EVE Search - The tracking change to null does nothing for the Tempest

All Channels

Ships and Modules

The tracking change to null does nothing for the Tempest

» 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)
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.05 20:38:00 - [1] Tempest and Megathron I just wanted to show you a graph of how the range of null is making it impossible for the Tempest to outdamage it. This graph is with 100 m/s transversal velocity to simulate the Tempest trying to dodge the fire of the Megathron. And its with the latest ammo changes, where null is nerfed with 50% less tracking. Does it matter? No. The graph is originally from a post in General Discussion where Bazman suggests making null more like antimatter range, but with higher tracking, which I feel would be perfectly fine. High damage up close, poor damage at range. Thats what blasters should be. You see in the graph how antimatter and null differ. Im not even showing the extra drone damage from the Megathron in this graph. But it doesnt even need those to outdamage the Tempest. So... 25 km range with blasters, eh? Yeah, thats "balanced". Im going to keep posting these things until something is done about this situation. Its so incredibly unbalanced. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Mallick Northern Intelligence SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.05 20:47:00 - [2] Maybe you should compare Mega Neutron Blasters with 800mm Repeating Artillery Cannon?
Jenny Spitfire Caldari Boryokudan Incorporated	Posted - 2006.11.05 20:52:00 - [3] Originally by: Mallick Maybe you should compare Mega Neutron Blasters with 800mm Repeating Artillery Cannon? --------- Faction Warfare Begins Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
starship enginer	Posted - 2006.11.05 20:58:00 - [4] what makes you think the tempest should out damage the megathron at any range? does the megathron accelerate faster than the tempest at any range? does the megathron have a faster top speed at any range? does the megathron guns use less cap at any range? does the megathron have lower sig than the tempest at any range? does the megathron have the ability to choose dmg type at any range? what makes you think it should out damage the megathron at any range eh?
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:02:00 - [5] Originally by: Mallick Maybe you should compare Mega Neutron Blasters with 800mm Repeating Artillery Cannon? Guess you dont know how little different it actually makes. Well, check the graph again, I just added it. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
starship enginer	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:08:00 - [6] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Mallick Maybe you should compare Mega Neutron Blasters with 800mm Repeating Artillery Cannon? Guess you dont know how little different it actually makes. Well, check the graph again, I just added it. how about you do me a graph with the tempest with dual 90% webbers vs a cepter and the megathron with 90% webber vs a cepter how about you take into account that both the tempest and the megathron will have a webber if not two, and make the transverse 90% less at 0m to 10km how about you TELL ME WHY you think the tempest should do more damage than the megathron at any range? for i can list many reaspns why it should not i await yee answers
Wat0721 GalacTECH Unlimited	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:12:00 - [7] Edited by: Wat0721 on 05/11/2006 21:15:49 Originally by: starship enginer Edited by: starship enginer on 05/11/2006 21:09:38 Edited by: starship enginer on 05/11/2006 21:08:59 Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Mallick Maybe you should compare Mega Neutron Blasters with 800mm Repeating Artillery Cannon? Guess you dont know how little different it actually makes. Well, check the graph again, I just added it. how about you do me a graph with the tempest with dual 90% webbers vs a cepter and the megathron with 90% webber vs a cepter how about you take into account that both the tempest and the megathron will have a webber if not two, and make the transverse 90% less at 0m to 10km how about you make me a graph with no drone inc in either ship [they lost them while warping out or they got killed] how about you extend the graph to 50km how about you TELL ME WHY you think the tempest should do more damage than the megathron at any range? for i can list many reaspns why it should not i await yee answers ...Because... Autocannons are short->mid-range weapons, whereas blasters are point-blank->short range weapons that, with null, happen to perform effectively just like autocannons? ...And that's a problem... Help any? EDIT: Let's make it clearer. There's no point in arguing that because the Tempest can outdamage the blasterthron past 20km because 20km is "the limit" for short range weapons. That's as far as it matters. If 20km is short range, I want my long range T1 scramblers. --- ECM Fix <--still stands, post-nerf.
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:15:00 - [8] Hi Gronsak. NB. In Rust We Trust
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:16:00 - [9] Originally by: starship enginer how about you do me a graph with the tempest with dual 90% webbers vs a cepter and the megathron with 90% webber vs a cepter how about you take into account that both the tempest and the megathron will have a webber if not two, and make the transverse 90% less at 0m to 10km how about you TELL ME WHY you think the tempest should do more damage than the megathron at any range? for i can list many reaspns why it should not i await yee answers What does the webbed ceptors have to do with the range of null? And yes, I can show you a damage graph of both ships standing still webbed... what does that have to do with the range of null again? Besides, Tempests getting webbed at that range DIES. Dont you know that? Thats the whole point of it trying to stay away from the Megathron blasters. And for your last question: I DONT feel the Tempest should do more damage than the Megathron at any range. I feel it should do more damage than the Megathron at maybe 13-20 km away, because thats where autocannons should shine, and blasters go down in damage, because they are close range guns with higher damage. Is it really that strange? --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Mallick Northern Intelligence SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:28:00 - [10] Ok, you changed your graph. Mind telling us what you have included? Skills? Ship bonus?
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:31:00 - [11] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 05/11/2006 21:31:54 Originally by: Mallick Ok, you changed your graph. Mind telling us what you have included? Skills? Ship bonus? The point of the graph was to show the incredibly long range of null ammo, and see if it wouldnt be better if the range of it was more like antimatter, but then boost its damage instead. Making blasters incredibly high dps weapons up close, without covering the entire warp disruptor range. I just added 800 autocannons to the graph when i edited it. Makes little difference. The graph includes max skills for tempest and megathron, and ship bonuses, yes. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:32:00 - [12] Originally by: Jim McGregor Edited by: Jim McGregor on 05/11/2006 21:31:54 Originally by: Mallick Ok, you changed your graph. Mind telling us what you have included? Skills? Ship bonus? The point of the graph was to show the incredibly long range of null ammo, and see if it wouldnt be better if the range of it was more like antimatter, but then boost its damage instead. Making blasters incredibly high dps weapons up close, without covering the entire warp disruptor range. I just added 800 autocannons to the graph when i edited it. Makes little difference. The graph includes max skills for tempest and megathron, and ship bonuses, yes. Can you do another one at 200m/s transversal?
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:36:00 - [13] Originally by: Goumindong Can you do another one at 200m/s transversal? Done. Check original post. Makes little difference. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Kye Kenshin Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:39:00 - [14] You know you should make a graph about how a torp Raven with tank out damages an AC Tempest alot further then a neuthron loaded with null with no tank.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.05 21:43:00 - [15] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 05/11/2006 21:45:14 Originally by: Kye Kenshin You know you should make a graph about how a torp Raven with tank out damages an AC Tempest alot further then a neuthron loaded with null with no tank. You do have a tank with neutrons on megathrons. Repper, 1600 mm plate, hardeners. For example this (needs a 3% or 5% cpu implant, but they are cheap): 7 x Neutron II, Named MWD, med injecter with 800 sized charges, web, scram, Large repper II, 1600mm plate, 2 x EANM II, named DC, 2 x damage mods And Ive made graphs about the Raven before, showing how unbalanced it is that a ship can put out that kind of damage with that kind of tank. But I dont want to turn the thread into a general flame fest. Lets focus on turret ammo here. Missiles are different. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Kye Kenshin Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.11.05 22:09:00 - [16] Originally by: Jim McGregor Edited by: Jim McGregor on 05/11/2006 21:45:14 Originally by: Kye Kenshin You know you should make a graph about how a torp Raven with tank out damages an AC Tempest alot further then a neuthron loaded with null with no tank. You do have a tank with neutrons on megathrons. Repper, 1600 mm plate, hardeners. For example this (needs a 3% or 5% cpu implant, but they are cheap): 7 x Neutron II, Named MWD, med injecter with 800 sized charges, web, scram, Large repper II, 1600mm plate, 2 x EANM II, named DC, 2 x damage mods And Ive made graphs about the Raven before, showing how unbalanced it is that a ship can put out that kind of damage with that kind of tank. But I dont want to turn the thread into a general flame fest. Lets focus on turret ammo here. Missiles are different. An extremely rare setup that will only fit with AWU5 and you will have no cap in a short amount of time but i'll take your arguement that it can fit a some kind of tank. Thing is Jim you not thinking all this fully through, your trying to nerf a ship that was fixed with the help of Null and the blaster boosts in the hope of fixing the tempest. What you should be doing is trying to get the tempest/ACs boosted instead. Making the Blasterthron useless again isn't going to make the Tempest any better. Also smaller blaster boats have been hit very badly by the null nerf as it is.
Siakel	Posted - 2006.11.05 22:11:00 - [17] Any chance I could get a link to the tool you use to make these graphs? Tried searching around, but no luck..
Risien Drogonne	Posted - 2006.11.05 22:17:00 - [18] Originally by: starship enginer what makes you think the tempest should out damage the megathron at any range? does the megathron accelerate faster than the tempest at any range? does the megathron have a faster top speed at any range? does the megathron guns use less cap at any range? does the megathron have lower sig than the tempest at any range? does the megathron have the ability to choose dmg type at any range? what makes you think it should out damage the megathron at any range eh? QFT. There is no balance reason for the tempest to exceed or even just match the megathron's DPS.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.05 22:19:00 - [19] Originally by: Siakel Any chance I could get a link to the tool you use to make these graphs? Tried searching around, but no luck.. Here you go. It has the latest ammo changes and ships, with one exception: The myrmidon now has 6 turrets instead of 5. So add that under the Ships tab when you have downloaded it. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Mallick Northern Intelligence SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.05 22:35:00 - [20] Edited by: Mallick on 05/11/2006 22:35:55 Somehow I did not get the same result as you did? Chart
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.05 22:38:00 - [21] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 05/11/2006 22:39:00 Originally by: Mallick Edited by: Mallick on 05/11/2006 22:35:55 Somehow I did not get the same result as you did? Chart Yeah, you are showing it per gun... Megathron has 7 guns and Tempest has 6, so the dps numbers you get are per gun, not per ship. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Ateneiha Amarr Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.05 23:24:00 - [22] I dont know if it would change a lot JIM but the tempest has 340 m of sig radius, not 400 as ur chart is showing, so the damge from the tempest to the Mega T is right but not the damage that the Mega T will do to the tempest. Anyway imo null should not have this range, its too much.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.11.05 23:34:00 - [23] Edited by: Tasty Burger on 05/11/2006 23:35:57 Edited by: Tasty Burger on 05/11/2006 23:34:51 You guys are ridiculous. We arent asking for the tempest to outdamage the mega at ALL ranges. We want it to outdamage the megathron AT ABOVE WEB RANGE. This is where autocannons are supposed to shine. With null, blasters completely infringe on autocannon range, making an autocannon tempest fairly useless. Blasters completely dominate 0-20km range with null which is ridiclous. The tracking nerf does nothing because its hard to get high transversal at those ranges, plus a tempest will be trying to maintain range, NOT orbit. Null needs to have a tracking BOOST, but have its range bonus removed. Its really only fair. Blasterthrons have unrivaled damage below 10km, thats fine, we just want an AC tempest to HAVE A ***** CHANCE AT BEATING A BLASTERTHRON without ECM or a ***** domination disruptor. As it stands, there is really no reason to use one over a megathron for both solo and small-medium gang work. The damage, range, and at the moment, tracking, are far better, and even with less tracking its really not that big of a drawback. I think you guys just think a blasterthron should completely wipe the floor with anything without a chance of anything staying out of blaster range. By the way, 800mms are useless. Dual 650s and 800mms (and the smaller versions) should get a falloff boost, just as all other guns do when the size increases. For example, an ion has a 33% boost over an electron, and a neutron has a 66% over an electron. Dual 425 has 16km falloff as do the other two. Dual 650 should have 21.3km falloff. 800 should have 26.6km falloff. This way there would FINALLY be a reason to fit larger autocannons. The DPS difference is minimal, they have less tracking... they should have more range (and no, 500m optimal is not any more useful range). I think you'll find that people will finally be fitting larger autocannons with them getting a rightful falloff bonus, which would change the picture a bit. - It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.11.05 23:57:00 - [24] Originally by: Risien Drogonne QFT. There is no balance reason for the tempest to exceed or even just match the megathron's DPS. Yes there is. If the Mega outclasses the Tempest at anyrange, then what the hell is the point of flying a tempest over a mega? Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
Foulis Minmatar Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.11.06 00:43:00 - [25] I agree with jim and tasty. While the megathron should be an effective ship within its web range, it should not be more effective than another ship at all of that other ships ranges. To the person who argued that the tempest is faster and more maneuverable, how does that matter if no matter what range the tempest dictates it cannot win? ---- Originally by: Nikolai Nuvolari NO WORDS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARE SPELLED WITH THE NUMBER "8" IN THEM GODIT!
Shayla Sh'inlux Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.06 00:58:00 - [26] Just asking if you added the two t2 siege launchers a Tempest can have to that damage graph...
Mila Prestoc	Posted - 2006.11.06 01:11:00 - [27] Originally by: Tasty Burger ... stuff ... Forgive me I haven't read all your post but basically I read enough to agree. I just been annoyed at the AC tier's thing for ages and just had a rant on SHC before reading your post. I did some testing while ranting and I used similar numbers as you but had 4km increase in falloff per tier. Here are the results using the 3 turret races and the ships which uses both bonuses to its turrets: T1 Ammo T2 Damage Ammo T2 Ranged Ammo As you can see the Largest tier minmatar AC would now compete in range with the smallest pulse laser filling that "mid range" position Projectiles are meant to do. The max tier blaster competes with the lowest tier AC's range/damage, but now our bigger tier weapons can actually out range them. This wouldn't affect solo combat unless T2 disruptors are released in a form of 25 to 30km range with 1pt but would affect gang combat, firmly planting AC's into the mid-range category. ------------------------- Originally by: "Lord Violent" EvE is slowly becoming a game for the stupid, catered to by devs as they lack ability to kill/survive anything.
Mila Prestoc	Posted - 2006.11.06 01:12:00 - [28] Edited by: Mila Prestoc on 06/11/2006 01:14:06 Originally by: Shayla Sh'inlux Just asking if you added the two t2 siege launchers a Tempest can have to that damage graph... How about adding a seige launcher to the Mega as well then? Not to mention its extra drone space. Tempest fitting seige has serious CPU problems even with dual 425mm AC's. He used just turrets as people have complained that hasn't happened. ------------------------- Originally by: "Lord Violent" EvE is slowly becoming a game for the stupid, catered to by devs as they lack ability to kill/survive anything.
Tasty Burger	Posted - 2006.11.06 01:26:00 - [29] Edited by: Tasty Burger on 06/11/2006 01:31:00 I'm glad you agree with me Mila. However I'm also sure you realize that a falloff boost to larger autocannons is not going to solve the problem, as fair as it would be. As you can see in your graphs the nullathron still far outclasses anything until 20km, this needs to be changed as well. as has been suggested by someone (may have been on shc), null should not get any range bonuses, but should get a slight tracking bonus. 0% range penalty or bonus, same damage as now, but a tracking bonus. Either that or less damage along with the tracking nerf. - It's great being Minmatar, ain't it?
Mila Prestoc	Posted - 2006.11.06 01:29:00 - [30] Edited by: Mila Prestoc on 06/11/2006 01:33:42 Edited by: Mila Prestoc on 06/11/2006 01:30:44 Originally by: Tasty Burger Edited by: Tasty Burger on 06/11/2006 01:26:33 I'm glad you agree with me Mila. However I'm also sure you realize that a falloff boost to larger autocannons is not going to solve the problem, as fair as it would be. As you can see in your graphs the nullathron still far outclasses anything until 20km, this needs to be changed as well. Or the limits of warp scrambling range changes, T2 warp disruptors with 1pt and 30km range. Or could just lower the optimal of the blasters and AC's, making the benifit of null reduced as its percentage increase is reduced with the lower base number. Oh it was Bazmans great idea, someone should post it here. Anyway our tier discussion is a base stats problem which is emphaisesed by t2, which is two seperate issues. ------------------------- Originally by: "Lord Violent" EvE is slowly becoming a game for the stupid, catered to by devs as they lack ability to kill/survive anything.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.