EVE Search - Hybrids v. Projectiles

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Hybrids v. Projectiles

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
VJ Maverick Caldari Maverick Specialized Services	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:20:00 - [1] Can someone please give me the quick rundown of the respective advantages and disadvantages of hybrids and projectile weapons? AC v. Blasters and Rail v. Arty. Thanks.
Ishquar Teh'Sainte Maza Nostra RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:39:00 - [2] blasters: pro: great damage potential good tracking con: only kin/therm damage type need cap to fire ultra-short range ACs: pro: different damage types best tracking of all turrets no cap needed allmost no fitting requirements in comparison to other turrets con: lack a bit of damage output short range (due to the big fall-off they are not THAT ultra-shortrange) rails: pro: relative good tracking good rof -> useful DPS con: only kin/therm as damage types they need mediocre amount of cap damage is mediocre arty: pro: good alpha no cap usage con: range dictates damage type slow rof crappy tracking high fitting requirements (especially PG) ___________________ -Skellibjalla- Life is a garden of perceptions. Pick your fruit.
Christopher Dalran	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:42:00 - [3] Edited by: Christopher Dalran on 09/02/2007 18:40:23 Rails/blasters - High energy consumption, Higher average DPS, stuck into kinetic/thermal damage types. Long optimal very small falloff AC's - Shorter optimal, very long falloff, No energy consumption, variable damage types Arty's - Shorter Optimal, very long falloff, Huge alpha strike but long refire rate and lower DPS, variable damage type but absolutly HORRID tracking. general Projectile - Can fire with no cap, can vary damage types to coincide with weak resists, can cover a large range. Hybrid - Higher DPS, Longer optimal but can cover a smaller range because of small falloff. The big advantage projectiles have over hybrids is you can fire them with no cap, the advantage of hybrids is they do more DPS over time. Rails/artys - long range bad tracking weapons, they dont hit up close Blasters/AC's - close range weapons with good tracking, they hit close fast orbiting ships but anyone faster than you can avoid fire by gaining distance. You need to be in a fast ship to use these.
VJ Maverick Caldari Maverick Specialized Services	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:46:00 - [4] Thanks. This is great so far. What do you mean by range dictates damage? Also, regarding the alpha strike of artillery vs. sustained DPS of railguns - what are the practical implications of this distinction?
Samirol The Scope	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:47:00 - [5] blasters you go up and kick the *****es in the face ACs you beat them with a bat I buy insane sigs, mail me ingame.
Sir Drake	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:55:00 - [6] Hybrid vs Projectile In general hybrids do better DPS but do need cap to fire and only do Therm & Kin damage. Projectiles dont need cap and can switch their dmg with their ammo. I wont go into comparing fitting requirements as i think they should only used on the according ships. AC vs Blasters - ACs have better falloff range (~1/3 more), better RoF, NEED NO CAP! - Blaster have better optimal (~1/3 more), better damage, better DPS Rail vs Arty - Rails have way better RoF, bit better optimal and better DPS. - Artys have great damage (if they hit) and therefore make a very good Alpha Strike weapon), better falloff ------------------------------------------------------- Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer I like that.
VJ Maverick Caldari Maverick Specialized Services	Posted - 2007.02.09 18:57:00 - [7] So by alpha strike, you mean that the artillery damage is frontloaded, right?
Olirtad Fiven	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:25:00 - [8] Originally by: VJ Maverick So by alpha strike, you mean that the artillery damage is frontloaded, right? alpha strike = first strike the high damage mod and slow rate of fire mean that each of your strikes have very high damage but the time between strikes is long, making the artillery a good weapon when you for example have to warp out all the time with just enough time to fire once.
Sir Drake	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:26:00 - [9] Pretty much,yes. One heavy damage volley and after that a long waiting time till it fires again which kills the DPS. ------------------------------------------------------- Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer I like that.
darkmancer	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:33:00 - [10] High Alpha Stike; Say Arties do 1000 Damage per Shot and fire once per 10 sec. DPS will be 100 Now say Rails do 800 every 7 seconds DPS will be 115 (roughley) Damage for Arties 1000(0 secs), 2000(10), 3000(20), 4000 (30) For Rails 800(0),1600(7),2400(14),3200(21),4000(27) If the fight lasts less than 20 secs arties are better due to higher alpha, above that rails out dps. There's lots of other considerations (no cap use means arties my be better at the end when the other person runs out), range, ship layout etc. But there's the advantage of high alpha, please the advantage tends to get more pronounced as more ships are involved. --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:34:00 - [11] Originally by: Ishquar Teh'Sainte blasters: ACs: pro: different damage types best tracking of all turrets no cap needed allmost no fitting requirements in comparison to other turrets con: lack a bit of damage output short range (due to the big fall-off they are not THAT ultra-shortrange) The almost no fitting requirements is only true with the frigates. With cruisers they do have somewhat less but are much closer to all other turrets and with battleship turrets the grid requirements of autocannons is practically the same as for blasters in the same tier. Crystal-Slave, that way? Potential solution to the current Recon cloak and cyno bug
Karasu Kaizoku Caldari Project Mortormis	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:39:00 - [12] Originally by: Samirol blasters you go up and kick the ****es in the face ACs you beat them with a bat Yup that's about how it goes, though I use projectiles because even the long range T2 ammo for autocannons is pretty good, not to mention you use your falloff range for your fighting range. Which in most cases can put me a little distance away. - CCP are forum ***'s for removing a signature .00001 byte over the limit.
