EVE Search - I thought they said they wouldnt do this?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

I thought they said they wouldnt do this?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Gabriel Karade Office linebackers Blood of the Innocents	Posted - 2006.09.08 17:02:00 - [61] Originally by: Anaka Totoch A corp mate of mine flies a mega and fits two damage mods and large neutron t2 he gets 1400 dps with his drones and has a MASSIVE tank. Sorry but that is utter nonsense. Maximum skills and two 3% implants with tech II Ions and Void L gives you 901 dps plus another 311 dps from Ogre II's (Gallente Drone spec IV). Neutrons do only 6% more DPS, but then one of the implants has to be a CPU implant to make it all fit.... ---------- - Office Linebacker -
Dixon Caldari	Posted - 2006.09.08 17:54:00 - [62] although I was the first one to sign I feel the need to /double sign - with a vengeance - - - - - - I have no strong feelings one way or the other...
Pestillence Revelations Inc.	Posted - 2006.09.08 22:29:00 - [63] Edited by: Pestillence on 08/09/2006 22:29:11 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: Anaka Totoch A corp mate of mine flies a mega and fits two damage mods and large neutron t2 he gets 1400 dps with his drones and has a MASSIVE tank. Sorry but that is utter nonsense. Maximum skills and two 3% implants with tech II Ions and Void L gives you 901 dps plus another 311 dps from Ogre II's (Gallente Drone spec IV). Neutrons do only 6% more DPS, but then one of the implants has to be a CPU implant to make it all fit.... Add to this a MASSIVE TANK!!eleven!1! isnt a couple of plates or 1 large repper Edit - Oh, and signed.
Vicious Phoenix	Posted - 2006.09.08 22:32:00 - [64] T2 ammo is fine. Its T2 its supposed to be better than the T1 variant. (duh!) The only thing that needs looked at are Hail (speed penalty) and the rail ammo that kills your shield. CFW (Certified Forum Warrior) I kill people ingame too.
Max Hardcase Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2006.09.08 23:26:00 - [65] Fine ? Tech2 long range ammo totally outclasses anything tech1. This was clearly NOT the intent of the eve skill system. And thats only 1 of the problems.
vyperpit Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2006.09.08 23:39:00 - [66] NOOOO NOOO nooo the problem is clearly the dam optimal of the guns these days, they can hit at 250km, so let us insted nerf all gun optimal by say ermm a half that should fix things come on devs, fix t2 ammo, nerf sensor boosters, add some more hp to ships, GIVE US BIGGER plates and extenders insted of fubering with range which is totally fine
Vicious Phoenix	Posted - 2006.09.09 00:11:00 - [67] Originally by: Max Hardcase Fine ? Tech2 long range ammo totally outclasses anything tech1. This was clearly NOT the intent of the eve skill system. And thats only 1 of the problems. More skills shouldn't be better than less skills? Is that what you're saying? I think its rediculous to expect anything T1 to outclass T2. CFW (Certified Forum Warrior) I kill people ingame too.
Frools No Quarter. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.09.09 00:18:00 - [68] the problem is not that t2 turret sniping is just better than t1 its that it completely obsoletes t1 sniping if you want to fly a bs in a fleet fight you REQUIRE t2 turrets to compete, thats crap :\
Vicious Phoenix	Posted - 2006.09.09 00:22:00 - [69] Originally by: Frools the problem is not that t2 turret sniping is just better than t1 its that it completely obsoletes t1 sniping if you want to fly a bs in a fleet fight you REQUIRE t2 turrets to compete, thats crap :\ But thats the point of T2. You're not honestly going to tell me that a Rifter should be able to compete with a Jaguar? Or that a Prophecy should be able to almost take down an Absolution. T2 is supposed to be better than T1, thats how it works. Also, as far a not being in range in fleet fights, you can always warp out and warp back to a tackler at your optimal. CFW (Certified Forum Warrior) I kill people ingame too.
Xev Bellringer Lexx Corp	Posted - 2006.09.09 01:08:00 - [70] I don't understand your problems w/ T2 ammo. Lets take a deimos vs domi for example: With max skills applied to both ships.. deimos w/ 5 heavy neutrons II and void = 374 dominix w/ 5 ogre Is = 275dps deimos w/ 5 heavy neutron IIs & 3 mfs IIs & void M = 618dps dominix w/ 5 ogre IIs = 389dps The domi will end up on the winning end if fitted properly. Of course you're going to get stomped if you're in a T1 cruiser going up against a T2 cruiser or BS, even if they are using T1 ammo. But against ships of similar class, maybe even a T2 cruiser vs BS, the T2 ammo gives you the extra edge you need to win the fight. It's not like the stuff is cheap or takes a week to learn.
BlackHorizon Caldari Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.09.09 02:27:00 - [71] /signed Make T2 ammo have T1 damage but with benefits (eg. cap useage, tracking, shield bonus, armor bonus etc...) . Get rid of the "long-range" and "short-range" ammotypes and make it more graded like T1 ammo. There should be lots of T2 ammo types like there are lots of T1 ammo types.
Amerame Section XIII	Posted - 2006.09.09 02:42:00 - [72] The problem at this point with nerfing t2 long range ammo would be that you'd see fleets of Rokhs, just Rokhs and they would have an huge edge over anything else, since it's not very practical to fight at 230km (considering max locking range in 250, you run into locking range problem at those range) Rokh fleet can be taken on at the moment.
Max Hardcase Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2006.09.09 08:55:00 - [73] Edited by: Max Hardcase on 09/09/2006 09:01:25 Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Originally by: Max Hardcase Fine ? Tech2 long range ammo totally outclasses anything tech1. This was clearly NOT the intent of the eve skill system. And thats only 1 of the problems. More skills shouldn't be better than less skills? Is that what you're saying? I think its rediculous to expect anything T1 to outclass T2. No what I'm saying is that its ok that a low skilled people are at an disadvantage. What is NOT ok is that the T2 long range ammo has such range that T1 people can't even play. You are deliberately trying to be obtuse, tech2 guns already have bonus damage over tech1 guns via the skill needed to use them (2%/lvl). Add to that the greater availability and better price. The Rokh is a secondary problem, the 10% bonus on optimal range is ludicrous given the stated dev concerns about long range fleet combat. It almost comes down to giving them a free 1.5-2 tracking computers ( range factor only ofcourse ). Or it extends the long range punch to way over 200 km if do fit TC's.
Anaka Totoch Dark Knights of Deneb Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.09.09 11:45:00 - [74] Originally by: Gabriel Karade Originally by: Anaka Totoch A corp mate of mine flies a mega and fits two damage mods and large neutron t2 he gets 1400 dps with his drones and has a MASSIVE tank. Sorry but that is utter nonsense. Maximum skills and two 3% implants with tech II Ions and Void L gives you 901 dps plus another 311 dps from Ogre II's (Gallente Drone spec IV). Neutrons do only 6% more DPS, but then one of the implants has to be a CPU implant to make it all fit.... Ok first of all i have seen people post that this is utter bs. At the time when i posted i wanted to make a point. Before the gankadays a full magstabed thron got over 1000 dps. Now you have a thron with amazing tank + 2 mag stabs and he can get 900. Ok may be he doesnt do 1400, but you yourself have admited he could do 1200, he does use neutrons and he does have a few damage implants. The point i am making is t2 ammo pushes his damage well over 1000 dps + he can still have massive tank completely screwing up the point of the boosted tanking and the stacking nerf. Sorry if that statement caused people to discredit me. It was an over exageration, however when i can ask him next i will askhim what his dps is. Anaka Totoch CEO of The Dark Knights of Deneb
Anaka Totoch Dark Knights of Deneb Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.09.09 12:00:00 - [75] Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Originally by: Frools the problem is not that t2 turret sniping is just better than t1 its that it completely obsoletes t1 sniping if you want to fly a bs in a fleet fight you REQUIRE t2 turrets to compete, thats crap :\ But thats the point of T2. You're not honestly going to tell me that a Rifter should be able to compete with a Jaguar? Or that a Prophecy should be able to almost take down an Absolution. T2 is supposed to be better than T1, thats how it works. Also, as far a not being in range in fleet fights, you can always warp out and warp back to a tackler at your optimal. Dear Mr Vicious Phoenix, please do not post if you have never been in a 0.0 fleet battle. I am going to assume that you are a person who doesnt venture far from empire and know very little about 0.0 life, because anyone who has been in one of these battles will know that frools speaks the truth. What he is saying is that T1 cannot even participate in the battle, let alone compete. Why you may ask?? well if you have ever used sniper ammo you would know. 100% bonus to range and extra damage compared to your standard 60% t1 ammo with pathetic damage. With this the person fitting t2 can put on sensor boosters and tracking comps getting his optimal + fall off well over 200km, lock range at 250 km. The person who can use t1 can also get his lock range as high, but the max for his guns will be betwenn 140-180 km range depending on skills and considerably less damage. Therefore when t2 fleet warps in on t1 fleet they warp in at 200km+ and although both sides can lock each other it is only the t2 fleet that can do damage. Since the introduction of sniper ammo, it has become pointless for anyone other than a t2 fitted bs to take part in fleet battles. Although i dont dispute with you that t2 should have the edge, and already does in extra damage, giving it sniper ammo and further damage ammo, like quake causes problems. Many people have said that other ammo is fine. My main problem lies with the 100% ammo. However i also think that originally t2 ammo should never have been designed as farther damag, it should be more tactical, same damage as t1 with side effects. The sheer size of this problem is shown by all the people who themselves use the ammo, myself included, and admit it is overpowered and it causes problems. They arethe ones that sign the thread, not the T1 users !!!!!I hope ccp sees this thread. And vicious phoenix i hope this helps you understand abit more what frools was talking about.It is hard to really know how much of a difference T2 ammo makes UNLESS YOU ACTUALLY USE IT! Anaka Totoch CEO of The Dark Knights of Deneb
roBurky StateCorp Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.09.09 14:14:00 - [76] Tech 2 ammo is awful. It really needs a complete rethink. The peculiar added downsides do nothing when you can get hugely better damage at a vastly better range. If there are to be downsides to tech 2 ammo, then it needs to be downsides in its regular attributes, not extra penalties unrelated to shooting. The large training time for large tech 2 guns does not lessen their effect on the game. It makes it worse, as the difference between those with the skills and those without is so wide that you are either someone who can fight in a fleet battle, or someone spending several months in essential training for fleet fighting. Tech 2 ammo needs to become a /small/ bonus over tech 1, and maybe more tactical. I think it also ought to be usable in tech 1 guns, with its own smaller set of skills. ---
Vicious Phoenix	Posted - 2006.09.09 17:47:00 - [77] Originally by: Anaka Totoch Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Originally by: Frools the problem is not that t2 turret sniping is just better than t1 its that it completely obsoletes t1 sniping if you want to fly a bs in a fleet fight you REQUIRE t2 turrets to compete, thats crap :\ But thats the point of T2. You're not honestly going to tell me that a Rifter should be able to compete with a Jaguar? Or that a Prophecy should be able to almost take down an Absolution. T2 is supposed to be better than T1, thats how it works. Also, as far a not being in range in fleet fights, you can always warp out and warp back to a tackler at your optimal. Dear Mr Vicious Phoenix, please do not post if you have never been in a 0.0 fleet battle. I am going to assume that you are a person who doesnt venture far from empire and know very little about 0.0 life, because anyone who has been in one of these battles will know that frools speaks the truth. What he is saying is that T1 cannot even participate in the battle, let alone compete. Why you may ask?? well if you have ever used sniper ammo you would know. 100% bonus to range and extra damage compared to your standard 60% t1 ammo with pathetic damage. With this the person fitting t2 can put on sensor boosters and tracking comps getting his optimal + fall off well over 200km, lock range at 250 km. The person who can use t1 can also get his lock range as high, but the max for his guns will be betwenn 140-180 km range depending on skills and considerably less damage. Therefore when t2 fleet warps in on t1 fleet they warp in at 200km+ and although both sides can lock each other it is only the t2 fleet that can do damage. Since the introduction of sniper ammo, it has become pointless for anyone other than a t2 fitted bs to take part in fleet battles. Although i dont dispute with you that t2 should have the edge, and already does in extra damage, giving it sniper ammo and further damage ammo, like quake causes problems. Many people have said that other ammo is fine. My main problem lies with the 100% ammo. However i also think that originally t2 ammo should never have been designed as farther damag, it should be more tactical, same damage as t1 with side effects. The sheer size of this problem is shown by all the people who themselves use the ammo, myself included, and admit it is overpowered and it causes problems. They arethe ones that sign the thread, not the T1 users !!!!!I hope ccp sees this thread. And vicious phoenix i hope this helps you understand abit more what frools was talking about.It is hard to really know how much of a difference T2 ammo makes UNLESS YOU ACTUALLY USE IT! Anaka Totoch CEO of The Dark Knights of Deneb To put it simply, go **** yourself. I know what I'm talking about. Don't assume I don't fly in 0.0 because I do, and don't assume I've never been in fleet battles because I have, and don't assume I don't know about T2 ammo because I happen to fly a T2 Tempest. Stop assuming, you're the one who looks like an asshat now. Also, I agree that T2 ammo is important in fleet combat, but it is not the be all and end all. You don't need T2 to be useful. If you can't shoot them, you leave and warp back in at a range you can. Camping a gate and enemy warps in at 200 to a tactical BM? Firstly, you should have tactical BM's too, but even if you don't you can warp out and warp back in at 100km and you're good. POS are the same. T2 ammo is great and it should be. Like I said before, you wouldn't expect a HAC to lose to a regular cruiser, would you? CFW (Certified Forum Warrior) I kill people ingame too.
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.09.09 17:56:00 - [78] Originally by: vyperpit come on devs, fix t2 ammo, nerf sensor boosters, add some more hp to ships, GIVE US BIGGER plates and extenders insted of fubering with range which is totally fine All over the board. Fixing T2 amo and sensor boostered means they don't NEED to further alter hp and plates! They did alter them dramatically, T2 amo has hidden the changes. //Maya
Instagib Amarr Raptus Regaliter	Posted - 2006.09.09 18:18:00 - [79] Originally by: Max Hardcase The Rokh is a secondary problem, the 10% bonus on optimal range is ludicrous given the stated dev concerns about long range fleet combat. It almost comes down to giving them a free 1.5-2 tracking computers ( range factor only ofcourse ). Or it extends the long range punch to way over 200 km if do fit TC's. Actually.. TC/TEs only give 15% to optimal. 4x TCs (with stacking penality factored) only give 47% to optimal, 5x TC/TEs give 49% and finally with 6x TC/TEs you get 50% (not that 5th and 6th are ever worth it). 1x: 1+.151 = 1.15 2x: 1.15(1+.15.8708860) = 1.30022... 3x: 1.30022...(1+.15.5705831) = 1.41151... 4x: 1.41151...(1+.15.2829552) = 1.47142... 5x: 1.47142...(1+.15.1059927) = 1.49481... 6x: 1.49481...(1+.15*.0299912) = 1.50153... So as far as pure optimal it's worth to more than just 1.5-2x TC/TEs Thinking about it, it's kinda odd that tracking bonuses are so weak when they are so easy to get 1-1.5 TCs
Max Hardcase Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2006.09.09 19:25:00 - [80] Edited by: Max Hardcase on 09/09/2006 19:27:15 Originally by: Instagib Originally by: Max Hardcase The Rokh is a secondary problem, the 10% bonus on optimal range is ludicrous given the stated dev concerns about long range fleet combat. It almost comes down to giving them a free 1.5-2 tracking computers ( range factor only ofcourse ). Or it extends the long range punch to way over 200 km if do fit TC's. Actually.. TC/TEs only give 15% to optimal. 4x TCs (with stacking penality factored) only give 47% to optimal, 5x TC/TEs give 49% and finally with 6x TC/TEs you get 50% (not that 5th and 6th are ever worth it). Realised that after I made the post but couldnt edit anymore, had it stuck in my head that TC had both 30% tracking AND optimal But the TC ofcourse adds the same range as a lowly tracking enhancer. 1x: 1+.151 = 1.15 2x: 1.15(1+.15.8708860) = 1.30022... 3x: 1.30022...(1+.15.5705831) = 1.41151... 4x: 1.41151...(1+.15.2829552) = 1.47142... 5x: 1.47142...(1+.15.1059927) = 1.49481... 6x: 1.49481...(1+.15*.0299912) = 1.50153... So as far as pure optimal it's worth to more than just 1.5-2x TC/TEs Thinking about it, it's kinda odd that tracking bonuses are so weak when they are so easy to get 1-1.5 TCs Noticed that after I had made the post. Had it stuck in my head that Tc upped both optimal and tracking by 30%. But ofcourse the optimal bit is only as good as the tracking enhancer.
Dethis Caldari The Graduates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.09.09 21:28:00 - [81] /Signed t2 ammo 4tl -------- Kill em all and let god sort em out
Anaka Totoch Dark Knights of Deneb Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.09.10 16:58:00 - [82] Originally by: Vicious Phoenix To put it simply, go **** yourself. I know what I'm talking about. Don't assume I don't fly in 0.0 because I do, and don't assume I've never been in fleet battles because I have, and don't assume I don't know about T2 ammo because I happen to fly a T2 Tempest. Stop assuming, you're the one who looks like an asshat now. Also, I agree that T2 ammo is important in fleet combat, but it is not the be all and end all. You don't need T2 to be useful. If you can't shoot them, you leave and warp back in at a range you can. Camping a gate and enemy warps in at 200 to a tactical BM? Firstly, you should have tactical BM's too, but even if you don't you can warp out and warp back in at 100km and you're good. POS are the same. T2 ammo is great and it should be. Like I said before, you wouldn't expect a HAC to lose to a regular cruiser, would you? I am sorry if i offended, but from your original post it either sounded as if you had never been to 0.0 fleetbattle or that you were playing a completely different game. considering you were posting on the eve forums i thought it was safe to assume the first. However it does seem that i was wrong. Although tactial bms are always a good plan, if you are a defending fleet and have people warping in on you then it is usually hard for you to say please warp in under 150 km so i can actually hit you. The problem is not that t2 ammo is better than t1 i would not expect that. The problem is that t2 ammo adds both ridiculuos range and damage. I think t2 ships are balanced.If you dont believe me compare tremor L with carbonized lead L, the t1 equivalent.(I fly T2 tempests aswell.)Tremor L36 points of raw damage at 100% range. Carbonised Lead L24 points of raw damage at 60%. That is approximately 50% more damage + 32% more damage from t2 turret at 60% more range. A bit much dont you think? The point here is that ccp have just removed the point in increasing tanking and fixing stacking penalty by adding this ammo. It really takes from pvp. increasing range and damage. I dont want t2 ammo to not be great i think it could just be so much more than just more damage and more range. To your point about not expecting a hac to loose to a t1 cruiser. No i wouldnt, but at the same time i have seen it happen. Intelligence > dps. The person in the mega i was talking about before, i have seen him kill a faction mega with all faction mods with his t2 setup. Although you may not expect it it does happen. Although i admit to using t2 ammo myself, it is only becayse if you dont there is no way that you can compete. These necessities should not be there, they should be a luxury. Although you may claim i look like an asshat for assuming, what was i meant to do, you dont even have your corp showing. I think many people have agreed with me in this post and so i find it hard to consider myself an "asshat". Oh yeah btw real nice insult there. What is an asshat anyway, a hat in the shape of a but?? Kind Regards, Anaka Totoch CEO of The Dark Knights of Deneb

Pages: 1 2 [3] :: 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.