| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Chris TheNinjaPirate
Amarr
   |
Posted - 2006.12.19 05:48:00 -
[1]
there was very much speculation before kali become live that blasters would become too weak to stay competative. however, NOW is the time to actually have the discussion because ONLY NOW has there been time to adequately judge the performance.
so - lets have at the discussion. please don't post about it if you have not tested blaster ships yourself. please don't post if you are just making assumptions about how blasters work. please don't post if you have just run up against a blaster ship that killed you and you were simply unlucky.
i imagine cap will enter into the discussion. obviously the effect of nos and cap boosters must be discussion.
however things like rigs should not be discussed. since obviously such discussion would be pure hearsay... because these rigs do not exist in reasonable quantites in tranquility, and since ships should be balanced BEFORE RIGS because the rigs are to be very expensive and so it is not useful to base ships balance on rigs.
so - discuss. who was right? are blasters now terrible? or are blasters still useful? have the changes hurt it so badly?
(for the record: i fly minmatar ships, but have trained a little bit of blasters. this discussion will be educating in nature for some of us. however i will not start the conversation with opinion because i have not tested medium or large blaster ships!!)
* * * * * * * * * * * *
sorry for my english, i am new with it |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 06:18:00 -
[2]
There were no changes to blasters that were not also changed on other weapon systems.
Every combat time increase benefits the short range high damage weapons over long range lesser damage weapons
Blasters got a boost in the last patch. Albiet slightly, but still a boost.[quantifying that boost is rather difficult as it depends on the ship you are fighting, and how far you have to close under their guns in order to damage. The boost was stronger versus lasers and less versus AC's, and stronger versus NOS]
----------------------------------------
Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Chris TheNinjaPirate
Amarr
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 06:30:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Chris TheNinjaPirate on 19/12/2006 06:39:18
 Originally by: Goumindong
Blasters got a boost in the last patch. Albiet slightly, but still a boost.[quantifying that boost is rather difficult as it depends on the ship you are fighting, and how far you have to close under their guns in order to damage. The boost was stronger versus lasers and less versus AC's, and stronger versus NOS]
yet tanking is stronger. so if there is in fact a boost perhaps it is too small to be perceptible.
plus i have seem plenty of peoples complaining about how badly kali hurt the blasters system of fighting. i can not think that these complaints are totally without merit?
however as i said in the post, i really wish to see "rl" testing. i mean, fights (solo, fleet, whatever) on tranquility. real fights. real setups. (so no rubbishy sisi "test" set ups)
* * * * * * * * * * * *
sorry for my english, i am new with it |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 06:40:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Chris TheNinjaPirate
Originally by: Goumindong
Blasters got a boost in the last patch. Albiet slightly, but still a boost.[quantifying that boost is rather difficult as it depends on the ship you are fighting, and how far you have to close under their guns in order to damage. The boost was stronger versus lasers and less versus AC's, and stronger versus NOS]
yet tanking is stronger. so if there is in fact a boost perhaps it is too small to be perceptible.
however as i said in the post, i really wish to see "rl" testing. i mean, fights (solo, fleet, whatever) on tranquility. real fights. real setups. (so no rubbishy sisi "test" set ups)
1. Tanking isnt stronger. Only the length of time ships last was increased, the amount of damage they can soak has not, and this was near universal accross the spectrum.[Aside from a few ship types that got a bit larger or smaller boost, but these, like all the other changes, normalize out accross damage types, though not against cap/dmg warfare. I.E. nos is stronger vs battlecruises, and damage is stronger versus tech II ships than they were before, but there were no blaster changes aside from the combat time increase]
2. Fights mean nothing unless they are skill normalized. Know anyone able to skill normalize fights?
----------------------------------------
Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Terraform
Gallente
Deviance Inc
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 07:04:00 -
[5]
Having flown the Brutix for quite a long time i haven't noticed a dramatic change to blasters, but i have noticed that after Kali the fights lasts much longer which definitly is a problem for any blastership.
The main advantage with blasterships is their ability to do high DPS over short amount of time, this has been somewhat negated by the HP boost and other changes to make fights last longer.
Being a blastership it STILL requires a significant amount of cap to sustain any kind of fighting-ability, this is again not good for the blasterships since now the fights last longer, making the chance to run out of cap much greater than before.
Blasters have been "nerfed" if you want, to make way for longer fights, but i feel that it only requires the blasterpeople to adapt slightly to keep doing what they do best: Destroying everything within range in short amounts of time.
I'm definitly not giving up blasters, still my weapon of choice!
Just my point of view...
Terraform, Brutix-pilot.
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 07:25:00 -
[6]
Its not so much dmg these days (thats still top of the pile) its sustainability.
Blasters need a small cap reduction for the sacfrifice of having to get so damned close, its takes cap to get to range do dmg and tank and it deffinatly is harder since kali, compared to vs the same ships before hand.
