| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eaterof Children
   |
Posted - 2007.07.23 21:26:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Eaterof Children on 23/07/2007 21:29:14
As graphics work is done for Rev 3, could the Devs please use this opportunity to add one turret hardpoint to the Merlin, Moa, Eagle and Ferox?
There have been numerous threads where this matter crops up. The general consensus is more or less, that the aforementioned ships would definately need another turret to be closer in power to their competition, better to fly, without overpowering them in the least.
Some people believe the Vulture needs another turret as well, but there were a enough strong counterarguments to this that I cannot, with honesty, say that the community agreed to that as a whole. I am simply not sure.
To the best of my ability to relay them, the most usual arguments supporting this idea are:
a) A damage bonus is more or less equal in power to an optimal bonus, so the lack of one turret compared to Gallente equivalent ships is a handicap that leaves them ships clearly behind their competition
b) The 2 missile launchers each of these can fit do not benefit from either ship bonus or magnetic field stabilisers, and add very little to the ships overal use - they are strictly point-defense, and end up being a problem for these ships instead of a benefit
c) The Rokh has the same number of turrets as its counterparts (most direct comparison being the Hyperion) and it is still not at all overpowered compared to them. Instead, it is a useful ship to fly, with its own strengths, weaknesses and quirks. That's what we want for the rest.
d) In general, their dps is very very bad. They get outdamaged at all ranges apart from their extreme when another ship (notably gallente) is fit for long range and can reach them at all. A Moa will be badly outdamaged by a rail-Thorax at all ranges where the Thorax can reach it at all. There are no sweet-spots, the Moa will always get outdamaged if it cannot TOTALLY outrange the thorax. Same goes for Eagle/Deimos, Ferox/Brutix.
Almost all Caldari gunnery-specced pilots seem to agree with these points in the threads that have cropped up. Also, even most non-caldari that have commented seem to agree too. A good majority, but I suppose not all of them.
The few counter-arguments AGAINST the requested change are
a) People have seen the aforementioned ships to good use as they are today, hence no change needed
b) The range bonus is better than a damage bonus
c) Some ships have a "niche" role that they can perform, so they do not need boosting
d) With another turret they would be overpowered, because they can fit more magnetic field stabilisers in their low slots than their counterparts. Response to that was that in the same count, they would either not have tackling, tank, or ew, while their counterparts can benefit from these. The fact that they can field more Magnetic Field Stabilisers is balanced by the fact that they can not tank-tackle-inject, while their counterparts can.
I believe the supporting arguments are stronger than the counter-arguments, so I ask the Devs to take a look at the matter since the graphics upgrade would be a perfect opportunity for applying that "fix".
To the esteemed forum warriors:
These are not MY arguments (though I of course agree with most), it is mainly the points that have cropped up at several places at the forums. I made a compilation for easy reading ( Greyscale). There is no need to support the arguments, sign the thread, or flame it. If you like the request, bump it once a week or so with a nice comment. Don't like it? Let it die.
Supporting DPS diagrams (Best T1 ammo and T2 spike ammo overlapped)
For ships that 'work'
Rokh/Hyperion damage comparison
For ships that we want to have more turets
Eagle/Deimos damage comparison
Moa/Thorax damage comparison
Ferox/Brutix damage comparison
|
William Hamilton
Caldari
THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS....
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 00:50:00 -
[2]
Edited by: William Hamilton on 24/07/2007 00:50:26
You forgot that one command ship, can't remember wich one is the railgun one at the moment.
The charts realy help show the point.
Anwyays, full support, give us our turrets!
|
Dr Cedric
Caldari
Shock and Awe
Peons of Doom
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 08:06:00 -
[3]
I have to wholeheartedly agree with this poster. It seems that the Devs have overlooked the dichotomy that the other races seem to have. Gallente are either blaster or Drone spec'd, Ammar are Laser or nos (thats a stretch...) Minny are either sheild or armor...
It seems caldari are either Missle or nothing, with the exeption of the Rokh and cormorant, which are clearly Rail specialized.
I believe that the extra turret slot, even to the loss of a missle slot would at least keep up the spirit of the dichotomy of the races, and the specialization of the specific ships. If you're going to give a rail gun bonus...why use half of a ship's high slots for a module that will not recieve that bonus? If you'll give a BC sized ship 7 launcher slots, and ever other race's BC class ship a majority of slot use for the ship bonus, why not tweak the Merlin, Moa, Eagle, Ferox and perhaps Vulture? At least for the Moa and Eagle, which are touted in their descriptions as being Rail gun boats.
Personally I would love to see a Ferox sporting 6 med railguns and getting a bit more loving out there. Great job Eaterof Children, you have my support!
Ced
Dr Cedric
CEO - Brothers in Arms Manufacturing |
Tony Benn
Dawn of War
|
Posted - 2007.07.24 08:19:00 -
[4]
Here here!
Even if they don't get any extra power or cpu, the extra slot would go an awful long way to reviving Caldari - especially the Ferox and Moa, which you simply never see even for PVE nowadays.
|
Neuromandis
|
Posted - 2007.07.27 18:22:00 -
[5]
I really hope a devs gets a look at this one...
Good work!
---
If someone else from my Corporation or Alliance agrees with me, he will say so. Assume nobody does :)
---
WTB: Scorpion wing (left)
|
Kudaro
|
Posted - 2007.07.28 03:47:00 -
[6]
I agree with the original poster. Please give the Caldari more turrets. Thank you.
|
Plekto
Priory Of The Lemon
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.07.28 07:44:00 -
[7]
A better change would be to make most smaller ships able to also fit missiles.
In real life, missiles would be among the first and most basic weapons to eb used by smaller ships. As it is, it's stupidly easy to find a ship in most classes than fits all beams or rails but finding one that fits only missiles...
Find me a T1 ship smaller than a BC that can fit all of its hardpoints with missiles of any size. Right.. doesn't exist. So essentially it's useless to fit small missiles on anything except for a flycatcher.
|
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2007.07.28 21:37:00 -
[8]
A little note on the meaning of the supporting diagrams:
In the case of the Rokh/hyperion damage chart, we have the Hyperion outdamaging a rokh by 25% at close range, as is to be expected, then as the Hyperion needs to change ammo, their damage becomes very close, for all intents and purposes, until the Hyperion switches to Spike, at which point it again, as expected, it outdamages the rokh. Then at the extreme range as it is to be expected, the rokh outdamages the hype again.
Roughly, short range hype>rokh, med range rokh=hype, long range hype>rokh, extreme range rokh>hype. This is fine. We have a definite advantage for close range, a definite advantage for long range and a grey area in between. Both ships are useful, and winning with one against the other is a matter of using their advantages.
The problem with the other charts is this: A deimos, a thorax or a brutix may simply fit spike in the rails and already do the same damage (or even better) than their counterparts can ever do, even with antimatter. There is a strong asymmetry here favoring the close range ships, there is no "grey area": What should be the grey area totally belongs to the close-ranger.
We would like this grey area please.
Thanks to all for the support.
If by any chance a dev sees this thread and it is not in his job, please kindly direct someone that IS responsible for this kind of thing here. We would want this thread to be considered by someone that is responsible for these kind of changes in the game. Thank you.
|
Ruiryu
|
Posted - 2007.08.03 14:17:00 -
[9]
I had made a thread to discuss this topic but more on just the eagle, I have to agree with the OP. and these charts make a very good point. I support this and hope the devs will take a look and consider giving some help. You take a look at all the other hacs in the game they are all very specialized. You look at the eagle and scream sniper, but once you fit it up and try it out, you scream piece of ****. And want to try blasters, where you then consider it being ok till you engage a ship meant to use blasters and you start screaming piece of ****, all over again.
Deimos = MWD blaster, no two ways around it
Ishtar = Ummm drones and lots of them, and this ship can tack nos/nuet and tank. with insane DPS from a very wide varierty of drone types
Zealot = Lovely pulse laser boat with either great speed/damage/or tank, or a combination of those 2
Sac = With the new changes a fear uber tanked heavy assault boat that will actually be able to use EW and a tank to attack it's target with
Vegabond = Simply hands down the best hac, it's amazing that it can hit it's target with the transverse velocity it's making, but you can't hit it for a damn. and then the fact if in danger you can't hold it with a single web, you pretty much need a dual webb hugg in there to stop them
Muninn: The only real other sniper hac, it gets the tracking bonus to make the sniping viable and has that extra turret that the eagle could use as well. Why give the Muninn the extra turret and not the Eagle? With it's tracking bonus the tech2 sniping ammo on Muninn actually has no negative effect in fact with level 4 hac you don't even feel it your actually getting better tracking, so your actually gonna hit a target if it's moving. You don't really need to fit that tracking computer but you can fit a nice painter and watch yourself come very close to insta-popping frigates and make tech1 cruiser cry like a little school girl.
|
DirtyDozen
Caldari
Kings of Kill
EVE Animal Control
|
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:31:00 -
[10]
I totally agree w/ this. Eagle has needed a 5th turret slot from the beginning. I like the ship but if the deimos is getting it's buff, i think the eagle needs some lubbins too.
/signed.
I'm uber....thanks for asking. |
Horb
F.R.E.E. Explorer
EVE Animal Control
|
Posted - 2007.08.03 16:44:00 -
[11]
I fully endorse these changes.
Ferox is obsolete.
Eagle needs 5th hardpoint.
I could really care less about the t1 ships, but since we're on the topic. Fix those too.
/signed.
|
Dr Cedric
Caldari
The Nietzian Way
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.04 20:27:00 -
[12]
I just like to keep this alive. I am a Railgun fanatic at my very core, and having a 6th Rail point on my Ferox would make me a happy man. As well another point for my Eagle/Moa and all my wildest dreams have come true. Keep up the posts people. Lets get this in the hands of a dev.
BUMP
Dr Cedric
Lead Diplomat - Shock and Awe |
Cutie Chaser
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.05 07:01:00 -
[13]
I agree 100% with this post. I've been looking for an excuse to fly a ferox, and this change would give me an excuse to buy a few new shiny ones!
***
Thats a Templar, the amarr fighter. Its a combat drone used by carriers. |
Chainsaw Plankton
|
Posted - 2007.08.05 08:34:00 -
[14]
or we can fix it by giving the rohk 6 turret slots 
|
Yorick Downe
|
Posted - 2007.08.05 11:17:00 -
[15]
Agreed, /signed.
An extra rail slot would do nicely. Keep the range bonus, add a rail, and you'll have your race-specific ship with its own quirks - still gets outdamaged close-range by Gallente, due to the range instead of damage bonus, but doesn't get pwned into oblivion, damage-output wise. The somewhat lower damage up-close is balanced nicely with the ability to snipe.
Yup, very nice idea indeed. Get to it, hamsters! 
|
Gotk
Caldari
New Millenium Knights
|
Posted - 2007.08.05 12:24:00 -
[16]
 Originally by: Plekto
A better change would be to make most smaller ships able to also fit missiles.
In real life, missiles would be among the first and most basic weapons to eb used by smaller ships. As it is, it's stupidly easy to find a ship in most classes than fits all beams or rails but finding one that fits only missiles...
Find me a T1 ship smaller than a BC that can fit all of its hardpoints with missiles of any size. Right.. doesn't exist. So essentially it's useless to fit small missiles on anything except for a flycatcher.
kestrel
|
Grayplate
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2007.08.05 20:05:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Plekto
A better change would be to make most smaller ships able to also fit missiles.
In real life, missiles would be among the first and most basic weapons to eb used by smaller ships. As it is, it's stupidly easy to find a ship in most classes than fits all beams or rails but finding one that fits only missiles...
Find me a T1 ship smaller than a BC that can fit all of its hardpoints with missiles of any size. Right.. doesn't exist. So essentially it's useless to fit small missiles on anything except for a flycatcher.
Any reason that you arent including the Kestrel?
ΦConcord, the ultimate noob ganksquad!Φ
ΦFYI. I am not allowed to mount a bayonet on a crew-served weapon.Φ |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
New Eve Order
|
Posted - 2007.08.05 20:08:00 -
[18]
i would just be happy if the turret objects where placed on the ships so they made sense.. and ofc, missle launcher objects.
The Beginning <-- crap quality, need to redo, sorry :( |
prathe
Minmatar
Omega Enterprises
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2007.08.06 05:17:00 -
[19]
Edited by: prathe on 06/08/2007 05:17:59
your comparisions are off centre somewhat
your comparing blaster boats to rail boats
rails on deimos are bad deimos is a close range chainsaw eagle is a long range frig ceptor dictor killer
same goes for all your comparisions
please compare eagle to munnin
ferox has no equivalent in bc arena with the as the comparible ships tend to be either close range or missile boats
moa vs thorax is also invalid please compare moa to rupture for valid results
sorry but your trying to compare long range snipers to short range blasters the difference is in their range
|
Neuromandis
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 02:16:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Neuromandis on 07/08/2007 02:16:40
**nvm**
---
If someone else from my Corporation or Alliance agrees with me, he will say so. Assume nobody does :)
---
WTB: Scorpion wing (left)
|
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 02:21:00 -
[21]
Originally by: prathe
your comparisions are off centre somewhat
your comparing blaster boats to rail boats
...
sorry but your trying to compare long range snipers to short range blasters the difference is in their range
Thank you for the comment. But I beg to differ. I am comparing hybrid boats to hybrid boats. I cannot do a similar comparison with a rupture et.c. because artilleries and autocannons work a lot differently, are capless, have different fittings et.c.
Apart from that, I chose these graphs EXACTLY for the reason you painted. More on that 2 paragraphs below.
I am comparing Gallente to Caldari, who use **the same** weapons with different philosophies.
But let us forget all that for the moment, and focus on what you said:
If it were true that Gallente are blasterboats and Caldari railboats (which I personally don't agree to at all: the big bad sniping Megathron with his friend the Fleet Hyperion will shoot me from 170km if I do, and then the Blasterokh will come and spank my corpse as well, and then no more eating children for me)
IF it were true, and I am comparing blasterboats to railboats, the graphs show that the so called "blasterboats" are better than the "railboats" at using rails. That is the core of the problem, and you are reinforcing the argument perfectly.
|
Zosimos Sabina
Tritanium Workers Union
Kinetic Maelstrom Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 11:41:00 -
[22]
I don't think the Eagle needs another turret, Ferox/Moa perhaps, but not the Eagle. It is the only sniper capable of sniping at t2 sniper battleship range, which is a tremendous, tremendous advantage in fleets. It also makes it much harder to pin down by enemy interceptors.
------------------------------------------------
»\(¦_o)/» |
Helevorn Feanaro
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 12:48:00 -
[23]
I don't think your comparissons are valid. You are not adding damage from missiles, hence Caldari mixed missile/rail boats seem underpowered, e.g Moa vs. Thorax.
You also call for an additional hardpoint on the Merlin, without comparing it to the Tristan, which has the same high slot configuration as the Merlin. Merlin gets a range bonus, Tristan gets a damage bonus. What's the problem?
|
Waxau
Mortis Angelus
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 13:05:00 -
[24]
Sod the charts - Anyone whos caldari specialised HAS or has though of atleast training up gallente. Simple as that.
Ferox (Therefore vulture) needs one extra turret. Moa (therefore eagle) needs another turret slot.
The ferox dps is less than a thorax for christ sake :P I mean come on......a Vulture does less dps than a thorax even. And its a bleeding COMMAND SHIP! lol.
Give these ships some love.
|
True Ace
Gallente
Blood Moon Masques
Lunar Dominion
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 14:28:00 -
[25]
if u want to put caldari rail ships inline with gallente blaster ships then those caldari ships need to lose all of their missle hard points including the rokh. then u guys can get your one extra turret .
seriously though even though caldari and gallente share a single weapon system doesnt mean u can compare them on that basis alone. yes a mega can use rail guns up to 170km i think what was said but how much dps does a mega have over the rokh from 170km to 250km.
but anyways im all for these changes aslong as they dnt get any pg or cpu increase to fit said weapon since thats why u have the missle hardpoints for anyway. |
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 16:19:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Helevorn Feanaro
I don't think your comparissons are valid. You are not adding damage from missiles, hence Caldari mixed missile/rail boats seem underpowered, e.g Moa vs. Thorax.
You are kidding, right? I also did not add drone damage, and it is triple or quadruple what the 2 missile hardpoints of the Moa or the Eagle's missiles. I purposely left them outside because if you add drones and missiles the graphs become unreadable. You are still reinforcing the argument saying that because, you may find it hard to believe, if you add missile damage and drone damage, the gallente need twice-three times the chart that the Caldari do. Let us stick to primary weapons here, though. They are enough to show a Gallente advantage, and just keep in mind that 5 med drones add thee to four times the dps of two heavy missiles, and at longer range.
Originally by: True Ace
if u want to put caldari rail ships inline with gallente blaster ships then those caldari ships need to lose all of their missle hard points including the rokh. then u guys can get your one extra turret .
And the Gallente their dronebays? Let's keep this serious.
Originally by: True Ace
seriously though even though caldari and gallente share a single weapon system doesnt mean u can compare them on that basis alone. yes a mega can use rail guns up to 170km i think what was said but how much dps does a mega have over the rokh from 170km to 250km.
but anyways im all for these changes aslong as they dnt get any pg or cpu increase to fit said weapon since thats why u have the missle hardpoints for anyway.
Your notes, or similar, are already in the OP as counterarguments, no need to recount them. There are a lot (i think 5) of threads DISCUSSING the proposed changes elsewhere in the forums, this discussion may take place there.
Apart from that, I do not care how much damage the Megathron does over the Rokh or the Rokh over the Mega, the Mega is tier 2. I am showing how much the HYPERION does over the Rokh in the graphs.
Apart from that, I already explained that IF what you said is true and the Gallente are blasterships and the Caldari Railships, something is terribly broken.
Apart from that, this argument is meaningless because I already said that the Hyperion is already balanced with the Rokh and I requested no change to it.
But seriously, if your concerns have not yet been alleviated, can we keep this discussion to a discussion thread? We do not need ANOTHER unreadable 10 page thread for the exact same matter.
|
True Ace
Gallente
Blood Moon Masques
Lunar Dominion
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 17:17:00 -
[27]
btw where is the chart for dps tanked while using a full rack of highest tier rails. last time i checked thorax , hyperion and deimos has a very hard time fitting those. |
Arte
Warspite Developments
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 17:50:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Eaterof Children
Originally by: prathe
your comparisions are off centre somewhat
your comparing blaster boats to rail boats
...
sorry but your trying to compare long range snipers to short range blasters the difference is in their range
Thank you for the comment. But I beg to differ. I am comparing hybrid boats to hybrid boats. I cannot do a similar comparison with a rupture et.c. because artilleries and autocannons work a lot differently, are capless, have different fittings et.c.
Apart from that, I chose these graphs EXACTLY for the reason you painted. More on that 2 paragraphs below.
I am comparing Gallente to Caldari, who use **the same** weapons with different philosophies.
But let us forget all that for the moment, and focus on what you said:
If it were true that Gallente are blasterboats and Caldari railboats (which I personally don't agree to at all: the big bad sniping Megathron with his friend the Fleet Hyperion will shoot me from 170km if I do, and then the Blasterokh will come and spank my corpse as well, and then no more eating children for me)
IF it were true, and I am comparing blasterboats to railboats, the graphs show that the so called "blasterboats" are better than the "railboats" at using rails. That is the core of the problem, and you are reinforcing the argument perfectly.
This is not a flame or a troll but I think you're wrong in saying that it's viable to compare the Deimos and the Eagle directly.
Despite your assertation, the Deimos in your graph does not fare better than the Eagle past what looks to be about 80km and that's the point.
The Deimos was supposed to be designed from the ground up to be a close range monster, while the Eagle is a "reach out and touch" type of ship. So even with rails (assuming that any deimos could fit a rack of them... which it cannot without rigs or gimping it's setup elsewhere) the eagle continues to be effective at longer ranges.
Your graph appears to me to show that while the Deimos is capable of (much) greater damage than the Eagle, it cannot continue this at longer ranges, the usefulness of this extra range is moot. Deimos is ineffective at anything like the ranges that the Eagle is.
It appears that the area of each "damage envelope" is roughly equal indicating that overall, they have the same damage capability, just spread out over a different range bracket.
I am not disagreeing that the Eagle amongst other ships deserve another turret, it bothers me not one iota, but I would agree with Prathe on this one, the difference is in the range, not the damage.
|
Neuromandis
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 19:48:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Neuromandis on 07/08/2007 19:49:49
Originally by: Arte
...constructive criticism...
I think that what you are arguing already practically exists in the OP as well. I would tend to thinkt that what he says is that the eagle does less damage than it should. It is difficult to compare that with only that diagram, but if you compare all the diarams together it would be easier to understand their difference.
---
If someone else from my Corporation or Alliance agrees with me, he will say so. Assume nobody does :)
---
WTB: Scorpion wing (left)
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 21:49:00 -
[30]
It looks like, according to these graphs, that the Eagle performs quite well compared to the deimos.
And since t1 ammo[well faction t1 ammo] is the ammo you ought to be using for doing your job[tracking], since tech 1 fit battleships outdamage all of them when using tech 2 ammo it doesnt seem that much of a streth.
If the eagle gets another turret, it needs to lose the damage bonus. The Ferox needs 7 turrets and the Moa 5 though.
|
Arte
Warspite Developments
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 22:19:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Neuromandis
Edited by: Neuromandis on 07/08/2007 19:49:49
Originally by: Arte
...constructive criticism...
I think that what you are arguing already practically exists in the OP as well. I would tend to thinkt that what he says is that the eagle does less damage than it should. It is difficult to compare that with only that diagram, but if you compare all the diagrams together it would be easier to understand their difference.
I think I reacted the way that I did because when he replied to Pathe, he said that he had had his point illustrate to perfection, which I disagreed with.
It's difficult to prove a point when you use unrealistic situations - such as the Deimos using a full rack of 250's to "prove" that the Deimos is a "more effective rail boat" which it cannot be because of a number of issues.
I agree that if I'd looked at all the graphs together I may have seen his point more readily, focusing on the Deimos/Eagle comparison somewhat detracts from his 'message'.
I do agree that there is no real harm altogether in the Eagle getting another turret and I know that there are a number of issues with other ships that have been going on for a long long time.
|
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2007.08.07 23:05:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Eaterof Children on 07/08/2007 23:14:40
Originally by: Arte
It's difficult to prove a point when you use unrealistic situations - such as the Deimos using a full rack of 250's to "prove" that the Deimos is a "more effective rail boat" which it cannot be because of a number of issues.
I admit that you at least have a point, but without an exhausting number of diagrams it would be difficult to "prove" anything.
In fact, I only provided the graphs for convenience. I made this thread because I consider its point already proven from numerous discussions on these same forums, game situations where many ships are compared, and others. There are of course still numerous active discussions in the forums about this matter, and not everyone may agree with me, which is of course their right.
|
Helevorn Feanaro
|
Posted - 2007.08.08 07:05:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Eaterof Children
Originally by: Helevorn Feanaro
I don't think your comparissons are valid. You are not adding damage from missiles, hence Caldari mixed missile/rail boats seem underpowered, e.g Moa vs. Thorax.
You are kidding, right? I also did not add drone damage, and it is triple or quadruple what the 2 missile hardpoints of the Moa or the Eagle's missiles. I purposely left them outside because if you add drones and missiles the graphs become unreadable. You are still reinforcing the argument saying that because, you may find it hard to believe, if you add missile damage and drone damage, the gallente need twice-three times the chart that the Caldari do. Let us stick to primary weapons here, though. They are enough to show a Gallente advantage, and just keep in mind that 5 med drones add thee to four times the dps of two heavy missiles, and at longer range.
No I am not kidding. Drones are useless at 60-80km, which is where you should be in a Moa. Moa gets a range BONUS. Thorax does not. Moa also has an additional hardpoint that the Thorax does not have.
I fail to see how you expect to influence the devs by not counting damage from 2 of the 6 hardpoints and then claiming that it does not do enough damage. If the charts were inclusive of missile damage, we could have a discussion about facts. As it is, it is wishfull thinking based on incomplete data.
Also, you have not answered my criticism of your statement regarding the Merlin.
|
Dr Cedric
Caldari
The Nietzian Way
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 15:03:00 -
[34]
Quote:
No I am not kidding. Drones are useless at 60-80km, which is where you should be in a Moa. Moa gets a range BONUS. Thorax does not. Moa also has an additional hardpoint that the Thorax does not have.
I fail to see how you expect to influence the devs by not counting damage from 2 of the 6 hardpoints and then claiming that it does not do enough damage. If the charts were inclusive of missile damage, we could have a discussion about facts. As it is, it is wishfull thinking based on incomplete data.
Also, you have not answered my criticism of your statement regarding the Merlin.
Heavy missles are about as effective at 80 km as the drones are. You'd have to spend more time training to specialize in Heavy missles to get them to be effective at the range your primarily using (gunnery). Missles have no place in this discussion, mostly because Caldari are restricted to using less/smaller drones and missles do not make up that difference. Keep it to the subject. at 150-175km range (where you would want to be with an Eagle or Vulture to snipe) you are extremely ineffective because of the lack of available turrets to deliver your damage.
So, back to the task at hand, +1 Turret for Moa/Eagle, Ferox/Vulture.
Dr Cedric
Lead Diplomat - Shock and Awe |
Tintifish
Coreli Corporation
Corelum Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 19:49:00 -
[35]
Um, you're comparing 3 almost exclusively blaster boats to 3 exclusively rail bonuses, am i the only one who doesnt get this? ><
|
Dr Cedric
Caldari
The Nietzian Way
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.09 22:11:00 -
[36]
Why should 3 exclusively Blaster boats be able to shoot rails with better outcomes than the 3 exclusively Rail boats....Thats the arguement, thanks for bringing it up
Dr Cedric
Lead Diplomat - Shock and Awe |
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2007.08.10 02:03:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Tintifish
Um, you're comparing 3 almost exclusively blaster boats to 3 exclusively rail bonuses, am i the only one who doesnt get this? ><
Thanks dr. Cedric, you explained my point excellently.
Also, there is another small (or big, depending on your point of view) reason I put up these diagrams:
It is my personal belief (which you may disagree to of course, but I retain the right of keeping it), that there are no "blasterboats" or "railboats", there are only "hybrid boats", and the aforementioned ships are "short range blasterboats" and "short-medium range blasterboats", or "medium-long range railboats" and "long range railboats". This is non-negotiable as far as I am concerned, as long as people have the ability to fly beagles, blarpies, blasterokhs, blastermoas, railraxes, railbrutixes, railmegas, snipehyperions, and the list goes on.
Also, this is perfectly fine and race-symmetrical: Amarr and Minmatar share the ability to mount either close or long range guns, the Gallente and the Caldari are also required to be effective with either long or short range guns, and they are differentiated in this by ship bonuses which define each ship's its specific abilities and quirks in each role.
In short, what each of us perceives as optimal use for a ship (i.e. "this is a railboat" or "this is a sniper" or "but this is a close range platform") is neither restraining nor necessarily its optimal or "intended" use, someone else is bound to come up with a use that is either as good or even better.
To illustrate what I say, take a rokh and a hyperion. A blaster-hyperion will probably eat a blaster-rokh alive if it can get extreme close range, and the rai-rokh will probably kill the hyperion if it manages to stay well outside its optimal range with null. The middle area is contested and situational.
The same way, a sniperion that shoots a sniperokh at 160km will eat it alive, while the same rokh will be able to devastate the hyperion if it shoots it from 200-230km, while the middle area is also contested and situational, with the ships doing similar damage. This is balance between ships that have bonuses for exactly the same weapon systems, blasters and railguns. The ship bonuses give them their specific quirks and abilities, but they do not restrain them to use each. Extremes tend to be useful (maximising dps or maximising range), but they are in no way the endgame, people tend to use the middle ground to great effect as well.
On the other hand, having this ship comparison when one ship (moa) is completely devastated using blasters (by a thorax) while it only has a small margin of use for its railguns is im-balanced. The reverse is also true - a ship that gets devastated when using railguns (an example would be an imaginary 4 turret thorax against a 5 turret moa), which only had a small margin of use with blasters (same example), would also be imbalanced.
That is why, according to my personal beliefs concerning hybrid boats, I posted the diagrams. They illustrate the same image you will meet with blasters, but with the rails, where things are even clearer. If you disagree with my posting the diagrams, be my guest. But don't contest their usefulness (it is pointless), if you feel THE RESULTS contestible, comment on them (Gourmindog for example did - I disagree, but he is of course entitled to his own opinion). You think they're invalid? Ignore them. If you feel their result points to something different than the OP suggests, feel free to point it out.
This is not a thread about Eaterof Children's ability to creat valid comparisons. It is a thread of the Caldari's gunboat and their relation to the rest of EVE. I'm not going to invest any more time making diagrams for something that will probably be ignored anyway. If you want better diagram comparisons, feel free to make them yourselves and of course post the results here...
|
True Ace
Gallente
Blood Moon Masques
Lunar Dominion
|
Posted - 2007.08.10 03:34:00 -
[38]
yea on paper gallente ships out damage caldari ships with rails. Thats on paper and not even a realistic view of the situation. without using rigs come up with a sniper setup with the ships u guys mentioned thats better than the caldari rail ship. then add in drone dps and missle dps at all ranges of these ships. then u can add dps tanked of these ships. only then can u begin to compare gallente blaster ships with rails and caldari rail ships.
btw deimos and thorax dnt have the slots to fit any type worth while sniping setup. they have gimp lock ranges and drone range is only about 50 to 60km.
IM YOUR KING'S KING. |
Ciara Daag
|
Posted - 2007.08.10 04:52:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Plekto
A better change would be to make most smaller ships able to also fit missiles.
In real life, missiles would be among the first and most basic weapons to eb used by smaller ships. As it is, it's stupidly easy to find a ship in most classes than fits all beams or rails but finding one that fits only missiles...
Find me a T1 ship smaller than a BC that can fit all of its hardpoints with missiles of any size. Right.. doesn't exist. So essentially it's useless to fit small missiles on anything except for a flycatcher.
Caracal and kestrel are missile boats.
|
Magazaki
|
Posted - 2007.08.12 16:01:00 -
[40]
Back to the top?
|
Alunis
|
Posted - 2007.08.12 21:42:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Tintifish
Um, you're comparing 3 almost exclusively blaster boats to 3 exclusively rail bonuses, am i the only one who doesnt get this? ><
I've been confused from the beginning.. Fact is I happen to agree with the counter post regarding drones and missles not being factored in to this.
Drones also can be killed and negate the damage from them while missles as long as you have a supply of them are still additional damage.
This whole give caldari anything thread is nonsense. I would think the devs based upon true comparisons have a better idea of the true balance of these ships vs this chart which does not factor in nearly enough information about the ships in question and the supposed need for more turrent hardpoints.
/not signed. give it a rest.
|
Alunis
|
Posted - 2007.08.12 21:44:00 -
[42]
Originally by: True Ace
yea on paper gallente ships out damage caldari ships with rails. Thats on paper and not even a realistic view of the situation. without using rigs come up with a sniper setup with the ships u guys mentioned thats better than the caldari rail ship. then add in drone dps and missle dps at all ranges of these ships. then u can add dps tanked of these ships. only then can u begin to compare gallente blaster ships with rails and caldari rail ships.
btw deimos and thorax dnt have the slots to fit any type worth while sniping setup. they have gimp lock ranges and drone range is only about 50 to 60km.
/amen
What I'd like to see if my drone bay back to pre-RMR capacity on the rax. BUFF RAX DRONE BAY FTW!.. j/k 
|
Galmar Grief
Caldari
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 22:51:00 -
[43]
An extra turret to Eagle, Moa, Ferox and Vulture would be fantastic and actually make them used ships, the racial weaponry would be combat effective (nerf their missile slots too tbh, same goes for rokh)
I'm not sure about the Merlin, i think its pretty balanced the way it is right now, besides then people would whine about the Hookbill etc etc... I like the merlin as it is.
- - -
UI Suggestion for Missiles - STOP MAKING ME CRY |
KD.Fluffy
The Refugees
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 23:25:00 -
[44]
Quote:
btw deimos and thorax dnt have the slots to fit any type worth while sniping setup. they have gimp lock ranges and drone range is only about 50 to 60km.
what are you smoking.... deimos can snipe 100km easily! and do damn good damage doing it too. same with the thorax... deimos can out damage eagle at all ranges to 100km, without its drones factored in. really its no comparison.
|
MailFan
Horizon.Inc
Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 11:44:00 -
[45]
For relevance: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=568421
--
I'm in this mood because of scorn. I'm in a mood for total war
|
KD.Fluffy
The Refugees
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 18:20:00 -
[46]
could we get a dev response on this please?
|
Jurgen Cartis
Caldari
Interstellar Corporation of Exploration
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 05:21:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Plekto
A better change would be to make most smaller ships able to also fit missiles.
In real life, missiles would be among the first and most basic weapons to eb used by smaller ships. As it is, it's stupidly easy to find a ship in most classes than fits all beams or rails but finding one that fits only missiles...
Find me a T1 ship smaller than a BC that can fit all of its hardpoints with missiles of any size. Right.. doesn't exist. So essentially it's useless to fit small missiles on anything except for a flycatcher.
Kestrel
Heron (lol)
Caracal
And in the 'close but no cigar (1 turret)' category, the Inquisitor, the Condor, Griffin and the Breacher.
Also, the T1 Caldari frigate that's supposed to be our railboat (merlin) only gets 2 turret slots.
--------------------------------------------------
ICE Blueprint Sales |
Jurgen Cartis
Caldari
Interstellar Corporation of Exploration
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 05:32:00 -
[48]
Originally by: True Ace
yea on paper gallente ships out damage caldari ships with rails. Thats on paper and not even a realistic view of the situation. without using rigs come up with a sniper setup with the ships u guys mentioned thats better than the caldari rail ship. then add in drone dps and missle dps at all ranges of these ships. then u can add dps tanked of these ships. only then can u begin to compare gallente blaster ships with rails and caldari rail ships.
btw deimos and thorax dnt have the slots to fit any type worth while sniping setup. they have gimp lock ranges and drone range is only about 50 to 60km.
Drones are useless past 60km, and heavy missiles past 84km. At sniper ranges, Drones do nothing, and missiles with no velocity bonus are equally pointless. Including Drone/Missile DPS would actually only serve to accentuate the Thorax/Deimos' advantage in the 0-60km range bracket. 5x HH IIs with maxed skills adds up to about 160 DPS. No way two HML IIs are going to beat that.
--------------------------------------------------
ICE Blueprint Sales |
Seraphim Io
Caldari
Battlestars
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.08.19 07:42:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Seraphim Io on 19/08/2007 07:42:59
How about some attention to the vulture as it is the worse of the 4 field command ships and sucks with blasters AND rails as an eagle can do just about as much damage in the sniping role. I refuse to accept that the only role the vulture has in this game is as a meat shield or a platform to give bonus' and contribute nothing else to the fight.
|
Andreya
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 15:44:00 -
[50]
im voting against,
eventually caldari pilots will realize, that caldari are meant to fight at extreme ranges, and when you are at that range, you are supierior to all other races. of course you do less damage! you can shoot people when you cannot be shot back!
use your double range bonus's to their max potential and you will never complain about caldari not being god in pvp.
all those ships you mentioned will all overcome the ship you compared them to if used PROPERLY. (of course implying that both the eagle/deimos were being tackled by an inty)
caldari are perfect as is
|
Andreya
|
Posted - 2007.08.20 15:47:00 -
[51]
and for a better examplbe of comparing two sniper ships :
a artillery muninn
and a rail eagle
yes, the muninn hurts more.
but your eagle shoots 50% further.
if you both were pointed by a interceptor, the eagle would win...
of course, this is if you were using your uber sniping ship 'properly' by making sure you have the proper sniping spots (for example 170km away from gate)
|
Dr Cedric
Caldari
The Nietzian Way
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.22 14:06:00 -
[52]
Putting it back on top. Ferox/Vulture and Moa/Eagle need more rail points and less missile points.
Keep pushing this.
Dr Cedric
Lead Diplomat - Shock and Awe |
Ess Erbe
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2007.08.22 19:31:00 -
[53]
3/2 or 3/1 turret/launcher slots for the Hookbill and Merlin would be mighty nice.
|
Magazaki
|
Posted - 2007.08.27 01:17:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Magazaki on 27/08/2007 01:18:33
Hey, why was this in the third page?
Ok, shameless bump, but I really hope this comes through.
The Caldari rail/blasterships don't need a boost, and this thread does not call for one. They just need to be brought in line with the rest of EVE.
|
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 14:01:00 -
[55]
Nice patch, but the Caldaris still need their fix I think...
|
Neuromandis
|
Posted - 2007.09.08 15:24:00 -
[56]
Apart from the 35 page thread on ships and modules, this needs to stay alive somewhere where it is not a flamefest...
---
If someone else from my Corporation or Alliance agrees with me, he will say so. Assume nobody does :)
---
WTB: Scorpion wing (left)
|
S'vart Tseirgn
|
Posted - 2007.12.18 06:26:00 -
[57]
*bump*
100% agree with the OP (reasons have already been covered pretty well, so I won't go into them again). Would be nice if CCP ever actually looked at this thread though......
|
Dristra
Amarr
Shadows of the Dead
Aftermath Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.18 11:59:00 -
[58]
Why is this even a matter to discuss, the rail boats need the turrets, everyone know this.
It's great being Amarr isn't it.
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr!
|
Eaterof Children
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 02:41:00 -
[59]
As it stands, I have heard that my (and a lot other's) suggestion of +1 turret for moa,eagle and ferox has passed to the Sisi server.
Thank you.
|
Nicola Sardonicus
|
Posted - 2008.04.20 00:50:00 -
[60]
Sign me agreed. When I first took at look at rockets vs. rails on the Caldari and started comparing relative fittings, it was clear that Caldari's rail abilities are somewhat gimped on the Merlin, Moa, and Ferox. So I decided early on to stick to missiles pretty much out of necessity. One more turret fitting on each would solve the problem without letting things get out of hand. (Actually, another turret fitting for the Raven and/or the Rokh might be justified too, but I never really looked at that because I'm so far up the missile tree at this point and still climbing.)
____________________________________
War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |