EVE Search - A New beef with Amarr...

All Channels

Ships and Modules

A New beef with Amarr...

» 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)
Sweaty Teeth	Posted - 2006.10.02 02:39:00 - [1] Now we all know that each race has it's pro's and cons. Gallente's big plus is their blasters, they do more damage than all other weapons in game. Amarr's big plus is their beams, they do the most damage per second of all long range guns (or so I thought, read on). But here's what gets me. Amarr guns have a built in damage bonus that comes with the built in penalty of cap usage. Then their ships all have a cap usage bonus that offsets the cap penalty so effectively, each Amarr ship is like it has a damage bonus in place of the cap usage bonus. Right? Long range is where Amarr guns are best so let's look at them first: Tachyon Beam Laser II does 25.9 dps without skills and without ship bonuses. 425mm Railgun II does 20.7 dps without skills and without ship bonuses. Sounds great right? But wait, Tachyon's have a build in damage bonus so that an Apoc has a cap usage boost and megathron has a damage boost. After you have battle ship 5 in each the numbers are: Tachyon Beam Laser II 25.9 dps (but uses almost as little cap as a railgun) 425mm Railgun II does .... 25.9 dps. Ta-da! Neat trick huh? Now let's look at blasters vs pulse lasers: Before bonuses the numbers are : Mega pulse II : 27.4 dps Neutron Blaster II : 32.0 dps. What?! And this is with the bonus built into the pulse lasers... after you get BS 5 the numbers are: Mega pulse II : 27.4 dps (but now uses almost as little cap as the blasters) Neutron Blaster II: 40.0 dps Blasters do 46% more dps than mega pulse and yet, our beams are dead equal to rails! Where's the justice? Here's how all the numbers were calculated in case someone is willing to double check my math: Neutron Blaster Cannon II damage multiplier = 4.2 rate of fire = 7.88 ammo damage base = 60 (this number doesn't matter, all ammo's are constant on damage amount, just different on damage type) dps = [damage multipler] * [ammo base damage] / [rate of fire] = 4.2 * 60 / 7.88 = 31.98 Please respond only to either the numbers accuracy or another difference that is between Amarr and Gallente's ships other than the quality of guns they use. I don't want to hear anyone saying "stop whining", since we've all ready hundreds of those posts and they don't add anything to the discussion. Thanks, Cold Sweat.
Cold Sweat	Posted - 2006.10.02 02:40:00 - [2] Now we all know that each race has it's pro's and cons. Gallente's big plus is their blasters, they do more damage than all other weapons in game. Amarr's big plus is their beams, they do the most damage per second of all long range guns (or so I thought, read on). But here's what gets me. Amarr guns have a built in damage bonus that comes with the built in penalty of cap usage. Then their ships all have a cap usage bonus that offsets the cap penalty so effectively, each Amarr ship is like it has a damage bonus in place of the cap usage bonus. Right? Long range is where Amarr guns are best so let's look at them first: Tachyon Beam Laser II does 25.9 dps without skills and without ship bonuses. 425mm Railgun II does 20.7 dps without skills and without ship bonuses. Sounds great right? But wait, Tachyon's have a build in damage bonus so that an Apoc has a cap usage boost and megathron has a damage boost. After you have battle ship 5 in each the numbers are: Tachyon Beam Laser II 25.9 dps (but uses almost as little cap as a railgun) 425mm Railgun II does .... 25.9 dps. Ta-da! Neat trick huh? Now let's look at blasters vs pulse lasers: Before bonuses the numbers are : Mega pulse II : 27.4 dps Neutron Blaster II : 32.0 dps. What?! And this is with the bonus built into the pulse lasers... after you get BS 5 the numbers are: Mega pulse II : 27.4 dps (but now uses almost as little cap as the blasters) Neutron Blaster II: 40.0 dps Blasters do 46% more dps than mega pulse and yet, our beams are dead equal to rails! Where's the justice? Here's how all the numbers were calculated in case someone is willing to double check my math: Neutron Blaster Cannon II damage multiplier = 4.2 rate of fire = 7.88 ammo damage base = 60 (this number doesn't matter, all ammo's are constant on damage amount, just different on damage type) dps = [damage multipler] * [ammo base damage] / [rate of fire] = 4.2 * 60 / 7.88 = 31.98 Please respond only to either the numbers accuracy or another difference that is between Amarr and Gallente's ships other than the quality of guns they use. I don't want to hear anyone saying "stop whining", since we've all ready hundreds of those posts and they don't add anything to the discussion. Thanks, Cold Sweat.
Vicious Phoenix	Posted - 2006.10.02 02:46:00 - [3] Tracking differences, range differences... The rest of my response would be a waste of time because amarr whiners never seem to quit even when shown reason. CFW (Certified Forum Warrior) I kill people ingame too.
Deitre Cibrus Beagle Corp	Posted - 2006.10.02 03:04:00 - [4] 1.) Damage per second on Structure : 80.308 (0.0 taking accuracy into account) 2.) Damage per second on Structure : 87.848 (0.0 taking accuracy into account) 1 is a geddon with 1x mega pulse II with max skills with conflag L 2 is a megathron with 1x Neutron Blaster Cannon II with max skills, with Void L Megathron just barely outdamages the geddon. ----------- Originally by: Santiago Cortes Please don't derail your own thread. What is this sig missing?
Aeaus Tharsis Security	Posted - 2006.10.02 03:13:00 - [5] Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Amarr whiners never seem to quit even when shown reason. I'm sure the whole EANM becoming standard and having Amarr primary damage halved on BS+ targets absolutely okay, reasonable, and not something to complain over. Join Tharsis! - Get Sexy Sigs
Cold Sweat	Posted - 2006.10.02 03:19:00 - [6] Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Tracking differences, range differences... So let's consider tracking and range: Pulse vs blasters: Pulse weapons have much worse tracking and much better range. The combined effect is that they can hit things further out but up close they miss a lot and are ineffective. I plugged the weapon stats into the turret tracking guide and the neutron's are more effective if the target is less than 15 km away. More than 15 km away and the pulse are more effective. This is with a transversal setting of 100 m/s. If you play with the transversal a bit you see them move around a bit but the neutron blasters are consistently better for the fights I get into. beams vs rails: rails ahve better optimal and better falloff but worse tracking. Rails have a tracking of 0.009626 and tachyon beams have tracking of 0.01392. So the tach's have a 44% bonus to tracking over the rails. This is a bit of a mix to me. If you compare the megathron and Apoc you get the same damage over time per gun (although apoc has better bursts) and the megathron has 9% more range and about 6.5% less tracking. Pretty similar although the tactical advantage of doing more damage in a burst is in the Apocs favor. Cold Sweat
Sweaty Teeth	Posted - 2006.10.02 03:23:00 - [7] Originally by: Deitre Cibrus 1.) Damage per second on Structure : 80.308 (0.0 taking accuracy into account) 2.) Damage per second on Structure : 87.848 (0.0 taking accuracy into account) 1 is a geddon with 1x mega pulse II with max skills with conflag L 2 is a megathron with 1x Neutron Blaster Cannon II with max skills, with Void L Megathron just barely outdamages the geddon. But the megathron has only 1 damage bous, the geddon has 2, and yet the geddon still losses to damage and uses more cap / second to operate.
Vicious Phoenix	Posted - 2006.10.02 03:37:00 - [8] Originally by: Sweaty Teeth But the megathron has only 1 damage bous, the geddon has 2, and yet the geddon still losses to damage and uses more cap / second to operate. 2 damage bonuses? I want your geddon. CFW (Certified Forum Warrior) I kill people ingame too.
Deitre Cibrus Beagle Corp	Posted - 2006.10.02 03:43:00 - [9] Originally by: Sweaty Teeth Originally by: Deitre Cibrus 1.) Damage per second on Structure : 80.308 (0.0 taking accuracy into account) 2.) Damage per second on Structure : 87.848 (0.0 taking accuracy into account) 1 is a geddon with 1x mega pulse II with max skills with conflag L 2 is a megathron with 1x Neutron Blaster Cannon II with max skills, with Void L Megathron just barely outdamages the geddon. But the megathron has only 1 damage bous, the geddon has 2, and yet the geddon still losses to damage and uses more cap / second to operate. Geddon with conflag hits out to 25km range(15km optimal, 10km falloff) Megathron hits out to about 15km range(3.4km optimal, 12km falloff) Geddon with Scorch L gets 55km range(45km optimal, 10km falloff) Megathron with Null L gets about 26km range(11km optimal, 15.6km falloff) So the geddon is superior in range, and never has to reload. Geddon uses 4.41176470588 cap/sec per gun with conflag Megathron uses 3.00925925926 cap/sec per gun with Void So yes, a geddon does use more cap second, but not everything in this game can be the same, lasers are meant to use more cap/sec than any other weapons,hence why amarr generally have better cap than all other races to make up for it. So stop whining, amarr isn't as bad as whiners make it sound. ----------- Originally by: Santiago Cortes Please don't derail your own thread. What is this sig missing?
Nifel Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.02 03:55:00 - [10] Originally by: Cold Sweat Long range is where Amarr guns are best so let's look at them first: Tachyon Beam Laser II does 25.9 dps without skills and without ship bonuses. 425mm Railgun II does 20.7 dps without skills and without ship bonuses. Sounds great right? But wait, Tachyon's have a build in damage bonus so that an Apoc has a cap usage boost and megathron has a damage boost. After you have battle ship 5 in each the numbers are: Tachyon Beam Laser II 25.9 dps (but uses almost as little cap as a railgun) 425mm Railgun II does .... 25.9 dps. Ta-da! Neat trick huh? Apoc gets one more gunslot, armageddon gets rof bonus. "When I die I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandpa. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car." RKK Ranking: (MIN14)
Gabriel Karade Office linebackers Blood of the Innocents	Posted - 2006.10.02 07:50:00 - [11] Originally by: Cold Sweat Now let's look at blasters vs pulse lasers: Before bonuses the numbers are : Mega pulse II : 27.4 dps Neutron Blaster II : 32.0 dps. What?! And this is with the bonus built into the pulse lasers... after you get BS 5 the numbers are: Mega pulse II : 27.4 dps (but now uses almost as little cap as the blasters) Neutron Blaster II: 40.0 dps Blasters do 46% more dps than mega pulse and yet, our beams are dead equal to rails! Where's the justice? Now try to do a sound analysis, and compare Mega Pulse II's on an Armageddon to Neutron II's on a Megathron, recalling that a 25% bonus to RoF is actually a 33% DPS bonus... ---------- - Office Linebacker -
Susa Ou	Posted - 2006.10.02 09:38:00 - [12] it has to be an Apoc vs. a Mega with drones added in. Without a shadow of a doubt, the mega will do more dps. With the way things are these days in EvE, Megas are the most powerful battleships for most roles.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.02 11:42:00 - [13] Edited by: Aramendel on 02/10/2006 11:44:33 Originally by: Vicious Phoenix 2 damage bonuses? I want your geddon. It's called the increased base damage of lasers. Lasers have a higher damagemod/sec than other weapons and in exchange need the cap reduction bonus to be able to sustain fire. For all intents and porpuses amarr ships always have 1 damage bonus. The first ship bonus makes them able to use it without draining their cap too fast. For example, a 250mm rail and a heavy beam have after skills & reload almost exactly the same raw dps (rail has 2% more). For pluse vs blasters of the OP. Blasters have way way WAY less range than pulses - their dps relation is balanced. The only problem is the nonexistance of a 30k disruptor, so amarr pulse (and minnie AC) ships cannot use their range advantage to a mega since with null it still does more dps than them up to 20k.