I dont know how 'out of ballence' it is exactly but it definatly could do with some love 
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 07:33:00 -
[7]
Sustainability didnt change, along with the HP boost came a capacitor boost.[unless you are fighting against a battlecruiser, in which case, they are weaker than they were to cap based attacks than they are to damage based attacks, but this weakness extends to ALL the ships]
25% more HP, 25% more cap, fights last 25% longer, cap lasts 25% longer.
The only thing that changed is the time it takes to close to your enemy has been reduced as a percentage of the battle. So, where as in RMR you would start the battle at a certian percentage of your capacitor and HP gone from having to close, in REV, you start at a higher percentage of your capacitor and HP.
Its an effective capacitor and HP boost for short range ships.
Blasters are short range ships.
So blasters got a buff.
Its simple, 100% provable math.
----------------------------------------
Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Xori Ruscuv
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 07:44:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 19/12/2006 07:48:23
Originally by: Goumindong
So blasters got a buff.
Its simple, 100% provable math.
EDIT: oops, didn't write anything. 
Anyway... people who are relatively experienced with blasters pre-kali are complaining about sustainability issues and the like. Obviously it can NOT be both ways: either blasters got a buff (and all of these people are idiots/lieing) or there is something missing.
So what gives? Why ARE people having more trouble, when your math "shows" that they aren't?
I can only speak for what I've seem them say, however. I haven't done much of anything since Kali. My cable has been bad, so it hasn't really been worth doing much. I also keep having FPS problems. Dunno why.
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 07:48:00 -
[9]
Ok so we hav more cap to use, the recharge is the same yet the tanks are 25% stronger in HP and 25% stronger with cap.
its made the ships comforably beatable before the patch the same but the close fights are now a win for the target, not team blasters.
if anything (active tank, lazor or range setups) and low cap use ships (missile, pasisve shield, autocannon, drone) now hav a larger gap then before.
whats the piont in high dmg when it cant be sustained long enough, either more sustainabilty or extra dmg is needed.
Simply put high cap use ships are duff, but only in 1v1, in gangs the extra dmg can be just loverly.
If blaster ships arnt ment to 1v1 then so beat it, its just a real shame 
|
Xori Ruscuv
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 07:52:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 19/12/2006 07:52:09
Originally by: Dr Fighter
Simply put high cap use ships are duff, but only in 1v1, in gangs the extra dmg can be just loverly.
If blaster ships arnt ment to 1v1 then so beat it, its just a real shame
That seems to be a reasonable conclusion. In small fleets, blasters still rip stuff up... until they get called primary and nossed to death.
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
Riho
Red Wrath
Exquisite Malevolance
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 08:00:00 -
[11]
for me... nothing has changed sofar... didnt use null before and still dont use it :P
void all the way
but those ppl who used null alot.. they might feel that they got nerfed and stuff... it still works... just u can ttrack that good enymore whit it... but if ur going in a straight line.. nps at all imo.
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 08:06:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 19/12/2006 07:48:23
Originally by: Goumindong
So blasters got a buff.
Its simple, 100% provable math.
EDIT: oops, didn't write anything.
Anyway... people who are relatively experienced with blasters pre-kali are complaining about sustainability issues and the like. Obviously it can NOT be both ways: either blasters got a buff (and all of these people are idiots/lieing) or there is something missing.
So what gives? Why ARE people having more trouble, when your math "shows" that they aren't?
I can only speak for what I've seem them say, however. I haven't done much of anything since Kali. My cable has been bad, so it hasn't really been worth doing much. I also keep having FPS problems. Dunno why.
a few things happened.
1. People realized just how strong NOS was. Not that it wasnt strong before, but when the HP changes went in before the cap changes, they realized just what a beast it was.
2. The damage reduction on t2 ammo skews the game slightly towards NOS. This has no effect on any other weapon balance
As far as i know there were no other capacitor use changes in modules and no capacitor use changes in weapons.
Also there have been reports of the cap bug coming back, this could be contributing to the issue.
----------------------------------------
Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 08:14:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Dr Fighter on 19/12/2006 08:15:12
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 19/12/2006 07:48:23
Originally by: Goumindong
So blasters got a buff.
Its simple, 100% provable math.
EDIT: oops, didn't write anything.
Anyway... people who are relatively experienced with blasters pre-kali are complaining about sustainability issues and the like. Obviously it can NOT be both ways: either blasters got a buff (and all of these people are idiots/lieing) or there is something missing.
So what gives? Why ARE people having more trouble, when your math "shows" that they aren't?
I can only speak for what I've seem them say, however. I haven't done much of anything since Kali. My cable has been bad, so it hasn't really been worth doing much. I also keep having FPS problems. Dunno why.
a few things happened.
1. People realized just how strong NOS was. Not that it wasnt strong before, but when the HP changes went in before the cap changes, they realized just what a beast it was.
2. The damage reduction on t2 ammo skews the game slightly towards NOS. This has no effect on any other weapon balance
As far as i know there were no other capacitor use changes in modules and no capacitor use changes in weapons.
Also there have been reports of the cap bug coming back, this could be contributing to the issue.
the extra cap and HP did amplyfy the strengths of nos, but a nos ship would mess up a blaster ship anyway, its it own nemisis.
The fact is the blasters dont cut it 1v1 anymore, and range for me, plays the biggest part. a few lazer ships can match the dps at a far greater range, and thats the only thing a little unblallenced (slightly squiffed by em&therm dmg vs. therm&kin)
|
Xori Ruscuv
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 08:19:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Goumindong
1. People realized just how strong NOS was. Not that it wasnt strong before, but when the HP changes went in before the cap changes, they realized just what a beast it was.
2. The damage reduction on t2 ammo skews the game slightly towards NOS. This has no effect on any other weapon balance
Interesting point... I guess it is possible that people are stupid and just totally missed how overpowered NOS is. :(
I guess that effect would be seen with lasers as well.
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
SSandra
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 08:33:00 -
[15]
I am still selling tons of Null M ammo, so I would say they are working well.
|
Lenaria
Caldari
Draconis Navitas Aeterna
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 08:45:00 -
[16]
For anyone who are certain what blaster/laser ships have it worse with cap after Kali and what NOS get relative boost - a small exercise: find a case where blaster ship would run out of cap AFTER Kali and wouldnt BEFORE Kali. Prove your point!
|
Chris TheNinjaPirate
Amarr
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 09:05:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Lenaria
For anyone who are certain what blaster/laser ships have it worse with cap after Kali and what NOS get relative boost - a small exercise: find a case where blaster ship would run out of cap AFTER Kali and wouldnt BEFORE Kali. Prove your point!
i have wondered that, same thing.
people talk as if it is worse and yet can give no samples.
since kali is a few weeks old now i thought this would be a good time for this discussion.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
sorry for my english, i am new with it |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 09:20:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv
Originally by: Goumindong
1. People realized just how strong NOS was. Not that it wasnt strong before, but when the HP changes went in before the cap changes, they realized just what a beast it was.
2. The damage reduction on t2 ammo skews the game slightly towards NOS. This has no effect on any other weapon balance
Interesting point... I guess it is possible that people are stupid and just totally missed how overpowered NOS is. :(
I guess that effect would be seen with lasers as well.
Well, the tech 2 damage nerf, and range nerf did amplfy the strength of NOS.
But against other weapon systems there wasnt a change.
----------------------------------------
Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Xori Ruscuv
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 09:24:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 19/12/2006 09:43:16
Originally by: Goumindong
Well, the tech 2 damage nerf, and range nerf did amplfy the strength of NOS.
The DAMAGE nerf implicitly buffed NOS, yes.
However, IMO the range nerf didn't amplify the strength of NOS... because the range nerf only happened to long range ammunition on long range guns (such as spike on railguns). The pratcial ranges of such setups are so far out of NOS range that it is hardly worth discussing NOS being on such setups.
However, I'll never miss an opportunity to whine about NOS.
NOS is overpowered.
End of story. 
PS. I've heard a great deal of talk about how a blaster rokh > hyperion. That ****es me off TO NO BLOODY END. Unbelievable. Yeah, I'll probably end up learning fricking shield skills and buying a bloody rokh. But only because I basically HAVE to. Of course then you've got the 4x blaster 4x NOS setups. Jesus christ...
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
Harris
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 09:40:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Harris on 19/12/2006 09:46:50
Originally by: Goumindong
1. Tanking isnt stronger. Only the length of time ships last was increased, the amount of damage they can soak has not, and this was near universal accross the spectrum
Surely, if cap was increased uniformly by 25% across the board, then those ships that don't rely on capacitor for their weapon systems - missiles and projectiles - can devote that extra 25% cap to their tank.
Therefore for certain ships and setups, tanks are much stronger.
It would seem to me then, that ships that do rely on capacitor for their offensive weapons (lasers and hybrids) are able to keep that offense up for just as long comparitively as pre-kali...
...but when coming up against the aforementioned non-cap reliant ships they are going to struggle to break the tank in time.
Maybe that is where some peoples perception of weakened blasters comes from, they can't break the tanks of certain ship types whereas before they could.
EDIT:
NM, what xori said about nos and range covered it...
|
Kunming
Amarr
adeptus gattacus
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 09:52:00 -
[21]
Anything that uses a NOS vs a blasterboat will beat it.
The b-boat concept is to overwhelm your target with lots of dmg in a short time before your weak cap and tank gets beaten. So the longer the fight lasts the less chance the b-boat has or the more dmg it needs to get the same result.
According to the above scheme KALI really messed up blasterboats, it made fights last longer so more cap was needed which was not given, it reduced dmg on T2 ammo so the the additionally needed dmg wasnt given instead it was even reduced.