VJ Maverick Caldari Maverick Specialized Services	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:42:00 - [13] Why do you use the falloff range for your fighting range? Isn't your chance to hit only 50% at your fall-off?
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:45:00 - [14] Originally by: VJ Maverick Why do you use the falloff range for your fighting range? Isn't your chance to hit only 50% at your fall-off? 50% chance to hit is still more then 0% chance to hit. Crystal-Slave, that way? Potential solution to the current Recon cloak and cyno bug
VJ Maverick Caldari Maverick Specialized Services	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:48:00 - [15] Originally by: Reatu Krentor Originally by: VJ Maverick Why do you use the falloff range for your fighting range? Isn't your chance to hit only 50% at your fall-off? 50% chance to hit is still more then 0% chance to hit. Yes but 100% to hit at your optimal is better than 50% to hit at your fall-off, especially since we're talking about alpha strikes on low ROF turrets where you really can't afford to miss.
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2007.02.09 19:56:00 - [16] Originally by: VJ Maverick Originally by: Reatu Krentor Originally by: VJ Maverick Why do you use the falloff range for your fighting range? Isn't your chance to hit only 50% at your fall-off? 50% chance to hit is still more then 0% chance to hit. Yes but 100% to hit at your optimal is better than 50% to hit at your fall-off, especially since we're talking about alpha strikes on low ROF turrets where you really can't afford to miss. I was actually referring to blasters vs. autocannons , eg. a rupture can use falloff to it's advantage when fighting against a thorax with medium blasters. Crystal-Slave, that way? Potential solution to the current Recon cloak and cyno bug
Aurael Drakewing Legio Immortalis	Posted - 2007.02.09 20:03:00 - [17] Originally by: VJ Maverick Yes but 100% to hit at your optimal is better than 50% to hit at your fall-off, especially since we're talking about alpha strikes on low ROF turrets where you really can't afford to miss. True, but high-alpha, low-ROF is only applicable to Howitzers (the long-range guns). Autocannons, OTOH have low-alpha, high-ROF...in fact I do believe that ACs have the highest in-class ROF, hence why they have short optimals and long falloffs, to counter the high ROF
Sir Drake	Posted - 2007.02.09 20:04:00 - [18] Dont forget that the targets are in most cases moving and at falloff the transversal is lower than in optimal. So the chance to hit is actually better than 50% at falloff and way less than 100% on optimal, in the end i dont think they are that much apart that you could really tell. ------------------------------------------------------- Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer I like that.
Red Harvest	Posted - 2007.02.09 20:08:00 - [19] Originally by: Aurael Drakewing Originally by: VJ Maverick Yes but 100% to hit at your optimal is better than 50% to hit at your fall-off, especially since we're talking about alpha strikes on low ROF turrets where you really can't afford to miss. True, but high-alpha, low-ROF is only applicable to Howitzers (the long-range guns). Autocannons, OTOH have low-alpha, high-ROF...in fact I do believe that ACs have the highest in-class ROF, hence why they have short optimals and long falloffs, to counter the high ROF RoF on ACs is great (i got 3.1 sec RoF with dual 650mm on my pest), damage is not that good per hit but it sums up quite nicely. Only bad thing about it is the speed it goes through a stack of ammo.
JIMINY JIMMYSON	Posted - 2007.02.10 05:29:00 - [20] Originally by: Aurael Drakewing ...in fact I do believe that ACs have the highest in-class ROF, hence why they have short optimals and long falloffs, to counter the high ROF This is actually incorrect, since AC ROF was dropped to get ammunition consumption under control Blasters have a higher ROF.
Deious Troeyd Minmatar Kalear Fleet Systems	Posted - 2007.02.10 05:34:00 - [21] Originally by: Aurael Drakewing ...in fact I do believe that ACs have the highest in-class ROF, hence why they have short optimals and long falloffs, to counter the high ROF This is actually incorrect, since AC ROF was dropped to get ammunition consumption under control Blasters have a higher ROF.
Bacarday	Posted - 2007.02.10 06:00:00 - [22] imho projectiles get pure fluff points, hybrids not so much.. its the sound of the machine gun that does it
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.10 06:15:00 - [23] Edited by: Goumindong on 10/02/2007 06:12:13 Originally by: VJ Maverick Why do you use the falloff range for your fighting range? Isn't your chance to hit only 50% at your fall-off? Yes, but since AC's have a long falloff, and blasters a much shorter falloff, if the AC user is sitting at 50% of his falloff, then the blaster user will be even farther out, reducing their damage further. And the name of the game isnt "do as much dps in your ship as possible" its "Do more DPS to the target than he does to me" ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Ernest Graefenberg Minmatar Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.10 06:32:00 - [24] Originally by: Ishquar Teh'Sainte blasters: pro: great damage potential good tracking con: only kin/therm damage type need cap to fire ultra-short range ACs: pro: different damage types best tracking of all turrets no cap needed allmost no fitting requirements in comparison to other turrets Blaster/AC range is rather similar in final effect actually, outside of low-tier Blasters.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.10 06:33:00 - [25] Originally by: Ernest Graefenberg Originally by: Ishquar Teh'Sainte blasters: pro: great damage potential good tracking con: only kin/therm damage type need cap to fire ultra-short range ACs: pro: different damage types best tracking of all turrets no cap needed allmost no fitting requirements in comparison to other turrets Blaster/AC range is rather similar in final effect actually, outside of low-tier Blasters. Before you fit anti-matter into the guns, yes. After you fit antimatter and fusion/phased plasma into the guns, no its not. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Kua	Posted - 2007.02.12 12:01:00 - [26] Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 10/02/2007 06:12:13 Originally by: VJ Maverick Why do you use the falloff range for your fighting range? Isn't your chance to hit only 50% at your fall-off? Yes, but since AC's have a long falloff, and blasters a much shorter falloff, if the AC user is sitting at 50% of his falloff, then the blaster user will be even farther out, reducing their damage further. And the name of the game isnt "do as much dps in your ship as possible" its "Do more DPS to the target than he does to me" This is a nice point. In a one on one situation, where one is using blasters the other autocannons, it is a good tactic for the autocannon user to drop back into his falloff range. This will hurt his opponents DPS much more than it hurts him. Perhaps this is a fairly one-off situation though (I'm not sure).
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.02.12 12:39:00 - [27] Originally by: Kua Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 10/02/2007 06:12:13 Originally by: VJ Maverick Why do you use the falloff range for your fighting range? Isn't your chance to hit only 50% at your fall-off? Yes, but since AC's have a long falloff, and blasters a much shorter falloff, if the AC user is sitting at 50% of his falloff, then the blaster user will be even farther out, reducing their damage further. And the name of the game isnt "do as much dps in your ship as possible" its "Do more DPS to the target than he does to me" This is a nice point. In a one on one situation, where one is using blasters the other autocannons, it is a good tactic for the autocannon user to drop back into his falloff range. This will hurt his opponents DPS much more than it hurts him. Perhaps this is a fairly one-off situation though (I'm not sure). It is a "one off" situation in that when fighting Amarr and Caldari the opposite is true. Getting closer improves your DPS and worsens his[not for caldari, but it doesnt help either], except possibly when fighting t2 pulse w/scorch as an armor tanker due to the large ratio of EM damage to therm on scorch. ---------------------------------------- Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"
Socrates Nacht Caldari Red Light Enterprises	Posted - 2007.02.13 06:21:00 - [28] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Ernest Graefenberg Originally by: Ishquar Teh'Sainte blasters: pro: great damage potential good tracking con: only kin/therm damage type need cap to fire ultra-short range ACs: pro: different damage types best tracking of all turrets no cap needed allmost no fitting requirements in comparison to other turrets Blaster/AC range is rather similar in final effect actually, outside of low-tier Blasters. Before you fit anti-matter into the guns, yes. After you fit antimatter and fusion/phased plasma into the guns, no its not. The range bonuses on Fusion and PP only affect optimal. The only projectile ammo that negatively impacts your AC's range is Hail, while the only ammo that positively affects your range is Barrage. Generally, ACs will outrange blasters, and since AC boats are faster than blasterboats...
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.02.13 10:05:00 - [29] Just a point. Alpha strike is nto relevant only at fisrt shot. When engagem,ent start howitzers will have damage advantage, with time this will be surpassed by others. About the 5th shot the ammarian guns have surpassed it and at the 8th shot the rails surpass them. So if you have a group of ships focus firing, if yout howitzer ships can kill an enemy **** like in the thirs or forth volley the howitzers have an advantage, otherwise they are at disadvantage. If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!!
Socrates Nacht Caldari Red Light Enterprises	Posted - 2007.02.13 10:07:00 - [30] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Just a point. Alpha strike is nto relevant only at fisrt shot. When engagem,ent start howitzers will have damage advantage, with time this will be surpassed by others. About the 5th shot the ammarian guns have surpassed it and at the 8th shot the rails surpass them. So if you have a group of ships focus firing, if yout howitzer ships can kill an enemy **** like in the thirs or forth volley the howitzers have an advantage, otherwise they are at disadvantage. In other words, pest and strom are best fleet snipers bar none.

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.