Commander Thrawn Tarnak inc.	Posted - 2006.10.02 11:52:00 - [14] Edited by: Commander Thrawn on 02/10/2006 11:53:09 Originally by: Deitre Cibrus Originally by: Sweaty Teeth Originally by: Deitre Cibrus 1.) Damage per second on Structure : 80.308 (0.0 taking accuracy into account) 2.) Damage per second on Structure : 87.848 (0.0 taking accuracy into account) 1 is a geddon with 1x mega pulse II with max skills with conflag L 2 is a megathron with 1x Neutron Blaster Cannon II with max skills, with Void L Megathron just barely outdamages the geddon. But the megathron has only 1 damage bous, the geddon has 2, and yet the geddon still losses to damage and uses more cap / second to operate. Geddon with conflag hits out to 25km range(15km optimal, 10km falloff) Megathron hits out to about 15km range(3.4km optimal, 12km falloff) Geddon with Scorch L gets 55km range(45km optimal, 10km falloff) Megathron with Null L gets about 26km range(11km optimal, 15.6km falloff) So the geddon is superior in range, and never has to reload. Geddon uses 4.41176470588 cap/sec per gun with conflag Megathron uses 3.00925925926 cap/sec per gun with Void So yes, a geddon does use more cap second, but not everything in this game can be the same, lasers are meant to use more cap/sec than any other weapons,hence why amarr generally have better cap than all other races to make up for it. So stop whining, amarr isn't as bad as whiners make it sound. in any short range engagement, you needs to be within 20km to lock down you target a geddon will never be outside 20km if he has any hopes in keeping you mega there. therefore the 45km optimal is useless and that means out of 20km we have 5km if which we outdamage a mega, not 10 which would be nice. but 5 out of 20k
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2006.10.02 12:04:00 - [15] Originally by: Aeaus Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Amarr whiners never seem to quit even when shown reason. I'm sure the whole EANM becoming standard and having Amarr primary damage halved on BS+ targets absolutely okay, reasonable, and not something to complain over. If EANM are unbalanced then base armor resist are unbalanced(and invulnerability field as well, and thus shield resists). All an EANM does is increase each resist equally. Could almost compare it to a straight damage reduction. 1 EANM II decreases all gun's damage by 20%-25%. For me personally I still prefer the 3 hardener setup most of the time(a couple exceptions). So is it a problem of the EANM? Or is it a problem of the base resists? ... oh well Rabble rabble ra...(meh)
Commander Thrawn Tarnak inc.	Posted - 2006.10.02 12:17:00 - [16] Edited by: Commander Thrawn on 02/10/2006 12:17:25 Originally by: Reatu Krentor Originally by: Aeaus Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Amarr whiners never seem to quit even when shown reason. I'm sure the whole EANM becoming standard and having Amarr primary damage halved on BS+ targets absolutely okay, reasonable, and not something to complain over. If EANM are unbalanced then base armor resist are unbalanced(and invulnerability field as well, and thus shield resists). All an EANM does is increase each resist equally. Could almost compare it to a straight damage reduction. 1 EANM II decreases all gun's damage by 20%-25%. For me personally I still prefer the 3 hardener setup most of the time(a couple exceptions). So is it a problem of the EANM? Or is it a problem of the base resists? its a problem with eanm and the added compasation skills. 2eamnII and a DC works better then 3 hardeners. its a fact, therefore most ppl use them and that means the already 60%em resistance that never got booster with 3 hardeners, is now always boosted and now the highest resistance on armor tanks. shields are also a problem with invuls, however... only 1/3 of ships shield tank and even alot of those prefer to stick jammers in mids and armor tank. which mean the vast majority of ships armor tank. that means amarr has the worst dmg type in game atm
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.02 12:19:00 - [17] Well, considering 2 EAN2 + 1 DC gives you +48% resistance vs all (with lvl 4 in the comp skills) and in addition acts like a plate with the hull resists of the DC and needs no cap and needs less cpu than a 3 harderner oufit the only, singular reason to fit a 3 harderner outfit is the price. 2 EAN2 + 1 DC are better everywhere else. And, yes, the problem are the base resistances. Or the shield/armortanker relation - the base resistances would be ok if we had a 50:50 distribution there. But we haven't. Right now an optimistic guess would be 1 out of 5 ships shieldtanking in PvP. Even with the med/lowslot balance fixed (which nerfing ECM alone won't accomplish) we have still from the basic shipdistribution twice as many armortankers than shieldtankers.
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2006.10.02 13:11:00 - [18] Originally by: Commander Thrawn Edited by: Commander Thrawn on 02/10/2006 12:17:25 Originally by: Reatu Krentor Originally by: Aeaus Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Amarr whiners never seem to quit even when shown reason. I'm sure the whole EANM becoming standard and having Amarr primary damage halved on BS+ targets absolutely okay, reasonable, and not something to complain over. If EANM are unbalanced then base armor resist are unbalanced(and invulnerability field as well, and thus shield resists). All an EANM does is increase each resist equally. Could almost compare it to a straight damage reduction. 1 EANM II decreases all gun's damage by 20%-25%. For me personally I still prefer the 3 hardener setup most of the time(a couple exceptions). So is it a problem of the EANM? Or is it a problem of the base resists? its a problem with eanm and the added compasation skills. 2eamnII and a DC works better then 3 hardeners. its a fact, therefore most ppl use them and that means the already 60%em resistance that never got booster with 3 hardeners, is now always boosted and now the highest resistance on armor tanks. 2 eanm + DC is not better then 3 T2 hardeners, when just considering the armor resist increase. The added structure resists are good however(especially for the gallente with their high structure hp). I get 84 - 53 - 60 - 65 with 2 eanm II and a named(+13%) DCU. OTOH I get 70 - 59.5 - 66.25 - 70.75 with 3 T2 hardeners. For overall resists I'd prefer 3 hardeners(the DCU adding to structure as well though is also handy). 3 T2 hardeners is still better on resists then eanm and dcu, however the eanm+dcu adds the benefit of effectively doubling hull and adding resists against Amarr(Nobody remembers the Gankgeddon era?). Originally by: Commander Thrawn shields are also a problem with invuls, however... only 1/3 of ships shield tank and even alot of those prefer to stick jammers in mids and armor tank. which mean the vast majority of ships armor tank. that means amarr has the worst dmg type in game atm Yeah there are not many ships that really shield tank currently. That's partly caused by a lack of mids on some ships and that in pvp fitting a shield tank means sacrificing things like ab/mwd, scramblers, webbers that are important for pvp. ... oh well Rabble rabble ra...(meh)
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2006.10.02 13:20:00 - [19] Originally by: Aramendel Well, considering 2 EAN2 + 1 DC gives you +48% resistance vs all (with lvl 4 in the comp skills) and in addition acts like a plate with the hull resists of the DC and needs no cap and needs less cpu than a 3 harderner oufit the only, singular reason to fit a 3 harderner outfit is the price. 2 EAN2 + 1 DC are better everywhere else. And, yes, the problem are the base resistances. Or the shield/armortanker relation - the base resistances would be ok if we had a 50:50 distribution there. But we haven't. Right now an optimistic guess would be 1 out of 5 ships shieldtanking in PvP. Even with the med/lowslot balance fixed (which nerfing ECM alone won't accomplish) we have still from the basic shipdistribution twice as many armortankers than shieldtankers. I rarely use 2 eanm2 + dc tank currently. I still prefer the 3 hardener setup. if I use the 2 eanm + dc setup I have a hole in explosive resist that berserkers just love chewing on. There is only one occasion where I'd use a Eanm setup and when I fit that I don't have enough lows to also use a dcu. On the shield tankers/armor tankers relation. Untill there is a change so that you can shield tank in pvp and not have to sacrifice pvp mods for it, there will be more shield tankers. Gallente = Armor tankers(Dominix could if really wanted shield tank) Amarr = Armor Caldari = shield Minmatar = Armor or shield(eg. Typhoon is clearly armor, Tempest can choose though will in most cases go for armor to have the mids for other essentials) ... oh well Rabble rabble ra...(meh)
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.02 14:12:00 - [20] Originally by: Reatu Krentor I rarely use 2 eanm2 + dc tank currently. I still prefer the 3 hardener setup. if I use the 2 eanm + dc setup I have a hole in explosive resist that berserkers just love chewing on. There is only one occasion where I'd use a Eanm setup and when I fit that I don't have enough lows to also use a dcu. Thats comparing a 4 harderner setup (3 actives + dc) vs a 3 harderner setup.. Also at non-minnie ships using a 3 active + DC set will result in an just as big EM hole. Quote: On the shield tankers/armor tankers relation. Untill there is a change so that you can shield tank in pvp and not have to sacrifice pvp mods for it, there will be more shield tankers. Gallente = Armor tankers(Dominix could if really wanted shield tank) Amarr = Armor Caldari = shield Minmatar = Armor or shield(eg. Typhoon is clearly armor, Tempest can choose though will in most cases go for armor to have the mids for other essentials) To repeat myself: Even with the med/lowslot balance fixed (which nerfing ECM alone won't accomplish) we have still from the basic shipdistribution twice as many armortankers than shieldtankers. If we assume a 100% armotank distribution for amarr and gal (dominix could shieldtank, but considering the only really useful thing he can put in his lows is an armortank the vaste majority of all setups won't shieldtank), 50:50 armor/shield for minnie, and 100% shield for caldari we get 62.5% armortankers, 37.5% shieldtankers. Now add that quite a few caldari ships won't be able to shieldtank & fit their combat role effeciently (scorpion, rook for example) and the majority of all frigates will use an armortank unless low slot tackling modules are introduced and you come loser to a 66:33 relation, aka 2:1. Under perfect conditions.
Frools No Quarter. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.10.02 15:01:00 - [21] Originally by: Reatu Krentor I rarely use 2 eanm2 + dc tank currently. I still prefer the 3 hardener setup. if I use the 2 eanm + dc setup I have a hole in explosive resist that berserkers just love chewing on. There is only one occasion where I'd use a Eanm setup and when I fit that I don't have enough lows to also use a dcu. with level 4 comp skills on base amarr armour 2 eanmII + iffa = 79/58/61/66 + structure resists + small shield resist exp/kin/th t2 hardeners = 60/64/66/70 exp/kin/th n-types = 60/60/62/67 2 eanmII + iffa = 77cpu 3 t2 hardners = 132 cpu 3 n-types = 96 cpu i go with 2x eanm + dcu for several reason 1. exp/kin/th resists are very similar, slightly lower though 2. 'free' EM resist 3. structure resist 4. it actually fits!
Tassi Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2006.10.02 15:32:00 - [22] Edited by: Tassi on 02/10/2006 15:32:29 Blasters still have higher DPS without boni than lasers. Neutron blaster II: 0.53 dmg mod Mega pulse II: 0.45 dmg mod (both with ROF factored in and no skills) So where is our inbuilt dmg bonus? blasters have better tracking aswell. Ever tried to shoot an EANMt2 + dc tanked blasterthron with scorch from 40km? Do that and than tell me OMG OMG AMARR OWNZORZRZRZRZ EANMt2 + dc tanked blasterthron will own a geddon even from 30km.
Siakel	Posted - 2006.10.02 15:49:00 - [23] Note also that the OP is comparing Tachyon Beam Lasers, which are 'oversized' larger-than-the-rest Lasers to 425mms that are supposed to be balanced to Mega Beam Lasers. The fact that they do the same DPS is worrisome, but I don't know if the OP took reload time into account, in which case the Tachyons would gain a bit more over the 425mms. But is it enough?
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.02 16:22:00 - [24] Edited by: Aramendel on 02/10/2006 16:23:55 Assuming max skills: 425mm Rail II: 0.948 DM/sec without reload, 0.914 DM/sec with reload Mega Beam II: 0.878 DM/sec on apoc, 1.17 DM/sec on arma Tachyon Beam II: 0.949 DM/sec on apoc, 1.265 DM/sec on arma Full gun rack: Megathron, 7 425 II: 6.638 DM/sec for fights shorter than 4.5 minutes (= time it takes to fire a 425mm rail empty), 6.398 DM/sec for longer fights of continuous fire Apocalypse, 8 Mega Beam II: 7.024 DM/sec, 8 Tachyon Beam II: 7.592 DM/sec Aramageddon, 8 Mega Beam II: 9.365 DM/sec, 8 Tachyon Beam II: 10.123 DM/sec So Amarr BS do higher base dps than the mega. This isn't because the lasers, though, but because they have an additional dps bonus or weapon slot. Also note that an arma with tachyons will not be able to mount any meaningful tank. Also on the frigate and cruiser lvl the amarr ships do not have these advantages. The ships there do not have additional dps boni or gunslots, so beam laser dps there falls under rail dps.
Azerrad InExile	Posted - 2006.10.02 16:53:00 - [25] Originally by: Commander Thrawn its a problem with eanm and the added compasation skills. 2eamnII and a DC works better then 3 hardeners. its a fact, therefore most ppl use them and that means the already 60%em resistance that never got booster with 3 hardeners, is now always boosted and now the highest resistance on armor tanks. So basically you want EM to be the lowest hardened shield resist and EM to also be the lowest hardened armor resist?
Azerrad InExile	Posted - 2006.10.02 16:57:00 - [26] Originally by: Tassi Blasters still have higher DPS without boni than lasers. ... So where is our inbuilt dmg bonus? Having a built-in dmg bonus does not necessarily mean that the gun will do more damage than other guns.
Novan Leon	Posted - 2006.10.02 17:06:00 - [27] All things balanced, shouldn't the lasers have a higher DPS in most situations than hybrids? Given the Amarr's sole reliance on lasers to deal damage in comparison to the other races's multiple weapon options, I would think so. Note: I don't fly Amarr and I don't use turrets as my primary so this is just speculation. ----------------------- Hey you! Obey the fist!
Gabriel Karade Office linebackers Blood of the Innocents	Posted - 2006.10.02 17:14:00 - [28] Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 02/10/2006 11:52:36 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Now try to do a sound analysis, and compare Mega Pulse II's on an Armageddon to Neutron II's on a Megathron, recalling that a 25% bonus to RoF is actually a 33% DPS bonus... And also a 33% increase of the weapon cap drain. And at closer range the pulse tracking suffers much more then the blaster tracking. But overall pulses and blasters are balanceed vs each other. At least if we ignore base resistances and the problem of using the pulse range advantage without a tackler (which is not making it "balanced", a mega with a tackler can also warp in at point blank range, for example). And as a sidenote, regarding that locked post: A mega with MWD & blasters won't be able to continously run a dual rep tank even with an injector, yes, but neither will be an arma with pulses...so... Yes but his point was about raw DPS - nothing else, missing off the ship bonus simply distorts the picture. But anyway, different tools balanced for different jobs, won't see a Blasterthron hitting targets out to 50km for 85% accuracy (Scorch), won't see an Armageddon chewing up opponents at 3-5km as efficiently, nor should you. ---------- - Office Linebacker -
Shadowsword Gallente COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2006.10.02 17:23:00 - [29] Originally by: Azerrad InExile Originally by: Commander Thrawn its a problem with eanm and the added compasation skills. 2eamnII and a DC works better then 3 hardeners. its a fact, therefore most ppl use them and that means the already 60%em resistance that never got booster with 3 hardeners, is now always boosted and now the highest resistance on armor tanks. So basically you want EM to be the lowest hardened shield resist and EM to also be the lowest hardened armor resist? Of course not, what we want is to UP the shield EM resist to, say, 20%, and lower the EM armor resist to a base 40%. Then you'd have balance... ------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy.
Trigger Sterling Amarr Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.10.02 17:33:00 - [30] Edited by: Trigger Sterling on 02/10/2006 17:33:34 Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 02/10/2006 16:23:55 Assuming max skills: 425mm Rail II: 0.948 DM/sec without reload, 0.914 DM/sec with reload Mega Beam II: 0.878 DM/sec on apoc, 1.17 DM/sec on arma Tachyon Beam II: 0.949 DM/sec on apoc, 1.265 DM/sec on arma Full gun rack: Megathron, 7 425 II: 6.638 DM/sec for fights shorter than 4.5 minutes (= time it takes to fire a 425mm rail empty), 6.398 DM/sec for longer fights of continuous fire Apocalypse, 8 Mega Beam II: 7.024 DM/sec, 8 Tachyon Beam II: 7.592 DM/sec Aramageddon, 8 Mega Beam II: 9.365 DM/sec, 8 Tachyon Beam II: 10.123 DM/sec So Amarr BS do higher base dps than the mega. This isn't because the lasers, though, but because they have an additional dps bonus or weapon slot. Also note that an arma with tachyons will not be able to mount any meaningful tank. Also on the frigate and cruiser lvl the amarr ships do not have these advantages. The ships there do not have additional dps boni or gunslots, so beam laser dps there falls under rail dps. My 'Geddon only has 7 turret slots. :(
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.02 19:27:00 - [31] Edited by: Aramendel on 02/10/2006 19:29:48 Originally by: Gabriel Karade But anyway, different tools balanced for different jobs, won't see a Blasterthron hitting targets out to 50km for 85% accuracy (Scorch), won't see an Armageddon chewing up opponents at 3-5km as efficiently, nor should you. Nope, never said it should, too. The problem is, as said, that the arma needs a faction disruptor or a tackler to operate at it's "medium range" while the mega doesn't. Given a BS sized 30k scrambler and AC, pulses and blasters should be pretty balanced vs each other. Originally by: Trigger Sterling My 'Geddon only has 7 turret slots. :( You prolly don't have the ultra-rare navy arma, which was given out at the last 30th feb. cough fixed.
Tarazed Aquilae	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:03:00 - [32] Lasers donÆt use ammo. For the mission runner that might not be a big deal, IÆll confess. But an Amarr laser boat can head out into 0.0 and rat in out of the way systems for weeks. (safespot/log if someone shows up in local) You could take the choicest loot and leave the junk. The only time you would have to come back to empire was when your cargo was full of top named loot. That is an entirely unique ability that no other raceÆs ships have. IMO itÆs an ability thatÆs worth a couple dps to get. Lasers donÆt need to be reloaded. In long fights this can be a big factor. I have to reload a couple times in a big belt rat fight, losing valuable seconds (and damage) when I do. Laser crystals change quickly. That means you can tune your lasers better than I can tune my railguns. I can change ammo types too, but it takes a long time and I have to carry a bunch of bulky ammo. The grass is always greenerà But you know what? I could complain about the big advantages lasers get over railguns, but IÆm not. Instead IÆm planning on training up Amarr ships and lasers. If you think any particular race has a big advantage over another then just train another raceÆs stuff.
Cold Sweat	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:12:00 - [33] Originally by: Deitre Cibrus Geddon with conflag hits out to 25km range(15km optimal, 10km falloff) Megathron hits out to about 15km range(3.4km optimal, 12km falloff) Geddon with Scorch L gets 55km range(45km optimal, 10km falloff) Megathron with Null L gets about 26km range(11km optimal, 15.6km falloff) We have to be fair though and take tracking into account. People may read this and think a geddon with scorch can hit anything up to 45 km away but it's not true at all, the geddon has serious tracking problems at ranges closer than 15 km. So it's range may as well be 15-45 km. Pretty good but considering any fight where you're getting attacked, you may get the first shot in but as soon as your target gets close, you're hooped. I've tried using tracking computers, which help, but if I don't use sensor boosters, the time it takes me to lock my target is already in close. So it's a lose-lose. Also, In my post I was comparing guns, not ships. It's not fair to compare a geddons damage to a megathron's damage straight up since the geddon has 2 bonuses: rate of fire (best battleship bonus in the game, shared with raven and tempest) -10% cap usage (lasers are supposed to do more base damage and this is supposed to reduce their cap usage penalty, so this is thought of as a damage bonus when considering balance) If you compare ships, geddon gets it's cap usage bonus to make it still use more cap and do less damage than blasters and blasters get 37% more to tracking. Then geddon gets rof bonus (+33% dps and cap consumption on guns) and mega gets damage (+25% dps). So really, if you look at the range situation, I like megathron better (it has less range but is more effective in the range that counts: up close). If you look at cap consumption, mega is better. So to me, mega is better so far in each catagory and we've counted 2 Geddon bonuses and 1 mega bonus. Considering the fact that is has a +37% bonus to tracking, mega is way ahead. So to further my original point: Amarr guns: pulse < blasters beams = rails Amarr Battleships: Close range: Megathron > Apocalypse / Armageddon. Long range: Megathron = Apocalypse > Armageddon (yes geddon can do more dps then the others but that is offset by the fact that it's capacitor fails quickly, it's burst damage is lower (7 guns vs 8) and it's harder to fit. What this turned into is a bunch of people talking bout the imbalance of damage types which is valid but there are other posts for that. My personal take on it is that we need further reduce the number of people using ECM so that more ships will use a sheild tank. Perhaps we could have ECM modules reduce armor repair amount by say 10% each, since those modules work too well together at the moment. Cold Sweat
Complacency's Bane	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:21:00 - [34] Edited by: Complacency''s Bane on 02/10/2006 20:23:59 Originally by: Aeaus Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Amarr whiners never seem to quit even when shown reason. I'm sure the whole EANM becoming standard and having Amarr primary damage halved on BS+ targets absolutely okay, reasonable, and not something to complain over. Yeah, because EANMs only affect em and thermal. Theres no way that it does THE EXACT SAME THING to all weapons reguardless of damage type. That would be crazy. Originally by: Azerrad InExile Originally by: Commander Thrawn its a problem with eanm and the added compasation skills. 2eamnII and a DC works better then 3 hardeners. its a fact, therefore most ppl use them and that means the already 60%em resistance that never got booster with 3 hardeners, is now always boosted and now the highest resistance on armor tanks. So basically you want EM to be the lowest hardened shield resist and EM to also be the lowest hardened armor resist? Yes, thats what it used to be. As a result, amarr were the indisputable single best race in the game. Now theyre not, and its whining time.
Byzan Zwyth	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:22:00 - [35] Also consider that amarr weapons - Do less effective damage due to it being mostly EM - Have generally higher fitting costs - The problem seems to be smaller with large weapons (which you are using in this example) - The slightly higher cap use means that both the tank is less effective and the ship is more vulnerable to NOS. - Plus the EW problem with Amarr - Amarr ships are shocking when your spec in that type of ship is low because cap use is so high the tank sucks. While this does not mean a lot in the maths because you have to assume spec 5 in ship type it means a lot in the game where amarr ships are a nightmare till you have awesome cap skills and spec 5 in your ship type. Some of these things may be small but they add up, and I personally donÆt think it will be much better with a couple of very small changes. Spesh if EM and NOS gets a nerf like maybe it should. Things like this. What if you halved the cap use of lasers and halved the amarr ship bonus for energy turret cap use. So they cap use was the same later on but the ships would be more manageable for lower speced pilots. Make the cap use bonus for all energy weapon types. Swapped EM and Thermal damage for crystals, so they do mostly thermal Changes like that donÆt change the maths much for you nerds but make the ships a little easier to use. ---------------------- I fly Amarr and Gallente ships Amarr because they peow peow and look cool... Gallente because they are effective
Complacency's Bane	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:28:00 - [36] Originally by: Byzan Zwyth What if you halved the cap use of lasers and halved the amarr ship bonus for energy turret cap use. So they cap use was the same later on but the ships would be more manageable for lower speced pilots. ... Changes like that donÆt change the maths much for you nerds but make the ships a little easier to use. Us nerds who know how to do basic multiplication? But that was mean, not everyone has passed 5th grade algebra. If you cut laser cap use, you get lasers on non-laser ships because they do (lots) more damage then the racial weapons for that ship.
Byzan Zwyth	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:35:00 - [37] Originally by: Complacency's Bane Originally by: Aeaus Originally by: Vicious Phoenix Amarr whiners never seem to quit even when shown reason. I'm sure the whole EANM becoming standard and having Amarr primary damage halved on BS+ targets absolutely okay, reasonable, and not something to complain over. Yeah, because EANMs only affect em and thermal. Theres no way that it does THE EXACT SAME THING to all weapons reguardless of damage type. That would be crazy. Well that whole problem seems very easy to me I dont know why you need someone to explain it to you. It seems to me the whole reason to for an EANM tank over an active tank on T1 ships is that you end up with pretty good all round ressits and totaly uber EM resist. And guess who that hurts the most? ---------------------- I fly Amarr and Gallente ships Amarr because they peow peow and look cool... Gallente because they are effective
Shadowsword Gallente COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:37:00 - [38] Originally by: Complacency's Bane So basically you want EM to be the lowest hardened shield resist and EM to also be the lowest hardened armor resist? Yes, thats what it used to be. As a result, amarr were the indisputable single best race in the game. Now theyre not, and its whining time. Ignorance ftw. Amarrs were considered best because of the way the stacking penalty worked, and because they were the only race to have a mid-range, instant-damage weapon. Megathrons could outdps them, but couldn't kill at 60km. Gankageddons could. ------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy.
Complacency's Bane	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:42:00 - [39] Edited by: Complacency''s Bane on 02/10/2006 20:45:43 Edited by: Complacency''s Bane on 02/10/2006 20:42:09 Originally by: Shadowsword Ignorance ftw. Amarrs were considered best because of the way the stacking penalty worked, and because they were the only race to have a mid-range, instant-damage weapon. Megathrons could outdps them, but couldn't kill at 60km. Gankageddons could. The old tanked armor resists (3x hardeners) were 60/67.5/62.5/55 and the old shield resists were 50/60/70/80. BOY ITS ODD HOW EM SEEMS TO BE THE LOWEST OR ALMOST LOWEST ON EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE. HMM. That, combined with 8 t2 stabs breaking the stacking penalty, megalpulse having absurd range, and radio doing twice the damage it does now, meant that amarr were the only race. Of course, amarr pilots were still whining about EM/thermal at the time, but at least there werent 80-page threads filled with tears. Originally by: Byzan Zwyth Well that whole problem seems very easy to me I dont know why you need someone to explain it to you. It seems to me the whole reason to for an EANM tank over an active tank on T1 ships is that you end up with pretty good all round ressits and totaly uber EM resist. And guess who that hurts the most? It seems easy to you because you dont know how to do math. 48% off all damage is 48% off ALL damage. I could make the argument that it hurts lasers least, since 300 DpS of lasers on armor means that an EANM II/DC tank will chop 64.8 DpS off untanked laser fire, while 300 DpS of AC fire will be reduced by 122 DpS. Sure, that wouldnt be an intellectually honest position to take, but none of the arguments in this thread can claim that either.
Shadowsword Gallente COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:48:00 - [40] Then go make a test on Sisi, an Tachyon Apoc against, for example, a Railthron, both with 2 EANM II + Damage control, and see which one blow up first. It will always be the Apocalypse. Then go think 2 miutes about why that is the case, and come back here... ------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy.
Complacency's Bane	Posted - 2006.10.02 20:53:00 - [41] Originally by: Shadowsword Then go make a test on Sisi, an Tachyon Apoc against, for example, a Railthron, both with 2 EANM II + Damage control, and see which one blow up first. It will always be the Apocalypse. Then go think 2 miutes about why that is the case, and come back here... How about I go onto SiSi, realize that if I'm blowing 3+ modules on a tank for a sniper ship that I fail at eve, and self-destruct in shame.
Murukan Minmatar The Priory	Posted - 2006.10.02 21:01:00 - [42] Originally by: Shadowsword Then go make a test on Sisi, an Tachyon Apoc against, for example, a Railthron, both with 2 EANM II + Damage control, and see which one blow up first. It will always be the Apocalypse. Then go think 2 miutes about why that is the case, and come back here... ok just for you guys we'll go back to using the 3 hards on armor so em has the lowest resist again? You guys are so ***** retarded it's amazing. oh noes i do less damage on armor!! Instead of looking at every possible negative aspect of your weapon hmm lets look at the positives. 1.no reloading 2.can switch crystals in 1 second 3.amount of crystals you have to carry significantly less than ammo users 4. means i can hold more cap boosters \o/ Cause look i could * and whine about how crappy proj turrets are cause they either do bad dps (ac's) or have to reload a lot and have bad rof (arties). Or i could work around the negative aspects of these weapons instead of whining a bunch and looking like a *** tit. But apparently a brain is out of reach for you idiots and whining is all you know how to do. In rust we trust!!!**
Byzan Zwyth	Posted - 2006.10.02 21:19:00 - [43] Originally by: Complacency's Bane Originally by: Byzan Zwyth What if you halved the cap use of lasers and halved the amarr ship bonus for energy turret cap use. So they cap use was the same later on but the ships would be more manageable for lower speced pilots. ... Changes like that donÆt change the maths much for you nerds but make the ships a little easier to use. Us nerds who know how to do basic multiplication? But that was mean, not everyone has passed 5th grade algebra. If you cut laser cap use, you get lasers on non-laser ships because they do (lots) more damage then the racial weapons for that ship. So what, amarr pilots use projectile weapons and hybrid weapons all the time, with BC lvl3-4 or lower the prophecy is a lot better with projectile weapons, other races dont really have a reason to fit weapons of another race. My example of halving was too much, just enough so that with a lvl5 ship bonus of 5% per level the cap use is similar to that of hybrid weapons. This would make the weapons and tank on amarr ships much easier to use with a lower skill level lower level amarr pilots dont get ****ed off and train another race. The other thing about lasers is they are pretty much totaly out of the question for fitting to other races ships. A change like that would help this fact but maybe not change it with the current state of fitting costs, bad damage types and still high cap use. ---------------------- I fly Amarr and Gallente ships Amarr because they peow peow and look cool... Gallente because they are effective
Byzan Zwyth	Posted - 2006.10.02 21:25:00 - [44] Originally by: Complacency's Bane Edited by: Complacency''s Bane on 02/10/2006 20:46:40 Originally by: Shadowsword Ignorance ftw. Amarrs were considered best because of the way the stacking penalty worked, and because they were the only race to have a mid-range, instant-damage weapon. Megathrons could outdps them, but couldn't kill at 60km. Gankageddons could. The old tanked armor resists (3x hardeners) were 60/67.5/62.5/55 and the old shield resists were 50/60/70/80. BOY ITS ODD HOW EM SEEMS TO BE THE LOWEST OR ALMOST LOWEST ON EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE. HMM. That, combined with 8 t2 stabs breaking the stacking penalty, megalpulse having absurd range, and radio doing twice the damage it does now, meant that amarr were the only race. Of course, amarr pilots were still whining about EM/thermal at the time, but at least there werent 80-page threads filled with tears. Originally by: Byzan Zwyth Well that whole problem seems very easy to me I dont know why you need someone to explain it to you. It seems to me the whole reason to for an EANM tank over an active tank on T1 ships is that you end up with pretty good all round ressits and totaly uber EM resist. And guess who that hurts the most? It seems easy to you because you dont know how to do math. 48% off all damage is 48% off ALL damage. I could make the argument that it hurts lasers least, since 300 DpS of lasers on armor means that an EANM II/DC tank will chop 64.8 DpS off untanked laser fire, while 300 DpS of AC fire will be reduced by 122 DpS. WOW EANMII/DC tanks are only half as effective against lasers as AC, lets double their EM/thermal resists. Sure, that wouldnt be an intellectually honest position to take, but none of the arguments in this thread can claim that either. so "The old tanked armor resists (3x hardeners) were 60/67.5/62.5/55" now list the new ones. With an EANM II tank. Go on... ---------------------- I fly Amarr and Gallente ships Amarr because they peow peow and look cool... Gallente because they are effective
Murukan Minmatar The Priory	Posted - 2006.10.02 21:30:00 - [45] Originally by: Byzan Zwyth Originally by: Complacency's Bane Edited by: Complacency''s Bane on 02/10/2006 20:46:40 Originally by: Shadowsword Ignorance ftw. Amarrs were considered best because of the way the stacking penalty worked, and because they were the only race to have a mid-range, instant-damage weapon. Megathrons could outdps them, but couldn't kill at 60km. Gankageddons could. The old tanked armor resists (3x hardeners) were 60/67.5/62.5/55 and the old shield resists were 50/60/70/80. BOY ITS ODD HOW EM SEEMS TO BE THE LOWEST OR ALMOST LOWEST ON EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE. HMM. That, combined with 8 t2 stabs breaking the stacking penalty, megalpulse having absurd range, and radio doing twice the damage it does now, meant that amarr were the only race. Of course, amarr pilots were still whining about EM/thermal at the time, but at least there werent 80-page threads filled with tears. Originally by: Byzan Zwyth Well that whole problem seems very easy to me I dont know why you need someone to explain it to you. It seems to me the whole reason to for an EANM tank over an active tank on T1 ships is that you end up with pretty good all round ressits and totaly uber EM resist. And guess who that hurts the most? It seems easy to you because you dont know how to do math. 48% off all damage is 48% off ALL damage. I could make the argument that it hurts lasers least, since 300 DpS of lasers on armor means that an EANM II/DC tank will chop 64.8 DpS off untanked laser fire, while 300 DpS of AC fire will be reduced by 122 DpS. WOW EANMII/DC tanks are only half as effective against lasers as AC, lets double their EM/thermal resists. Sure, that wouldnt be an intellectually honest position to take, but none of the arguments in this thread can claim that either. so "The old tanked armor resists (3x hardeners) were 60/67.5/62.5/55" now list the new ones. With an EANM II tank. Go on... zomg they are better against em dmg now what a ***** surprise. Guess what yes against a EANM II tank you're going to do less damage with em. That's the case. Cry me a *** river, build a bridge and get over it. So instead of crying about how your cookie cutter fly up to your enemy sit there and pew pew away till someone is dead is not working anymore, how about you pull your head out of your ass and come up with a new strategy? In rust we trust!!!**
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.02 21:39:00 - [46] Edited by: Aramendel on 02/10/2006 21:41:25 Originally by: Tarazed Aquilae Lasers donÆt use ammo. For the mission runner that might not be a big deal, IÆll confess. But an Amarr laser boat can head out into 0.0 and rat in out of the way systems for weeks. (safespot/log if someone shows up in local) You could take the choicest loot and leave the junk. The only time you would have to come back to empire was when your cargo was full of top named loot. That is an entirely unique ability that no other raceÆs ships have. IMO itÆs an ability thatÆs worth a couple dps to get. Logging on, killing rats, logging out. Joy oh joy. Newsflash: you will want to do something else but ratting now and then. For this you have to fly to a station. Also, due to the EM resist destribution amarr ships are only really good for ratting sansha and blood. For other ratst hey are only ghood for the lazy, but not for the smart because including runs back for ammo you will make more money/time with other races because you kill them way faster. Quote: Lasers donÆt need to be reloaded. In long fights this can be a big factor. I have to reload a couple times in a big belt rat fight, losing valuable seconds (and damage) when I do. Exept this is included in the weapon stats. Compare rails vs beam lasers and you will notice that rails (with +25% damage) will do a good amount more damage than beams (with -50% cap) if you do not include the reload time. Do that and they deal damage far more closer to beam damage (still a bit more, though). Quote: Laser crystals change quickly. That means you can tune your lasers better than I can tune my railguns. I can change ammo types too, but it takes a long time and I have to carry a bunch of bulky ammo. Quickly is relative. It often bugs out and you have to do it 2-3 times. Also since laser falloff is shorter you have to necessarily change ammo more often than rails. It is a bit of an advantage for them, though. Quote: The grass is always greenerà In your case certainly. Try actually comparing stuff next time. Originally by: Murukan ...how about you pull your head out of your ass and come up with a new strategy? "training for another race", "fitting projectiles" or "training for the recons" are very popular new strategies. Got any to add? Or are you just talking nonsense?
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.02 22:05:00 - [47] Edited by: Aramendel on 02/10/2006 22:05:17 Originally by: Complacency's Bane That, combined with 8 t2 stabs breaking the stacking penalty, megalpulse having absurd range, and radio doing twice the damage it does now, meant that amarr were the only race. Yes, lasers were in the (somewhat distant) past very strong. And this is in what way an argument in the current situation? Amarr use heat sinks, btw, not magnetic stabs. Quote: It seems easy to you because you dont know how to do math. 48% off all damage is 48% off ALL damage. Lets do this step-by-step. - Imagine a weapon which is good against shields and bad against armor (with base resistances). Lets call them "basers". - Now imagine that there are (due to game mechanics but also basic ship distribution) far more armortankers than shieldtankers. Would these "basers" would be at an advantage or disadvantage compared to a weapon system which is doing average damage against shields and armor? Now, there are of cource harderners. Pre-RMR there was no good omniharderner for armor, so people just used therm, kin, exp harderners since EM basic rsistance was already quite high. Meaning in the end the armor/shieldtanker imbalance did not bother "baser" users too much, since armortankers did not harden vs their main damage. Compared to other turret weapons they actually got the least resistances on average over the whole ship (shield + hardered + structure), although not by much though. Now with RMR there is viable armor omnitank and the armor/shieldtanker imbalance is noticeable again. In short: of cource does EAN2 harden everything equally. The problems are the base resistances. If we had a 50:50 armor/shieldtanker relation they would be fine, but this is not the case. From the basic shipdistribution we have under perfect conditions (med<->lowslot balance fixed, every shieldtanker +does* shieldtank) still twice as many armortank as shieldtanks. Meaning lasers suffer vs a typical selection of targets the highest average base resistances.
Byzan Zwyth	Posted - 2006.10.02 22:19:00 - [48] Originally by: Murukan Originally by: Byzan Zwyth Originally by: Complacency's Bane Edited by: Complacency''s Bane on 02/10/2006 20:46:40 Originally by: Shadowsword Ignorance ftw. Amarrs were considered best because of the way the stacking penalty worked, and because they were the only race to have a mid-range, instant-damage weapon. Megathrons could outdps them, but couldn't kill at 60km. Gankageddons could. The old tanked armor resists (3x hardeners) were 60/67.5/62.5/55 and the old shield resists were 50/60/70/80. BOY ITS ODD HOW EM SEEMS TO BE THE LOWEST OR ALMOST LOWEST ON EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE. HMM. That, combined with 8 t2 stabs breaking the stacking penalty, megalpulse having absurd range, and radio doing twice the damage it does now, meant that amarr were the only race. Of course, amarr pilots were still whining about EM/thermal at the time, but at least there werent 80-page threads filled with tears. Originally by: Byzan Zwyth Well that whole problem seems very easy to me I dont know why you need someone to explain it to you. It seems to me the whole reason to for an EANM tank over an active tank on T1 ships is that you end up with pretty good all round ressits and totaly uber EM resist. And guess who that hurts the most? It seems easy to you because you dont know how to do math. 48% off all damage is 48% off ALL damage. I could make the argument that it hurts lasers least, since 300 DpS of lasers on armor means that an EANM II/DC tank will chop 64.8 DpS off untanked laser fire, while 300 DpS of AC fire will be reduced by 122 DpS. WOW EANMII/DC tanks are only half as effective against lasers as AC, lets double their EM/thermal resists. Sure, that wouldnt be an intellectually honest position to take, but none of the arguments in this thread can claim that either. so "The old tanked armor resists (3x hardeners) were 60/67.5/62.5/55" now list the new ones. With an EANM II tank. Go on... zomg they are better against em dmg now what a ***** surprise. Guess what yes against a EANM II tank you're going to do less damage with em. That's the case. Cry me a ***** river, build a bridge and get over it. So instead of crying about how your cookie cutter fly up to your enemy sit there and pew pew away till someone is dead is not working anymore, how about you pull your head out of your ass and come up with a new strategy? far out, you can just admit your wrong. no need to get so emotional about it. I did come up with another strategy some time ago, I fly Gallente ships now, all the problems I was having with amarr ships vanished. ---------------------- I fly Amarr and Gallente ships Amarr because they peow peow and look cool... Gallente because they are effective
Shadowsword Gallente COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2006.10.02 22:20:00 - [49] Originally by: Murukan zomg they are better against em dmg now what a ***** surprise. Guess what yes against a EANM II tank you're going to do less damage with em. That's the case. Cry me a ***** river, build a bridge and get over it. So instead of crying about how your cookie cutter fly up to your enemy sit there and pew pew away till someone is dead is not working anymore, how about you pull your head out of your ass and come up with a new strategy? Yeah, because wanting BALANCE is such a bad thing. Now, since you're apparently not able to back your claims with reasoned counter-arguments and/or facts, how about just keeping quiet, instead of looking like an hysteric moron? ------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy.
twit brent Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2006.10.02 22:22:00 - [50] I have read the first post and found it lacking. Sory if my points have already been made but im too tired to read the rest of the posts. 1. Maybe you should use the armageddon for your pulse damage calculations and also take into account it is much easier to hit things with pulses with its much better range. 2. I use an amarr account and a gallente account, my amarr account is just finishing off large beam spec lvl 5 and I can tell you now that a beam geddon in terms or raw damage leaves the megathron in the dust. That 5% to ROF bonus means a very nice 33.33% bonus to dmg/s which makes the armageddon a very nice gunboat. 3. Just like caldari are not great in fleet amarr are not great solo pvp ships. But the do very well in small groups and large fleets. Pulses can hit anything well under 50km giving them that extra bit of versitilty over blasters and autocannons. Because of this fact they rarely have to rely on speed mods like MWD's. Alot of people calculate the raw dmg/s of a ship to calculate how effective they are in pvp whic IMO is never realy accurate. A blasterthron has huge dmg/s on paper but when actively fighting it will get alot of scratching and missing shots and its DPS can often fall dramatically unlike the raven that will consistantly hit for good damage. Looking at the tracking speed of blasters and pulses alot of people assume blasters are better but at the range that blasters are effective at the closer proximity of the target puts the transversal right up making it much harder to hit. Anyway to summon this up never rely on raw dmg/s to calculate how effective a weapon is. There are many more factors than just the dmagae. You say that blasters have more damage but u fail to mention the MWD needed and the much higher speed and risks involved. You tried to make a point but you miss most of the facts that are very important in this kind of discussion so your arguement is very weak.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.02 22:32:00 - [51] About the MWD: For solo setups all races need it (well, exept the raven maybe). Take a pulse geddon. While it can achieve quite a high range for a "shortrange weapon" it is not high enough do stand against longrange setups. So it needs to get closer. And vs other shortrange ships it will need to keep it's distance, otherwise it will get into the area where ACs and blasters have the edge (< 15-20 km). To do either it has to be faster (or as fast) as it's target. With tacklers a blastermega will be fine with an AB, too. It can either warp on top of it or can allow to take more time to get to it since it is not going anywhere.
twit brent Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2006.10.02 22:41:00 - [52] Originally by: Aramendel About the MWD: For solo setups all races need it (well, exept the raven maybe). Take a pulse geddon. While it can achieve quite a high range for a "shortrange weapon" it is not high enough do stand against longrange setups. So it needs to get closer. And vs other shortrange ships it will need to keep it's distance, otherwise it will get into the area where ACs and blasters have the edge (< 15-20 km). To do either it has to be faster (or as fast) as it's target. With tacklers a blastermega will be fine with an AB, too. It can either warp on top of it or can allow to take more time to get to it since it is not going anywhere. Yeah like I said its not the greatest solo ship. In small engagements they will usually outdamage megathrons provided that the fight does not start at very close range due to megathrons having to close the distance. Flying with friends has taught me that they do work well together tho because the amarr will rip through anythings shields just as the megathron gets in close to rip into the armor .
Simon Jax Gallente Freelancing Corp	Posted - 2006.10.02 23:22:00 - [53] Sooooo why is it that more people armor tank than shield tank? Was it found to be less effective strategically? Why was Amarr once considered the "solo pwnmobile" in days of yore? I kind of like the fact that as the game evolves, what was once uber becomes mediocre, and what used to be mediocre can become uber. In war, is there balance? Or is there a constant race to improve one weapon/defense to trump anothers defense/weapon? Sounds like that's what happened here. And it's awesome, I just with y'all could see it. Maybe in one patch or another they'll throw shield tankers a bone, and suddenly Caldari missile spammers will get a shield unit that interferes with warp in a pulse radius around the ship. Then the Amarr can beat the hell out of 'em while they try desperately to pump up their EM shield resistance, letting Therm or Kin fall? Who knows. It's all about adapting. There ain't a darn thing keeping you from training another ship. And eventually something is likely to come about to nerf another tactic/setup. Maybe Drones are gonna get cut-down? All it would really take is to make Smartbombs more effective, then you'd have Drone users wailing that they can't kill an Apoc because drones have become nigh useless. With an apparent rise in Gallente pilots (hearsay), this would justify the adaptation to remove their drones from the equation. shrug I'd be a bit miffed if they effectively took my drones away, but it'd just mean training something else. Sure, maybe CCP should look to "balancing" out the Amarr weapon distribution. But damn this game would get boring if it were actually balanced. --Wherever you go, there you are.
Lillian Jones	Posted - 2006.10.02 23:37:00 - [54] You say that its just caldari that shield tank, making it only about 1/4th of people in PVP who are shield tanking...but about 1/2 of people in this game are caldari. so...you're wrong.
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.10.02 23:40:00 - [55] Originally by: Simon Jax Sooooo why is it that more people armor tank than shield tank? Was it found to be less effective strategically? Why was Amarr once considered the "solo pwnmobile" in days of yore? I kind of like the fact that as the game evolves, what was once uber becomes mediocre, and what used to be mediocre can become uber. In war, is there balance? Or is there a constant race to improve one weapon/defense to trump anothers defense/weapon? Sounds like that's what happened here. And it's awesome, I just with y'all could see it. Maybe in one patch or another they'll throw shield tankers a bone, and suddenly Caldari missile spammers will get a shield unit that interferes with warp in a pulse radius around the ship. Then the Amarr can beat the hell out of 'em while they try desperately to pump up their EM shield resistance, letting Therm or Kin fall? Who knows. It's all about adapting. There ain't a darn thing keeping you from training another ship. And eventually something is likely to come about to nerf another tactic/setup. Maybe Drones are gonna get cut-down? All it would really take is to make Smartbombs more effective, then you'd have Drone users wailing that they can't kill an Apoc because drones have become nigh useless. With an apparent rise in Gallente pilots (hearsay), this would justify the adaptation to remove their drones from the equation. shrug I'd be a bit miffed if they effectively took my drones away, but it'd just mean training something else. Sure, maybe CCP should look to "balancing" out the Amarr weapon distribution. But damn this game would get boring if it were actually balanced. Simon: in the old days, Megapulse had more range, and a long range crystal that, although primarily EM, did a LOT more damage. They changed both. Afterwards, the Arma was still popular because you could stick 8 heatsinks on and get MORE benefit the more you put on. They changed it, and that was a good thing. And TBH shield tankers DON'T need a bone. My invuln field Raven has better resists overall than my armor tanking ships. It's just that "ECM Tanks" are that much better than even Shield tanks. And dont get me started on faction items. Gisti, Crystal, Estemeles Invuln field? LOL! Balance != Same. Balance is fun. It's variety, where lots of different types of ships work well in lots of different situations. Imbalance usually means "Flavor of the Month" which is good at Baskin Robins, but not in MMOs. When everyone gravitates to a couple of ships/setups it's less variety and therefore more boring. Imbalance is VERY bad for MMOs. It normally results in boring gameplay, where everyone is doing the same thing in the same way, or where players that play weaker classes get fed up and leave. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.10.02 23:43:00 - [56] Originally by: Lillian Jones You say that its just caldari that shield tank, making it only about 1/4th of people in PVP who are shield tanking...but about 1/2 of people in this game are caldari. so...you're wrong. If every Caldari char flew Caldari ships you would be correct in that assertion. There are more Caldari players becuase thier stats are better and they have a good description. The number of Caldari chars has very little to do with how many Caldari ships are flown in pvp. And even less with the way those ships are fit. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Android Mindslave Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2006.10.03 00:42:00 - [57] They should just buff the size of the Amarr drone bays and be done with it. They need a real second weapon skill anyways, because Amarr ships don't seem to be overly skill intensive. The SP reqs for a blasterthron would choke a horse. Also, having your optimal damage range past 15km isn't fully a bad thing. 2 vs 2 it makes it easier to focus fire. In a short range gang, you can't exactly have everyone MWD up to every target.
Complacency's Bane	Posted - 2006.10.03 00:50:00 - [58] Originally by: Simon Jax Sooooo why is it that more people armor tank than shield tank? Was it found to be less effective strategically? Why was Amarr once considered the "solo pwnmobile" in days of yore? I kind of like the fact that as the game evolves, what was once uber becomes mediocre, and what used to be mediocre can become uber. In war, is there balance? Or is there a constant race to improve one weapon/defense to trump anothers defense/weapon? Sounds like that's what happened here. And it's awesome, I just with y'all could see it. Maybe in one patch or another they'll throw shield tankers a bone, and suddenly Caldari missile spammers will get a shield unit that interferes with warp in a pulse radius around the ship. Then the Amarr can beat the hell out of 'em while they try desperately to pump up their EM shield resistance, letting Therm or Kin fall? Who knows. It's all about adapting. There ain't a darn thing keeping you from training another ship. And eventually something is likely to come about to nerf another tactic/setup. Maybe Drones are gonna get cut-down? All it would really take is to make Smartbombs more effective, then you'd have Drone users wailing that they can't kill an Apoc because drones have become nigh useless. With an apparent rise in Gallente pilots (hearsay), this would justify the adaptation to remove their drones from the equation. shrug I'd be a bit miffed if they effectively took my drones away, but it'd just mean training something else. Sure, maybe CCP should look to "balancing" out the Amarr weapon distribution. But damn this game would get boring if it were actually balanced. The reason that shield tanking has fallen out of favor is the same reason that amarr ships have problems in PvP - EW is absurdly, absurdly good. Shield tanking is rare because there are very few ships which can shield tank well enough to be worth omitting EW. That is the problem with amarr, not damage types or cap use. They are the single most vulnerable race to EW, and they are the race least capable of deploying their own EW. Its no accident that the 'good' amarr ships are the ones which can support full racks of whatever EW. Lasers are mostly fine (except, of course, for small lasers which are underpowered by comparison with other small weapons, and medium lasers which could use a 10-15% cut in grid use), and most amarr ships are fine. There are a few which could use a boost (apoc, maller, and a bit of a boost to the sac), but as a whole theyre no better or worse off then any other race if you ignore EW.
Micaela Caldari Brute Force Missions inc	Posted - 2006.10.03 01:26:00 - [59] not burst anyones bubble , but whats the chances of 2 EXACT sp pilots comming into conflict ? this seems to be another post about "why amarr sucks ". how about ya do this , sit back , and notice that most of your ships have bloody decent armor resists , and work on building a decent tank + decent energy turret skills , rather then try and get the best gun of every race? thats why amarr suck at the moment , not ccp , just players trying to make them super "omfg!" dmg dealers. if your smart youll start trying to outtank opponants and bring them down when your tank is running fine , rather then try to multi-race , then cry your skills arnt up to scratch. sorry but i think the whole basis of this post is a bit silly , just my 2cents anyway.
Liet Traep Minmatar Black Lance Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.10.03 03:07:00 - [60] Originally by: Android Mindslave They should just buff the size of the Amarr drone bays and be done with it. They need a real second weapon skill anyways, because Amarr ships don't seem to be overly skill intensive. The SP reqs for a blasterthron would choke a horse. They need a real second weapon option. With the laser changes and he armor comp skills amarr ships have it a little tough in damage department. And you can use other races weapons on your ships like some do. but then you have no damage bonuses. Still not a good option. I think increasing the size of some of the amarr ships drones bays would be helpful. Like the apoc, prophecy, damnation and absolution. And some ships should get a small drone bay like omen, maller and zealot.
Shirazz	Posted - 2006.10.03 05:57:00 - [61] Edited by: Shirazz on 03/10/2006 05:57:59 Seems to me when the sh*t hits the fan it comes down to: If you want to mission: use caldari If you want to pvp: use non amarr ships or amarr ships that use drones as their primary dmg dealer(e.g. curse/pilgrim) DONT use lasers( its a waste of time )
Complacency's Bane	Posted - 2006.10.03 06:29:00 - [62] Edited by: Complacency''s Bane on 03/10/2006 06:30:04 Originally by: Shirazz Edited by: Shirazz on 03/10/2006 05:57:59 Seems to me when the sh*t hits the fan it comes down to: If you want to mission: use caldari If you want to pvp: use non amarr ships or amarr ships that use drones as their primary dmg dealer(e.g. curse/pilgrim) DONT use lasers( its a waste of time ) No, you use amarr ships capable of fielding EW. Lasers are not the problem - a well skilled arma does a horrifically large amount of damage. The reason people use the curse/pilgrim/arbi is that they have a ton of midslots and EW bonuses. You could take the drones away from the curse/pilgrim/arbi and people would still fly them - you couldnt take the midslots+EW away and have them still be viable.
Shirazz	Posted - 2006.10.03 06:48:00 - [63] I disagree, 1. the arma has just 3 med slots 2. a skilled blastrathon does horrifically MORE dmg and can fit ew with a tank. nuf said
Famine Aligher'ri V i L e	Posted - 2006.10.03 08:31:00 - [64] --------------------------- Mega Pulse II Scorch - 45KM + 10KM Neutron Blaster Cannon II Null - 11.2KM + 15KM That's with NULL not Void. Neutron Blaster Cannon II Void - 3.1KM + 13KM Closing Arguements : Learn to play. DPS is very high on Blasterboats. As they should be. It takes a lot of cap and tactics to get in range to do it's full DPS. If you sit and camp a gate. Then you leave yourself wide open for a Mega to insta to you and *****you. Despite the DPS cries in this thread, keep in mind. You have range over the Blasters. DPS is lost on the approuch. If you follow tactics correct and use the geddon correctly you will have. PulseGeddon > Blasterthron To not factor in tactics into ship balance is like letting you argue that DPS means everything. --------------------------- Base Resis Shield : 0 EM, 60 EXP, 40 KIN, 20 THM Armor : 60 EM, 10 EXP, 35 KIN, 35 THM Geddon + Mega Pulse II Confl = 525.504 DPS on Shields (Key Point) Geddon + Mega Pulse II Confl = 299.46 DPS on Armor (Key Point) Geddon + Mega Pulse II Confl = 464.734 DPS Geddon + Mega Pulse II Scorch = 338.725 DPS Geddon + Mega Pulse II Scorch = 409.584 DPS on Shields Mega + Neutron Blaster II Null = 329.649 DPS on Shields (Key Point) Mega + Neutron Blaster II Null = 302.178 DPS on Armor (Key point) Mega + Neutron Blaster II Null = 362.493 DPS Mega + Neutron Blaster II Void = 493.781 DPS Mega + Neutron Blaster II Void = 447.93 DPS on Shields Closing Arguements : Lasers do more DPS on shield base resists than Hybrids can. Why does this matter? Well people do shield tank. It also alows you to drop shields first and begin working on armor quicker. Anyways, geddon is a bad example. Tanking geddons makes me cry. ---------------------------- Just some insight from me, being I hate all the laser crying going on. Keep camping gates and getting put down by gunnery not up to par to yours. Blasters do crazy DPS but they still suck. Projectiles 4tw then maybe Pulse :)
Gozmoth Altera Odyssea Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2006.10.03 09:49:00 - [65] Originally by: Famine Aligher'ri Shield : 0 EM, 60 EXP, 40 KIN, 20 THM [...] Well people do shield tank. Use tanked resists then ...
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.03 11:25:00 - [66] Edited by: Aramendel on 03/10/2006 11:26:06 Originally by: Lillian Jones You say that its just caldari that shield tank, making it only about 1/4th of people in PVP who are shield tanking...but about 1/2 of people in this game are caldari. so...you're wrong. Righty-o. Too bad that in EOS 02 they published the numbers of all BSs ingame. Using those you got a 2:1 armor:shieldtanker relation as well. And that if you handled EVERY raven AND scorpion doing a shieldtank and 33% of all tempests as well. Originally by: Complacency's Bane The reason that shield tanking has fallen out of favor is the same reason that amarr ships have problems in PvP - EW is absurdly, absurdly good. Shield tanking is rare because there are very few ships which can shield tank well enough to be worth omitting EW.... It is increasing the effect, but as said, there is also not a 50:50 armor:shieldtanker relation ingame from the basic shipdesign. See above. Originally by: Famine Aligher'ri numbers Firstly, you are only using the racial resists of the mega for this. Which effect hyprids negatively, but not lasers. Secondly, you are assuming equal shields and armor. Basically, that your ship will encounter armortank & shieldtanks in equal amounts. But this is not the case ingame, that is the whole problem (key point). If we had 50:50 armor:shieldtankers everything would be fine. But we have from the basic shipdistribution 66:33 there. And with the currrent medslot:lowslot imbalance (which is to a good amount because of ECM, but not only: tackling gear & cap injectors are also must haves) it is closer to 80:20.
Scordite	Posted - 2006.10.03 13:51:00 - [67] Make both armor and shield resist compensation skills have a more beneficial effect on active hardeners, thus making triple hardening more desireable than omnitank. The problem right now is that armor omnitank with EANMII+DC offers very comparable resists to exp/kin/therm active hardening, while using 1 cap per 30secs, doubling your structure hp, and using half the cpu of the active hardeners. There MUST be an advantage to using active hardeners, otherwise they're just pointless for people who have resist compensation skills trained up. Coming ECM nerf will help amarr ships also, making the impact of having such low number of mids and such low sensor strenght a disadvantage, instead of a large bullseye painted on almost every amarr boat. ----------------------------------------------- The only legitimate use of the BLINK tag: Schr÷dinger's cat is [BLINK] not [/BLINK] dead.
Famine Aligher'ri V i L e	Posted - 2006.10.04 01:42:00 - [68] Originally by: Gozmoth Originally by: Famine Aligher'ri Shield : 0 EM, 60 EXP, 40 KIN, 20 THM [...] Well people do shield tank. Use tanked resists then ... No matter the tank resistances, pulses come on top for DPS on shields. Only due to the fact Blasters use hybrid ammo. Base resists to show a more realistic DPS. Yes, more people armor tank than shield tank. Doesn't cover up the fact that tactics play a major role in combat. Like I said, blasters have more overall DPS over the Pulse. However, Pulse has other areas that are very vital to the gun as a whole. Like the below example. Vagabond isn't better than the Muninn because it has more DPS. The Muninn has more DPS than the Vagabond. The Vagabond can be better due to it's speed, agility, and range over the Muninn. Even if the Vagabond had no speed bonuses it still can dominate the Muninn. Why? Falloff... Same concept applies to Medium Ranged gunnery compared to Short Ranged gunnery (Pulse vs Blasters). Last time I checked, the used examples the geddon was the same speed as the mega. Where the mega is slightly bigger (slower agility) than the geddon.
Murukan Minmatar The Priory	Posted - 2006.10.04 01:58:00 - [69] Originally by: Shirazz I disagree, 1. the arma has just 3 med slots 2. a skilled blastrathon does horrifically MORE dmg and can fit ew with a tank. nuf said zomg a blasterthron does more damage!!! Holy ** when did this happen? Guys call the presses apparently blasters do a lot of damage! Congrats shirazz. Of course a *** blasterthron does more damage you stupid tit. Blasters do the most damage for a gun in the game, hence why they have the worst range too. Blasters do more damage than autocannons too! I know what a *** revelation that there are other ships out there then blasterthrons who just come out of the woodwork to gank your poor geddon. All you amarr idiots who compare blaster throns (especially nuetron gank setups, that just is beyond me how people can be so obtuse and stupid) to a geddon why don't you buy yourselves a *** clue? A blasterthron will kill anything that it gets way up close too, that's the whole point of the damn ships. Tempests get smacked by blaster throns if they get held down and the thing gets right up next to them. We all know this yet you stupid are the ones who whine about it. Instead of crying about "omg my poor geddon couldn't tank that blasterthron and out damage it at point blank range" why don't you stop flying with your head so far up your ass that you're licking the from yesterday's breakfest, and stay out of web range of that blasterthron like most pilots with a clue do. In rust we trust!!!**
Emperor D'Hoffryn No Quarter. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.10.04 02:00:00 - [70] Edited by: Emperor D''Hoffryn on 04/10/2006 02:02:08 The guns are fine actually, and fairly well balanced. Gallente are kings of 1vs1 BS fights cause there are only 20km scrams (excluding insanely expensive faction), so the geddon HAS to come into 20km range to hold the mega, and large blasters are completely effective inside 20km. Its not the guns, its the warp scrams. Give us a long range scram that ONLY BS can fit and ONLY effects other BSes, say out to 45km? Suddenly, youll see that geddon winning alot of fights. edit at which point people will scream nerf at pulses since they are longest range short range weapon, etc etc. Originally by: Tuxford Yes we don't play on our main accounts simply because you would lose all respect for us
Frools No Quarter. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.10.04 02:25:00 - [71] geddon and thron are pretty damn well balanced imo battleship lasers are fine really (t2 ammo screws with that somewhat, null makes conflag somewhat obsolete for example) small and medium lasers have issues, large are fine
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.04 02:33:00 - [72] Originally by: Famine Aligher'ri Yes, more people armor tank than shield tank. Doesn't cover up the fact that tactics play a major role in combat. Like I said, blasters have more overall DPS over the Pulse. However, Pulse has other areas that are very vital to the gun as a whole. Like the below example. Point is that you compared the DPS and drew conclusions from your comparsions. But since you compared the dps with incorrect base resistance (or, better, the only racial one which hurts hybrids, but not lasers - for example vs an amarr and minnie ship void will do 7% higher dps. Vs minnie ships conflag will to 10% less dps) and assumed you would kill on average as much shield as armor (when you should weight armor twice as much as shields since armortanks are much more common) those comparsions are incorrect and as result are the conclusions. For the base damage blasters and pluses are just fine really. The pulses trade dps & tracking vs higher range. No problem there (exept that a 30k scrambler is needed for AC & pulses to actually use their range advantage for blasters on the BS lvl). The problem are the resistances. The average resistances lasers encounter are simply higher than what other weapon systems encounter. "Pick your target" is no argument there because everyone can do this. When for one weapon 90% of all targets are "good" targets and for one 10% of all targets are "good" targets, which weapon is on the whole better and more useful?
Famine Aligher'ri V i L e	Posted - 2006.10.04 04:00:00 - [73] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Famine Aligher'ri Yes, more people armor tank than shield tank. Doesn't cover up the fact that tactics play a major role in combat. Like I said, blasters have more overall DPS over the Pulse. However, Pulse has other areas that are very vital to the gun as a whole. Like the below example. Point is that you compared the DPS and drew conclusions from your comparsions. But since you compared the dps with incorrect base resistance (or, better, the only racial one which hurts hybrids, but not lasers - for example vs an amarr and minnie ship void will do 7% higher dps. Vs minnie ships conflag will to 10% less dps) and assumed you would kill on average as much shield as armor (when you should weight armor twice as much as shields since armortanks are much more common) those comparsions are incorrect and as result are the conclusions. The point was to show vs a base resistance than 0 resistance. Yes, we know different ships have slightly different resistances. Like for example the Geddons armor resistance is different than Mega's. That's not worth mentioning in my post though. It was me explaining that there is a point to resistances and they shouldn't be overlooked. Obviously lasers seem to look very weak in compared to Hybrids. This isn't just due to the damage mod differences, but also due to the damage types they put out. Lasers obviously EM/Therm and Hybrids obviously Kin/Therm etc. For the base damage blasters and pluses are just fine really. The pulses trade dps & tracking vs higher range. No problem there (exept that a 30k scrambler is needed for AC & pulses to actually use their range advantage for blasters on the BS lvl). Quote: The problem are the resistances. The average resistances lasers encounter are simply higher than what other weapon systems encounter. "Pick your target" is no argument there because everyone can do this. When for one weapon 90% of all targets are "good" targets and for one 10% of all targets are "good" targets, which weapon is on the whole better and more useful? Yes, this is true. Like I said, most cases while flying amarr ships. Your target will be armor tanking. That means you got to sit and deal with the base EM + whatever extra to the armor resistances plus the Thermal. This is also why I think Amarr = Leet Armor Tanking. Not to mention why there guns have good range like Projectiles do for there close gun to gun combat. Also why Lasers don't have reloads which is a major factor in combat damage. Reloading gives you time to make up loss damage due to your damage types vs your opponent. Range helps keep you at a range where you can snipe outside there gun range (Example Mega vs Geddon). Tracking helps land better shots (Lasers vs Hybrid). To sum this up as my last post. I'm not trying to say you're all wrong and the lasers pwn all. Just saying that lasers require a bit more thought and tactical skill behind them than insta'ing gate to gate with a Blasterthron. Yes, hyrbids are the leet if used right. No not every Blaster boat is going to smack your Pulse boat. It's pretty balanced as the people posted above said. If you know how to play and know how to fly your ship. You can counter and destroy anyone. Why I never accept duels. People think countering your ship is skill. :)
Nifel Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.04 05:31:00 - [74] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Gabriel Karade But anyway, different tools balanced for different jobs, won't see a Blasterthron hitting targets out to 50km for 85% accuracy (Scorch), won't see an Armageddon chewing up opponents at 3-5km as efficiently, nor should you. Nope, never said it should, too. The problem is, as said, that the arma needs a faction disruptor or a tackler to operate at it's "medium range" while the mega doesn't. Given a BS sized 30k scrambler and AC, pulses and blasters should be pretty balanced vs each other. OK... I'm at a loss here. Since when has EVE been balanced with 1v1 in mind? "When I die I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandpa. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car." RKK Ranking: (MIN14)
TheEndofTheWorld	Posted - 2006.10.04 07:09:00 - [75] armor 80% EM, 68% therm, dual-LAR2 tank. armor 80% EM, 68% therm, lots of plates. Enjoy amarr.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.04 10:27:00 - [76] Edited by: Aramendel on 04/10/2006 10:33:17 Originally by: Famine Aligher'ri Reloading gives you time to make up loss damage due to your damage types vs your opponent. Range helps keep you at a range where you can snipe outside there gun range (Example Mega vs Geddon). Tracking helps land better shots (Lasers vs Hybrid). About the reloading - I think this is already included in the base damage stats. Compare the dps of a heavy beam with -50% cap and a 250mm rail with +25% damage. The rail does if you ignore the reload time 1.07 the base dps of the heavy beam. If you include the reload time it's 1.02. Also, you might notice that the dps loss from reloading is smaller than the dps loss you get from the different racial resistances. Something needs to have an effect < 1% to become "not worth mentioning" Originally by: Nifel OK... I'm at a loss here. Since when has EVE been balanced with 1v1 in mind? Just because it is an MMORPG does not mean 1v1 is insignificant. Being strong/weak in 1v1 is just as a factor as being strong/weak in groups or fleets.
Nifel Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.04 14:04:00 - [77] Edited by: Nifel on 04/10/2006 14:05:38 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Nifel OK... I'm at a loss here. Since when has EVE been balanced with 1v1 in mind? Just because it is an MMORPG does not mean 1v1 is insignificant. Being strong/weak in 1v1 is just as a factor as being strong/weak in groups or fleets. I never said it was insignificant. I was just wondering what 1v1's has to do with overall game balance. Cause you just proposed a 30km bs sized tech 1 scrambler based on 1v1 scenarios. /me goes off to see all the new pretty gatecamps that are now even harder to get by "When I die I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandpa. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car." RKK Ranking: (MIN14)
Nifel Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.04 14:04:00 - [78] Edited by: Nifel on 04/10/2006 14:05:38 Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Nifel EVE Online \| EVE Insider \| Forums \| 204
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.04 14:31:00 - [79] Originally by: Nifel I never said it was insignificant. I was just wondering what 1v1's has to do with overall game balance. Cause you just proposed a 30km bs sized tech 1 scrambler based on 1v1 scenarios. /me goes off to see all the new pretty gatecamps that are now even harder to get by If it is not insignificant how can it not have something to do with the overall game balance? It involves everything, including 1v1 fights. Also, there are ways to balance this. A 30k disruptor which needs 1k grid and twice the capneed of a 20k one would mean anything below a BS would not use it unless they want to gimp their setup horribly. And BSs do not have the fastest locking time around. You could even add a -50% scan resolution on it.
Nifel Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.10.04 14:52:00 - [80] Originally by: Aramendel Originally by: Nifel I never said it was insignificant. I was just wondering what 1v1's has to do with overall game balance. Cause you just proposed a 30km bs sized tech 1 scrambler based on 1v1 scenarios. /me goes off to see all the new pretty gatecamps that are now even harder to get by If it is not insignificant how can it not have something to do with the overall game balance? It involves everything, including 1v1 fights. Also, there are ways to balance this. A 30k disruptor which needs 1k grid and twice the capneed of a 20k one would mean anything below a BS would not use it unless they want to gimp their setup horribly. And BSs do not have the fastest locking time around. You could even add a -50% scan resolution on it. I think I'll just answer with: ... "When I die I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandpa. Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car." RKK Ranking: (MIN14)
Murukan Minmatar The Priory	Posted - 2006.10.04 15:32:00 - [81] You realize that this game is not balanced for 1v1 right? So whine and whine all you want it's not going to change this. 1v1 is also not the be all end all so stop doing this stupid ass 1v1 comparisons. Your pulse geddon will never beat a bthron with half a brain if you're an idiot and sit right next to it In rust we trust!!!
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.10.04 17:44:00 - [82] Originally by: Murukan You realize that this game is not balanced for 1v1 right? So whine and whine all you want it's not going to change this. 1v1 is also not the be all end all so stop doing this stupid ass 1v1 comparisons. Your pulse geddon will never beat a bthron with half a brain if you're an idiot and sit right next to it Well that sounds good in theory. Can you tell me exactly how a geddon or a tempest is supposed to win in a 1v1 vs a blasterthron then? Please remember that past 20km, either ship can just warp away. I eagerly await instruction on how this can be done barring massive ecm. And if the Bthron is meant to win 1v1 then (Eve doesn't have to be balanced 1v1, right?) then can the Tempest and Geddon get a 10% bonus to damage and/or a 10% bonus to armor per gang member? Since really eve doesn't have to be balanced for fleet engagements. It sounds rediculous because it is. Eve has to be relatively balanced for both group and solo. Not the same, but if 1 ship or set of ships just completely pwns all others then everyone will fly that ship. Different strenghts and weaknesses, yes. But within reason, and balanced with each other. Nyxus Originally by: Tux The thought of a missile spewing armor tanking cool black looking ship makes me happy in the pants
Murukan Minmatar The Priory	Posted - 2006.10.04 19:33:00 - [83] Edited by: Murukan on 04/10/2006 19:33:48 k here's how you beat that bthron. If your in a tempest you can always stay out of range of his void with your gun's unloaded until he switches to null then rush in load in hail and rip him to shreds. Or you can call in a little friggy friend to web/scramble the thron and happily pound away at about 30km while sicking your drones on his drones so your friggie friend doesn't die. Probably lots of other tactics you can use. I dunno about you guys but if a certain tactic clearly isn't working i'm not going to keep doing it over and over while crying about how it does not work, i'm going to approach the situation differently and try something new. There will always be an advantage in 1v1 for certain ships while that advantage will be offset by other ship's advantages in small groups. You can't make every single ship have the exact same power in a 1v1 because to do so would be to remove all variety in the game. Sorry there will always be little imbalances, so instead of ***ing about every single little one you can adapt maybe? In rust we trust!!!**
Sweaty Teeth	Posted - 2006.10.10 01:10:00 - [84] Originally by: Murukan Edited by: Murukan on 04/10/2006 19:33:48 k here's how you beat that bthron. If your in a tempest you can always stay out of range of his void with your gun's unloaded until he switches to null then rush in load in hail and rip him to shreds. Or you can call in a little friggy friend to web/scramble the thron and happily pound away at about 30km while sicking your drones on his drones so your friggie friend doesn't die. Probably lots of other tactics you can use. 1 month old players shouldn't have forum access.... none of that crap you suggested will work. Inertia prevents you from using a tempests superior speed from dictating range, you basically MWD at each other, and hit with web when within 10 km, both turn off your MWD and hope the other guy dies first... If you have a friggie friend with you, what's the point of the discusssoin? How not just have 7 tempest @ 200 km away with you and one shot him?
Murukan Minmatar The Priory	Posted - 2006.10.10 01:19:00 - [85] Originally by: Sweaty Teeth Originally by: Murukan Edited by: Murukan on 04/10/2006 19:33:48 k here's how you beat that bthron. If your in a tempest you can always stay out of range of his void with your gun's unloaded until he switches to null then rush in load in hail and rip him to shreds. Or you can call in a little friggy friend to web/scramble the thron and happily pound away at about 30km while sicking your drones on his drones so your friggie friend doesn't die. Probably lots of other tactics you can use. 1 month old players shouldn't have forum access.... none of that crap you suggested will work. Inertia prevents you from using a tempests superior speed from dictating range, you basically MWD at each other, and hit with web when within 10 km, both turn off your MWD and hope the other guy dies first... If you have a friggie friend with you, what's the point of the discusssoin? How not just have 7 tempest @ 200 km away with you and one shot him? lol first off i'm not one month old. Second off yah if you mwd right at the thron then your inertia will take you into web range. I guess if you're so obtuse that the only things you know how to use is orbit and keep at range off the overview you wouldn't be able to manuever also. In rust we trust!!!
Micaela Caldari Brute Force Missions inc	Posted - 2006.10.10 02:33:00 - [86] Originally by: Murukan Originally by: Sweaty Teeth Originally by: Murukan Edited by: Murukan on 04/10/2006 19:33:48 k here's how you beat that bthron. If your in a tempest you can always stay out of range of his void with your gun's unloaded until he switches to null then rush in load in hail and rip him to shreds. Or you can call in a little friggy friend to web/scramble the thron and happily pound away at about 30km while sicking your drones on his drones so your friggie friend doesn't die. Probably lots of other tactics you can use. 1 month old players shouldn't have forum access.... none of that crap you suggested will work. Inertia prevents you from using a tempests superior speed from dictating range, you basically MWD at each other, and hit with web when within 10 km, both turn off your MWD and hope the other guy dies first... If you have a friggie friend with you, what's the point of the discusssoin? How not just have 7 tempest @ 200 km away with you and one shot him? lol first off i'm not one month old. Second off yah if you mwd right at the thron then your inertia will take you into web range. I guess if you're so obtuse that the only things you know how to use is orbit and keep at range off the overview you wouldn't be able to manuever also. lol ownage Your signature is too large. Please see the Forum Rules for the limits - Serathu ([email protected])
Sweaty Teeth	Posted - 2006.10.10 19:29:00 - [87] Originally by: Murukan lol first off i'm not one month old. Second off yah if you mwd right at the thron then your inertia will take you into web range. I guess if you're so obtuse that the only things you know how to use is orbit and keep at range off the overview you wouldn't be able to manuever also. What you're discribing won't work. As soon as you see the thron, you can start running away at MWD speed (if you prefere to click space than use keep at range, go for it) but he is going to MWD straight at you (using keep at range 4000 or something). If you actually manage to get away (megathron has faster acceleration) you still aren't going to get him to switch to null... void can go to work on you even from 20 km at about 100 dps plus 200 dps worth of drones. If you go to 15 km, he can do enough damage to overcome your tank. If you go to 25 km... he might not even pursue you... he's simply not going to change to null ammo if you're in a tempest. Sorry to call you a one month old but it's obvious you're speaking hypothetically and haven't got he benifit of experience. Maybe you could offer everyone some advise on t1 cruiser tactics?
Byzan Zwyth	Posted - 2006.10.10 22:00:00 - [88] something I keep seeing that does not seem right. Hybrid weapons Railguns = best range turret Blaster = lowest range weapon, highest damage turret in the game people keep saying blasters have the closest range so they should have more damage, but if you look at the other end of the scale, railguns have the best range but they dont suffer at all in the damage department. infact with full ship bonus Railgun base damage is pretty much the same as laser damage, and lasers have lower range? also, how did the same type of weapon end up with a "best range in game" and a "best damage in game" option? This seems to me like another reason why Gallente are seen as the best option to choose currently. This is the factor which makes the mega arguably the best long range and short range battleship in the game 425mm railgun II = 58km optimal & 24km falloff tachyon beam laser II = 53km optimal & 20k falloff ---------------------- I fly Amarr and Gallente ships Amarr because they peow peow and look cool... Gallente because they are effective
Valea Silpha Cereal Killerz Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.10 23:58:00 - [89] A quick question: Can this whole thread be summed up by the phrase 'Pulses do less damage than Blasters' ? If so, tune into Sanity FM and realise that things do different amounts of damage. Come on now really... Ammar ships aren't solo BBQ wagons anymore. The megathron is probably a touch to big for its boots atm too. But niether of those factors (only my humble opinion) validate the sheer volume of *****ing thats going on regarding them. There are other battleships than the thron, and comparing everything and its daughter to the current 'king of the hill' is not useful or productive. It'll get a kick in the teeth soon enough through whatever mechanism the dev-boys see fit. Then again, you might have to think your way through the problem, but heaven forbid that you not be able to pwn the sphincter off of every other ship solo. Assuming the mega can't warp away, the geddon lays down the smack onto it at 20km or more. As that will remain being true, i don't see how much else is relevent in hypotheitcal 1 vs 1 set-ups. <Hammerhead> TomB is doing the nerfing <Hammerhead> I just stand behind him, look at his monitor and shake my head

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.