:
Not exactly. Have you seen the downsides to using long range faction ammo compared to close range faction ammo on Autocannons? The range downside is almost non-existent because of the huge falloff and the already pathetic optimal. Even if you do more than triple the optimal of autocannons, the optimal is a smal fraction of the overall range of the guns.
Just for example. Not saying I endorse his idea.
Also, Conflag isn't insanely good. You're high or something. It's pretty solid if you don't mind capping yourself out and you're shooting something two size classes higher than you, but even with a Coercer (a destroyer with a 50% tracking bonus) it's possible for frigates to get under your guns. You know, on a ship specialized in killing frigates, with a close range weapon system. It's still a great choice for when you don't need the tracking/can force the range to be at the edge of your optimal where the tracking isn't as bad, but it's not insanely good. Scorch is, but that's because of the low damage penalty and the high optimal of lasers recieving a huge bonus from an increase to optimal (you know, like I touched on in the first paragraph of this reply.)
You shouldn't be treating falloff as identical to optimal in any scenario.
And yes, conflag is "bad" if you exist in some weird vacuum where webs don't exist. Otherwise it's probably the best of the t2 high damage ammos. The cap penalty is fairly irrelevant, a coercer for example can run a full rack of small pulses using conflag, a prop mod, and a warp scram and have 16 minutes of cap, which is more than enough. And the tracking penalty is just that, not particularly a big deal. Something can get "under your guns" if had MF loaded as well. |
Goldensaver
Lom Corporation Shadow of xXDEATHXx
407
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 02:55:59 -
[149] - Quote
Schneevva wrote:Goldensaver wrote:
Not exactly. Have you seen the downsides to using long range faction ammo compared to close range faction ammo on Autocannons? The range downside is almost non-existent because of the huge falloff and the already pathetic optimal. Even if you do more than triple the optimal of autocannons, the optimal is a smal fraction of the overall range of the guns.
Just for example. Not saying I endorse his idea.
Also, Conflag isn't insanely good. You're high or something. It's pretty solid if you don't mind capping yourself out and you're shooting something two size classes higher than you, but even with a Coercer (a destroyer with a 50% tracking bonus) it's possible for frigates to get under your guns. You know, on a ship specialized in killing frigates, with a close range weapon system. It's still a great choice for when you don't need the tracking/can force the range to be at the edge of your optimal where the tracking isn't as bad, but it's not insanely good. Scorch is, but that's because of the low damage penalty and the high optimal of lasers recieving a huge bonus from an increase to optimal (you know, like I touched on in the first paragraph of this reply.)
You shouldn't be treating falloff as identical to optimal in any scenario. And yes, conflag is "bad" if you exist in some weird vacuum where webs don't exist. Otherwise it's probably the best of the t2 high damage ammos. The cap penalty is fairly irrelevant, a coercer for example can run a full rack of small pulses using conflag, a prop mod, and a warp scram and have 16 minutes of cap, which is more than enough. And the tracking penalty is just that, not particularly a big deal. Something can get "under your guns" if had MF loaded as well. What the **** is a web? Something I put in my prop slot, my point slot, or my cap booster slot?
Because it's a minority of laser using ships that have more than 3 mids. The number of laser based ships that have enough mids for everything they need and a web is quite low, most of them being ship classes that can't even use a web effectively like Battleships or caps. Ships up to BC don't have slots for a web, and BCs and BSes are trash anyways.
And just saying, none of my Coercer fits get over 3 mins of cap life, most less than that by a lot. the 10mn fit gets 2:32 with Scorch, 2:02 with Conflag. The "Slicer" style fit gets 1:22 with Conflag. Which prop mod do are you using, and why a scram when your damage range is out to long point range with pulses?
Also, Void is probably better. It's available on Gallente ships, an overwhelming number of which have a tracking bonus which allows them to apply damage more easily to similar sized ships. They also tend to have a decent amount of midslots, typically 4 or more on every ship over Destroyer. The range is poor, but Gallente ships are largely fast enough to get into range, and when in range can apply tackle while tracking well despite the penalty.
I won't dispute though, that it is far superior to Hail still. Hail's bad. Just terrible.
And no, falloff isn't indentical to optimal. But the point stands that range is dictated by 2 distinct variables that are affected independantly of each other, therefore the weapons which have a higher concentration of their range in one or the other are more affected by modifiers to that stat than other weapons. IE. Lasers suffer greatly by reducing their primary range by changing to high DPS ammo. Autocannons are almost completely unaffected due to the very small percentage of their effective range being in optimal. |
Schneevva
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
5
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 03:46:03 -
[150] - Quote
Quote:What the **** is a web? Something I put in my prop slot, my point slot, or my cap booster slot?
No, you put it into a mid a slot. You have two of them on a coercer. Yes I agree that needing cap boosters on many amarr ships is terrible and Amarr ships have too few slots to compensate for their cap problems. This has nothing to do with the fundamental balance of lasers, and webs, in general, in solo, solo or large scale pvp are basically par for the course. Webs on the tormentor, coercer and omen/maller are all possible and in fact kind of required if you intend to use pulse outside of massive blobs (where odds are you will still probably having webbing support and tackle.) or kiting (but scorch kiters are terribly predictable). |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |