If they apply to both you either fit them to both or you remove them from both. So on the Ferox that means less EHP or the loss of the TC or you start adding invuls to the Drake. Either way, we'll have a nice discussion on why it's ok for the Drake to have more EHP than the Ferox while you also think its weapons need to be buffed to be on par :)

If they apply to both you either fit them to both or you remove them from both. So on the Ferox that means less EHP or the loss of the TC or you start adding invuls to the Drake. Either way, we'll have a nice discussion on why it's ok for the Drake to have more EHP than the Ferox while you also think its weapons need to be buffed to be on par :)

Because long range fits typically rely on range as part of their tank? Maybe? Besides, if you're being shot with Heavies you really don't need a lot of tank.
Nice distraction from an example that shows your were mistaken about application though.

You realise that he's purposely messed up his "proof" right? The ferox applies more dps than it can do because it's being helped by a painter it doesn't have.

Damn! You're right! You're so right! In a solo game like Eve, where in the universe would a pilot get the effects of a Target Painter they don't have fitted? Oh, woe is me for choosing the wrong side! /sarcasm
When an equally bonused, slotted and fitted comparison wasn't enough for you, because reasons(?), another example was provided. To which the only fault you have managed to cling to is that the Ferox might have someone providing a Target Painter. Maybe even the Drake, in which case this comparison shows that you would be better off with 2 Feroxs as opposed to a Drake/Ferox combo or 2 Drakes.
Try again.

You realise that he's purposely messed up his "proof" right? The ferox applies more dps than it can do because it's being helped by a painter it doesn't have.

Ok sorry.

Lets ignore the TP and Webs then since no one has them fit anymore because we live in special vacuum land where only I exist against unfitted Caracals representing PVE targets in a one on one environment.

So Rails are better from 10K-80K+, instead of 5K - 80K+

My bad guys sorry for misleading you all with 3rd party Webs and TPs, and making HMs look 5K worse than they actually are.

So you don't only fabricate "proof" (and then defend it) but you also use hyperbole and just lies, showing bias. Kinda disqualifies one from any serious discussion, doesn't it. Pretty much done with that.

Troll post is trollerific.
Pretty much done with that.
Good job on the charts Mario, someone here can put 2 and 2 together without screaming bloody murder about where the plus sign came from and it's unfair.

Yes, a biased graph.

Not going to make a long quote that has to be scrolled past....
Caleb, you obviously put a lot of thought into that idea but I'm not sure how your version of missiles would be much different than the current artillery. My understanding is that you were referring to the MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System) and how it fires all at once which, IIRC, is not entirely correct. I believe the MLR systems are selectable, one can be launched or all can be launched, or somewhere in between. I do like the idea of having launchers that fire double, like dual AC's, but having launchers just fire everything and go into reload seems like a poor change to make unless you want to see gank Corax's replace gank Catalysts.

Actually... I'm not sure they would replace artillery gank fits entirely, a well-timed smartbomb would clear a lot of damage off the field since the missiles would still have their ridiculous flight times.

If he is correct, it shouldn't be hard to produce decent charts with proofs.

Trouble here is, doing so /correctly/ reveals the glaring holes in heavy missiles.

For instance no one has contested that they do damage at 0m and you can get under guns HOWEVER the point is that advantage is not worth the loss of effectiveness from 10-max range.

Attempting to argue they are 'fine' whilst being sub par in all common engagement types and ranges is hard to believe.

That is but one example.

Also - for really chuckles, add skirmish links to the mix and...wow.

If he is correct, it shouldn't be hard to produce decent charts with proofs.

Trouble here is, doing so /correctly/ reveals the glaring holes in heavy missiles.

For instance no one has contested that they do damage at 0m and you can get under guns HOWEVER the point is that advantage is not worth the loss of effectiveness from 10-max range.

Attempting to argue they are 'fine' whilst being sub par in all common engagement types and ranges is hard to believe.

That is but one example.

Also - for really chuckles, add skirmish links to the mix and...wow.

Hence why I said 4 pages ago that HML need to stop being treated as a viable solo weapon. They're "not bad" when used to pound the **** out of stuff that's already hard tackled. Functionally you could have a couple of brawlers (or just arazu/rapier combo) disabling the enemy and keeping your dps safe while they work from 50km off and apply very easy dps.

People don't use Cerb's because Ishtar's are massively overpowered.

A HML Cerb fleet would be like the days of olde HML Drake fleets. Only a lot better and faster.

Seriously. HML Cerbs en masse would be devastating. They actually outperform Ishtars at ranges >100km and less than 60km when using Mjolnir missiles vs Bouncer II's. Even when the Bouncer II's are in their sweet spot they're only maginally better than the cerbs HM's.

The main problem being that missiles have flight times. HM's could use a bit of a velocity buff and a flight time nerf to make them very useful at ranges >50km.

I think the only reason people don't use Cerbs is because of drone assist.

CCP literally teases us with better missile use thanks to the new Mordus line of ships. For a long time I wondered if the reason they gave those ships a missile velocity bonus was to test the waters for a general buff across the board.

From CCP
Basically graphing what weapons and ship types have been most responsible for all damage done in PVP over the past year.

http://i.imgur.com/yfeQpc4.jpg

Look at all those missile chuckers representing.

From CCP
Basically graphing what weapons and ship types have been most responsible for all damage done in PVP over the past year.

http://i.imgur.com/yfeQpc4.jpg

Look at all those missile chuckers representing.