Longer combat duration is great for ship like AC-boats or missile-spammers who can enjoy the superiority of needing no cap consumption, while b-boats and lasers boats are on seriously low supply. Its not important for a b-boat to put out dmg over a long time, its important that it puts out all its dmg in a short time!
KALI not only made combat last longer it, it shifted balance from gank setups to tank/NOS setups.. tanking and Nossing is one thing b-boats seriously suck at.
Quote:
READ THIS NEXT PART CAREFULLY AS IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND POSTING A REPLY WITHOUT READING IT MAY RESULT IN YOU LOOKING STUPID.
|
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 10:29:00 -
[22]
Edited by: LUKEC on 19/12/2006 10:30:50
Blasterboats are fine. It has cap issues unless you fit your ship properly.
I'd say they are even better than pre-kali as 1 point actually stops most ships from warping and you are not jammed from every stupid frig that has more than 1 medslot.
--------
The BoB model is bad for business. Incidently the BoB model is more suited for a game such as WoW where as the ASCN model more suited for Eve.
McGreedy |
Flabida jaba
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 10:34:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Dr Fighter
The fact is the blasters dont cut it 1v1 anymore
Good...Quite frankly, if this is the case
I am happy that blaster set-up's are no longer the be all and end all of 1v1 PvP
blasters have not really shifted in power next to any other Cap using wepon
but they have become considerably weaker Vs NoS/neut set-up,s
----------------------
Originally by: Blind Man
okies so liek when u warp in on them u shod target them... and stuff k.then u FIRE ZE MISSILES
|
Exogene
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 11:18:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Kunming
Anything that uses a NOS vs a blasterboat will beat it.
Any blaster setup with brains will use cap injectors (before and after Kali) so the effect of NOS is largely negated. Besides you can always fit NOS on blasterboats yourself.
Originally by: Kunming
According to the above scheme KALI really messed up blasterboats, it made fights last longer so more cap was needed which was not given, it reduced dmg on T2 ammo so the the additionally needed dmg wasnt given instead it was even reduced.
You are outright lieing here. Every ship got a cap increase, yes blaster boats too  The fact that cap recharge is worse now than before Kali actually makes other ships less effective since blaster boats never relied on cap recharge to begin with. All T2 ammo damage was reduced so that is not even an argument.
Originally by: Kunming
Longer combat duration is great for ship like AC-boats or missile-spammers who can enjoy the superiority of needing no cap consumption, while b-boats and lasers boats are on seriously low supply. Its not important for a b-boat to put out dmg over a long time, its important that it puts out all its dmg in a short time!
Again wrong. Have you ever tried to tank an AC boat? AC-boats can't tank to save their lifes (not enough cap even worse now with the reduced cap recharge) and missile boats being the shield tankers they are can only soak up damage for a short period of time unless of course both type ships are setup with ueber tanking at which point they will do ridiculously little damage.
If a b-boat would tank, it would be better off then any other tanking boat because they dish out more damage to begin with. B-boats still can dish out insane amounts of damage, heck they even get large drone bays and/or drone bonuses which enables them to do good damage even before they get in range of their turrets.
Originally by: Kunming
KALI not only made combat last longer it, it shifted balance from gank setups to tank/NOS setups.. tanking and Nossing is one thing b-boats seriously suck at.
Once again wrong. You can always fit NOS on a b-boat and still dish out more damage than any other equal class ship with NOS. Besides, having a cap injector on and already having a larger starting total cap amount, you can negate the NOS effects to a great degree (unless you are dumb enough to go up against a NOS boat like the dominix). Even if you run out of cap (which means you suck at piloting b-boats and should start training for something else) you always have the large drone bay with possible drone bonuses depending on the ship.
So much BS of course the op is going to think there is something wrong with blaster boats. B-boats are still ueber. All i see here is people who can't pilot a b-boat to save their lifes crying because CCP is trying to balance races to a certain degree.
|
Lord Infy
Amarr
No Quarter.
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 11:26:00 -
[25]
Blasters seem to be somewhat underpowered atm. I think they need +10% to dmg mod and cap need should be completely removed.
|
Kunming
Amarr
adeptus gattacus
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 12:20:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Exogene
Originally by: Kunming
Anything that uses a NOS vs a blasterboat will beat it.
Any blaster setup with brains will use cap injectors (before and after Kali) so the effect of NOS is largely negated. Besides you can always fit NOS on blasterboats yourself.
Originally by: Kunming
According to the above scheme KALI really messed up blasterboats, it made fights last longer so more cap was needed which was not given, it reduced dmg on T2 ammo so the the additionally needed dmg wasnt given instead it was even reduced.
You are outright lieing here. Every ship got a cap increase, yes blaster boats too The fact that cap recharge is worse now than before Kali actually makes other ships less effective since blaster boats never relied on cap recharge to begin with. All T2 ammo damage was reduced so that is not even an argument.
Originally by: Kunming
Longer combat duration is great for ship like AC-boats or missile-spammers who can enjoy the superiority of needing no cap consumption, while b-boats and lasers boats are on seriously low supply. Its not important for a b-boat to put out dmg over a long time, its important that it puts out all its dmg in a short time!
Again wrong. Have you ever tried to tank an AC boat? AC-boats can't tank to save their lifes (not enough cap even worse now with the reduced cap recharge) and missile boats being the shield tankers they are can only soak up damage for a short period of time unless of course both type ships are setup with ueber tanking at which point they will do ridiculously little damage.
If a b-boat would tank, it would be better off then any other tanking boat because they dish out more damage to begin with. B-boats still can dish out insane amounts of damage, heck they even get large drone bays and/or drone bonuses which enables them to do good damage even before they get in range of their turrets.
Originally by: Kunming
KALI not only made combat last longer it, it shifted balance from gank setups to tank/NOS setups.. tanking and Nossing is one thing b-boats seriously suck at.
Once again wrong. You can always fit NOS on a b-boat and still dish out more damage than any other equal class ship with NOS. Besides, having a cap injector on and already having a larger starting total cap amount, you can negate the NOS effects to a great degree (unless you are dumb enough to go up against a NOS boat like the dominix). Even if you run out of cap (which means you suck at piloting b-boats and should start training for something else) you always have the large drone bay with possible drone bonuses depending on the ship.
So much BS of course the op is going to think there is something wrong with blaster boats. B-boats are still ueber. All i see here is people who can't pilot a b-boat to save their lifes crying because CCP is trying to balance races to a certain degree.
You'r full of crap dude.. try flying a blasterboat sometime!
- Not every blasterboat has space for a cap booster, you still die to passive tanks with your boosters running out in the end.
- AC and missile ships can use all of that extra cap to tank even more or use it for their neutralizers to **** you up more. Most ac/missile boats reach their full dmg potential with 1-2 HI slots left free, b-boats dont have this luxury, those 2 slots are filled with NOS/Neutz almost all the time, replace turrets with NOS on a blasterboat and there wont be any purpose left to fly one at all.
- If there was no NOS/Neutralizers, or if they were impossible to fit on AC/Missile/Drone boats(basicly non-cap users) things would be balanced, as it is atm "NOS + NON-CAP-Consumer" is an overpowered combo vs the cap consumers.
Quote:
READ THIS NEXT PART CAREFULLY AS IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND POSTING A REPLY WITHOUT READING IT MAY RESULT IN YOU LOOKING STUPID.
|
R'adeh
Celestial Fleet
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 12:44:00 -
[27]
Well, being 100% Gallente I was a bit worried because the the HP boost. After a few tests I realized that my tanked Electronblasterthron now sucks against other BS. I just can't keep the tank running long enough to chew through their shell.
However, Neutronblasters still work like a charm. Only took a few seconds to kill another BS before the patch, and now it takes double the time...no big deal imo. If your enemy has a crazy Kin/Therm tank you will die. If he got a standard tank he'll still die almost as fast as before.
PS: Astarte still rocks 
__________________________________________________
My views are my own and I don't represent my corp. Please show mercy Drakma! |
Antodias
Puppets on Steroids
iPOD Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 12:57:00 -
[28]
Well on the cruiser side of things I haven't noticed any significant hit to my Thorax blasters.
The only one being it now takes longer to kill stuff, and I have been ganked a few more times because I didn't kill that Battlecruiser quickly enough to miss the people that come in to help, but that's fair enough.
Nos also kills me really _really_ fast, but then again, that was the case pre-kali. 
------------------------------------
It's great being a Dev, isn't it? |
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 15:52:00 -
[29]
Originally by: R'adeh
PS: Astarte still rocks
Yes, indeed
--------
The BoB model is bad for business. Incidently the BoB model is more suited for a game such as WoW where as the ASCN model more suited for Eve.
McGreedy |
Littleluk
The Ancient Order
Imperium Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 16:23:00 -
[30]
I think the point that most people have missed is that the static HP boost isn't the only thing that changed. 25% HP boosts gives 25% more repair cycles as well to the target. This does increase the amount of time required to kill something beyond a static 25% number. In the cases where people are building extreme repair tanks this can be a significant detriment. As a primary Minmatar pilot, cap usage isn't an issue with damage but it does make me more hesitant to engage NOS heavy tank setups because I may lose my cap before I can fully break that tank. I can imagine the problem is even worse for the blaster/laser boats.
Everyone needs a little luk. |
Terraform
Gallente
Deviance Inc
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 16:35:00 -
[31]
All i know is that I tried to fit my brutix with a full-gank setup and my friend in his t1-fitted passive-tanked Drake was able to outtank me still. I used to be able to break the tank of a seriously passive-tanked ferox pre-kali. Is it jsut because the Drake is extremely powerful, or did they change something?
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 16:50:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Littleluk
I think the point that most people have missed is that the static HP boost isn't the only thing that changed. 25% HP boosts gives 25% more repair cycles as well to the target. This does increase the amount of time required to kill something beyond a static 25% number. In the cases where people are building extreme repair tanks this can be a significant detriment. As a primary Minmatar pilot, cap usage isn't an issue with damage but it does make me more hesitant to engage NOS heavy tank setups because I may lose my cap before I can fully break that tank. I can imagine the problem is even worse for the blaster/laser boats.
Not it is not.
Tanks are either cap limited, or hit point limited.
I.E. they either fail because you run out of hit points and explode, or they fail because you run out of cap and they stop running.
Capacitor sized and recharge were increased 25%, this produced 25% larger capacitors with the same recharge rate. Which means that capacitors, under the same drain as before[and drain amount was not changed, though close range ships dont need to run their MWD as long as they used to] will last exactly 25% longer[+/- a few percent based on module impredicatbility] with constant drain[and possibly longer due to the lessened effect of large clumps of drain]
This means that if you were running a tank that was cap limited it now takes 25% longer for that tank to fail
Now, if you were running a tank that was HP limited, then you have 25% more HP, which means that your tank can run 25% longer before you explode[25% more HP]
Either way, tanks accross the board get a 25% straight boost.
----------------------------------------
Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 16:56:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Terraform
All i know is that I tried to fit my brutix with a full-gank setup and my friend in his t1-fitted passive-tanked Drake was able to outtank me still. I used to be able to break the tank of a seriously passive-tanked ferox pre-kali. Is it jsut because the Drake is extremely powerful, or did they change something?
Passive tanks got a boost, but it should not have been enough to matter versus a gank brutix
It must be because your fiend upgraded, though the drake does have an extra mid slot
With a full gank harbinger[tech 1 fitted, no drones], which ought to do less damage than a full gank Brutix[both have 7 guns, both have a damage bonus, but Heavy Pulse Lasers do less damage than any blaster], with no drones, I was able to break the tank of a passive sansha ratting fitted drake[albiet very slowly, and not before he would toast me].
----------------------------------------
Thou Shalt "Pew Pew" |
Exogene
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 17:41:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Exogene on 19/12/2006 17:42:52
Originally by: Terraform
All i know is that I tried to fit my brutix with a full-gank setup and my friend in his t1-fitted passive-tanked Drake was able to outtank me still. I used to be able to break the tank of a seriously passive-tanked ferox pre-kali. Is it jsut because the Drake is extremely powerful, or did they change something?
Perhaps it is because Brutix is a tier 1 BC and the Drake a tier 2 one? It all comes down to your setup and type of ship in the end like the last poster said. Pulses for example do more base damage on shields, however blasters do the same amount on both shields and armor.
|
Xori Ruscuv
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 17:44:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Exogene
Perhaps it is because Brutix is a tier 1 BC and the Drake a tier 2 one? It all comes down to your setup in the end like the last poster said.
What utter CRAP.
Tier 2 is NOT supposed to be "better" than tier 1. This was never the devs' intention - by their own proclaimation. The ships are supposed to be DIFFERENT, not better. Go look at fitting and other attributes of the various BCs, and you'll see that tier 2s are similar to tier 1s in such ways.
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 17:44:00 -
[36]
Lol at this thread, people are throwing around the same thoughts over and over.
Blasters got a slight nerf due to the extra HP and cap ppl hav, and the argument "blaster ships got it too" doesnt ballence things.
We know, we use blasters!
|
Andrea Jaruwalski
Caldari
Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 18:04:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv
Originally by: Exogene
Perhaps it is because Brutix is a tier 1 BC and the Drake a tier 2 one? It all comes down to your setup in the end like the last poster said.
What utter CRAP.
Tier 2 is NOT supposed to be "better" than tier 1. This was never the devs' intention - by their own proclaimation. The ships are supposed to be DIFFERENT, not better. Go look at fitting and other attributes of the various BCs, and you'll see that tier 2s are similar to tier 1s in such ways.
They never claimed such things. That statement was regarding the Tier 3 Battleships when they were trying to find roles for them.
The Tier 2 Battlecruisers are "meant" to do more damage than the Tier 1, they have the bonuses and the slot layout made 'especially' for that.
Don't mix it up. Tier 1 Tanking, Tier 2 Damage.
Now if you can make the tier 2 tank just as great, or spit out more bullcrap about some other facts regarding how to fit the ships to make one worthless, than keep it to yourself. lol
|
Aterna
Minmatar
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 18:21:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv
Originally by: Exogene
Perhaps it is because Brutix is a tier 1 BC and the Drake a tier 2 one? It all comes down to your setup in the end like the last poster said.
What utter CRAP.
Tier 2 is NOT supposed to be "better" than tier 1. This was never the devs' intention - by their own proclaimation. The ships are supposed to be DIFFERENT, not better. Go look at fitting and other attributes of the various BCs, and you'll see that tier 2s are similar to tier 1s in such ways.
They never claimed such things. That statement was regarding the Tier 3 Battleships when they were trying to find roles for them.
The Tier 2 Battlecruisers are "meant" to do more damage than the Tier 1, they have the bonuses and the slot layout made 'especially' for that.
Don't mix it up. Tier 1 Tanking, Tier 2 Damage.
Now if you can make the tier 2 tank just as great, or spit out more bullcrap about some other facts regarding how to fit the ships to make one worthless, than keep it to yourself. lol
Uh, you should read the description for the Myrmidon sometime. It is described as a sturdier platform then the Brutix. And it is, it has more lows for tank, more mids for Ewar, less highs for offense. But it has heavy drones, so who really knows, right?
- - -
|
Andrea Jaruwalski
Caldari
Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 18:23:00 -
[39]
Maybe you might want to read my post again.
It's not because you actually think the myrmidon is better than brutix in every ways than it is.
The majority of the Tier2 Battlecruisers are oriented toward damage, If one out of 3 is better in every way, even in damage than the Tier1, who cares?
Role wise, the Brutix will still be better than the myrmidon when you lose all your drones.
|
Xori Ruscuv
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 18:51:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski
The Tier 2 Battlecruisers are "meant" to do more damage than the Tier 1, they have the bonuses and the slot layout made 'especially' for that.
Don't mix it up. Tier 1 Tanking, Tier 2 Damage.
Wrong again, genius!
Myrmidon tank > Brutix tank, while Myrmidon damage is not quite as much as a Brutix's damage (depending on setup and drone use - but heavy drone use is somewhat contingent on targets)
Drake tank > Ferox tank, AND it does more damage.
So its more like this: Tier 1 tanking, tier 2 is damage for Minmatar and Amarr, tanking for Gallente, and tanking AND damage for Caldari.
Quote:
Now if you can make the tier 2 tank just as great, or spit out more bullcrap about some other facts regarding how to fit the ships to make one worthless, than keep it to yourself. lol
Talk about "spitting out bullcrap"... do you even try to make sense?
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
Xori Ruscuv
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 18:52:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Aterna
Uh, you should read the description for the Myrmidon sometime. It is described as a sturdier platform then the Brutix. And it is, it has more lows for tank, more mids for Ewar, less highs for offense. But it has heavy drones, so who really knows, right?
I don't think the heavies do as much damage as a blaster Brutix. Quickfit is in a broken state right now so I can't really test it. However, you are right: the myrmidon is simply a better tanker than the Brutix.
Therefor the statement "tier 1 = tank, tier 2 = damage" is WRONG.
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
Andrea Jaruwalski
Caldari
Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 19:43:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv
Myrmidon tank > Brutix tank, while Myrmidon damage is not quite as much as a Brutix's damage (depending on setup and drone use - but heavy drone use is somewhat contingent on targets)
Drake tank > Ferox tank, AND it does more damage.
So its more like this: Tier 1 tanking, tier 2 is damage for Minmatar and Amarr, tanking for Gallente, and tanking AND damage for Caldari.
Seems newly found forum warriors can't read.
Again here, we got another good example of your undying obsessions for Caldari. Ferox and Drake have unique roles and Tanking wise, a Ferox is way cheaper and is the same good old effective ship. Drake can tank better sure. It's not exactly a big surprise given it has more midslots and is overall a better ship.
Now, you can go on mumbling your usual bullcrap all you want, but you seem to fail to read like i said. I pointed out the fact the Tier1 were mainly made as a role to Tank, By CCP. Did i ever claim the ships were actually designed to be the tanking versions out of both Tiers? No. Stop telling me things i already know.
You can say anything you want about the Myrmidon VS Brutix. Fly the Myrmidon till you find someone with a brain and you'll notice why the Brutix would be coming out on top at that exact moment.
Oh and, I'd never expect a Tier 2 Battlecruiser that cost 50% more than a Tier 1 to have some kind of "better" attributes to it, it's just not possible.
Again, it's only a stupid world you live in, where you don't seem to realise it isn't Caldari-Online. It's simply the way CCP developers think.
EVE is turning into a game where specialisation isn't needed and everyone now flies a bit of every race. Noone will only fly one race and go "oh, i can use drones, i won't train for this ship because X RACE sucks".
Go spam another topic that has something to do with caldari or nosses 
|
Xori Ruscuv
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 19:46:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 19/12/2006 19:49:33
Anything having to do with blaster ships has to do with Caldari and NOSes.
Stop wasting your time. I'm not going to stop *****ing, and I won't stop trolling your pathetic "understanding" of game mechanics.
EDIT:
Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski
EVE is turning into a game where specialisation isn't needed and everyone now flies a bit of every race. Noone will only fly one race and go "oh, i can use drones, i won't train for this ship because X RACE sucks".
Specialization not needed... hahahahahaha
What's your thing for drones BTW? You keep talking about drones. This topic ISN'T about drones; it is about blasters.
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
Andrea Jaruwalski
Caldari
Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 19:51:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 19/12/2006 19:46:58
Anything having to do with blaster ships has to do with Caldari and NOSes.
Stop wasting your time. I'm not going to stop *****ing, and I won't stop trolling your pathetic "understanding" of game mechanics.
Maybe you're simply blinded by your own stupidity if you can't understand this.
Oh and back in 2003, I think i had a better understanding of the game mechanics than you ever did. Yea, Have fun replying to that.
Game as evolved and obviously, your 2006 experience of the game as evolved with it thru the years
|
Xori Ruscuv
Vendetta Underground
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 20:01:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 19/12/2006 20:03:06
Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski
epeening
Age does not imply understanding.
This babyish troll-fest is stopping. NOW. This is a derailment to the OP. I have my opinions, and you have yours. You haven't substantiated yours any more than I've substantiated mine. Let it go.
It's great playing Caldari-online, isn't it?
This IS my main! I just did a portrait swap... |
Andrea Jaruwalski
Caldari
Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 20:04:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Xori Ruscuv
Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 19/12/2006 20:02:27
Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski
epeening
Age does not imply understanding.
This babyish troll-fest is stopping. NOW. This is a derailment to the OP's points. I have my opinions, and you have yours. You haven't substantiated yours any more than I've substantiated mine. Let it go.
Sorry, Age dictactes Experience, Experience dictacte better understanding of game mechanics and furthermore better opinions about certain subjects
As for blasters, and the whole topic.. Blasters are still good, and the only thing that affected blasters with Kali is bassicly "solo work".
|
Crellion
Art of War
Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 20:34:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Crellion on 19/12/2006 20:36:09
They have been buffed and nerfed at the same time in my small experience.
Buffs:
They are more lonely in the solo-viable BS killers class.
They have more hp to throw away on approach.
Nerf:
There is no way now you can kill a plated/passive shield + Nos user in time.
Overall impression:
Severely nerfed as general purpose vehicules.
Slightly buffed as "pick your target" vehicules, I find.
Edit: I wont comment on the rumored success (?) of 4 Nos - 4 Neutron set ups on Hyperions - Rokhs etc. These set ups are an abomination in the eyes of our Lord and you wont catch me flying one ever 
Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim. |
Andrea Jaruwalski
Caldari
Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.12.19 21:05:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Crellion
Edit: I wont comment on the rumored success (?) of 4 Nos - 4 Neutron set ups on Hyperions - Rokhs etc. These set ups are an abomination in the eyes of our Lord and you wont catch me flying one ever
Well, The real abomination here is the lack of talent to develop a Blaster boat. And i don't want to point fingers when it comes to this
It's quite obvious there's something wrong with the hyperion as a "blaster" boat or whatever blasterboat we got. The real problem is the fact the hyperion has a tanking bonus, the fact it uses ALOT of cap like any blaster ship and if you dedicate all your lows for tanking, why not just try to feed it more with a bunch of NOS.
The damage is pathetic, and the majority of people fitting electrons and NOS on their hyperions are quite short minded or have really pathetic abilities when it comes to fitting ships.
It's tricky, but it's doable. Or maybe it's the flavor of the month to fly a new ship with **** setups. As **** as it may be, if it works, that's all you need..
|
Kunming
Amarr
adeptus gattacus
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.12.22 10:17:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Andrea Jaruwalski
Originally by: Crellion
Edit: I wont comment on the rumored success (?) of 4 Nos - 4 Neutron set ups on Hyperions - Rokhs etc. These set ups are an abomination in the eyes of our Lord and you wont catch me flying one ever
Well, The real abomination here is the lack of talent to develop a Blaster boat. And i don't want to point fingers when it comes to this
It's quite obvious there's something wrong with the hyperion as a "blaster" boat or whatever blasterboat we got. The real problem is the fact the hyperion has a tanking bonus, the fact it uses ALOT of cap like any blaster ship and if you dedicate all your lows for tanking, why not just try to feed it more with a bunch of NOS.
The damage is pathetic, and the majority of people fitting electrons and NOS on their hyperions are quite short minded or have really pathetic abilities when it comes to fitting ships.
It's tricky, but it's doable. Or maybe it's the flavor of the month to fly a new ship with **** setups. As **** as it may be, if it works, that's all you need..
Not really, this just shows that NOS/Neutz need a serious nerf, actually neutz is sorta balanced but NOS...
Quote:
READ THIS NEXT PART CAREFULLY AS IT IS VERY IMPORTANT AND POSTING A REPLY WITHOUT READING IT MAY RESULT IN YOU LOOKING STUPID.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |