Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 21:19:00 -
[181]
Originally by: Danjira Ryuujin Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 15/10/2007 21:10:43 Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 15/10/2007 21:09:36
Originally by: Gypsio III
Quote: Where does this 30km figure come from? torpedos have a speed of 1750ms, and a flight time of 6 seconds.
It comes from maths. Base speed of 1.5 km/s and base ToF 6 seconds gives base range 9 km. Multiply 9 by 1.5¦ to account for Missile Projection, Missile Bombardment and Raven bonus. Gives 30.375 km.
You clearly missed the point. Guns also have skills that increase optimal and fall off, yet people are using perfect missile skills in comparison to guns with NO SKILLS(I can deal with ignoring ammo range bonuses/penalty), and neglecting optimal to fall off completely. Thanks for teaching me "maths" though.
Except guns only have a 25% bonus to optimal and falloff with the 2 range skills, so an autocannon with 6km optimal and 25km fall off would have like 8 km optimal and 30km falloff.
Where as the 2 missile skills more than double the missile range. In addition, falloff isnt free damage, optimal+falloff= 50% damage, missiles dont suffer from this.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 21:19:00 -
[182]
But missiles still need to accelerate, no? So they will do 0 damage at 30km with perfect skills, and 0 damage at 24km with skills at 4. And in anything but a Raven (+some faction ship) the range will be under 20km, even though perfect skills give theoretical max of just over 20km.
|
Sc0rphion
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 21:27:00 -
[183]
8 pages of bull cra PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP and SHYTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
STFU ... stop "nefing not nerfing post"
WTS Clue: Dont whine before changes, or you'll never see one
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 21:35:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Sc0rphion
WTS Clue: Dont whine before changes, or you'll never see one
Isn't that what the "whiners" in general want, when discussing proposed future changes? Never to see the change they are whining about?
|
Danjira Ryuujin
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 21:36:00 -
[185]
Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 15/10/2007 21:40:14 Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 15/10/2007 21:39:49 Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 15/10/2007 21:38:57
Originally by: Gypsio III
What point, exactly, have we missed?
Point ->
Originally by: Danjira Ryuujin
Guns also have skills that increase optimal and fall off, yet people are using perfect missile skills in comparison to guns with NO SKILLS and neglecting optimal to fall off completely.
Originally by: Gypsio III
In any case, all skills at IV gives 24.7 km range. That isn't under 20 km, either...
Originally by: Danjira Ryuujin
Thats 10.5 kilometers ignoring the fact that missiles dont hit max velocity isntantaneously, and assuming the target is stationary. Even if you're including the ravens velocity bonus at bs 5, range is under 20km."
Point -> 1750 m/s x 1.5 = 2625m/s x 6 = 15.75km -> 15.75km including battleship skill is indeed less than 20km. You're confused because you decided to include other missiles skills for no apparent reason, again. See point number 1, although to your credit your did not include perfect missile skills this time.
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
Have you ever heard of something called skills? I would suggest that you give a good read in the description of missile bombardment and missile projection skills...
Seriously? Read my post again, I mentioned that people are including pefect missile skills when comparing to base(no skills included, nor mods) gun optimal. Yes I actually mentioned skills in my post.
Originally by: Gamesguy
Except guns only have a 25% bonus to optimal and falloff with the 2 range skills, so an autocannon with 6km optimal and 25km fall off would have like 8 km optimal and 30km falloff.
Where as the 2 missile skills more than double the missile range. In addition, falloff isnt free damage, optimal+falloff= 50% damage, missiles dont suffer from this.
I never said torpedos > guns, or guns > torpedos. I'm simply disputing innacuracies that people are posting. It doesn't make sense for the community to base their arguments off innaccurate information. I was aware that Shartshoopter and trajectory analysis are only 5% per level, but that doesnt make excluding them from comparisons to torpedos under perfect skills with the best bonused bs any more legitimate. But if the point you were trying to make was that autocannons with maxed skills (according to your numbers) do some damage at ~37km while torpedos(t1) do no damage passed ~30km, I agree.
|
Sc0rphion
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 21:37:00 -
[186]
Originally by: Qui Shon
Originally by: Sc0rphion
WTS Clue: Dont whine before changes, or you'll never see one
Isn't that what the "whiners" in general want, when discussing proposed future changes? Never to see the change they are whining about?
Isnt the right place for whine about changes... !! Do you get it?? or i should draw in paper like a children
FORUM HAS MORE PLACES TO POST ABOUT WHINING THINGS
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 21:51:00 -
[187]
Well, yes it does, but what would be more appropriate then ships and modules? I wouldn't want to clutter Game Development or Feedback forums with lowlevel talk about these changes, and it can't harm anyone to have paralell discussions about it. New viewpoints may emerge in different threads.
But by all means, draw me one of those pictures, I like purdy piccies.
|
Benn Helmsman
Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 22:01:00 -
[188]
Did they increase the base velocity of torps as well? They have are 1250m/s on TQ not 1750m/s, or did i miss something?
|
Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 22:04:00 -
[189]
Whoopee, more reason for newbs to fly caldari. ----------------- Friends Forever
Kill. BoB. Dead. |
Danjira Ryuujin
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 22:05:00 -
[190]
Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 15/10/2007 22:05:11
Originally by: Benn Helmsman Did they increase the base velocity of torps as well? They have are 1250m/s on TQ not 1750m/s, or did i miss something?
I was talking about live torpedo velocity, and I was wrong, its 1250.
|
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 22:12:00 -
[191]
It's supposed to be 1500m/s on test server.
Also, speed/flight time rigs DO NOT WORK with torps on test server, according to a thread in other forum. (thanks for pointing me there by the way, even though I never got any pictures)
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 22:43:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Danjira Ryuujin
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
Have you ever heard of something called skills? I would suggest that you give a good read in the description of missile bombardment and missile projection skills...
Seriously? Read my post again, I mentioned that people are including pefect missile skills when comparing to base(no skills included, nor mods) gun optimal. Yes I actually mentioned skills in my post.
Then next time make your statements clear. You said "where this 30km figure comes from". If what you intended to say is, the maximum range WITHOUT considering ship bonus or skills is 10, that SAY SO.
To this my answer would be: So what? The maximum Large Neutron blaster range (optimum + falloff) without considering skills and ship bonuses is 10 km, and at this distances you are only inflicting 50% of your total damage, assuming your target is stopped...
With this chance torpedos are probably the best close range weapon in range AND damage.
They don't have the accelerate (the acceleration is neglectable) they only have to reach the target. Which at close range will take 6 seconds at worst and after the first salvo hits the flight time does not matter anymore. Additionally blaster ships have to MOVE to the second target after the first one is destroyed. Call me crazy, but I think torps are a bit faster and more agile than battleships...
Quote:
Quote:
Except guns only have a 25% bonus to optimal and falloff with the 2 range skills, so an autocannon with 6km optimal and 25km fall off would have like 8 km optimal and 30km falloff.
Where as the 2 missile skills more than double the missile range. In addition, falloff isnt free damage, optimal+falloff= 50% damage, missiles dont suffer from this.
I never said torpedos > guns, or guns > torpedos. I'm simply disputing innacuracies that people are posting. It doesn't make sense for the community to base their arguments off innaccurate information. I was aware that Shartshoopter and trajectory analysis are only 5% per level, but that doesnt make excluding them from comparisons to torpedos under perfect skills with the best bonused bs any more legitimate. But if the point you were trying to make was that autocannons with maxed skills (according to your numbers) do some damage at ~37km while torpedos(t1) do no damage passed ~30km, I agree.
Yes, Autocannons do 50% damage at 37 km, and about 60% damage at 30 km. Torpedos on the other hand do 100% damage at 30 and 0 at 37. Blaster do 50% damage at 10 km and 4% at 18km. See? Different weapons, different ways to use...
=====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Danjira Ryuujin
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 23:50:00 -
[193]
Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 15/10/2007 23:50:43
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
Then next time make your statements clear. You said "Where this 30km figure comes from?". If what you intended to say is that the maximum range WITHOUT considering ship bonus or skills is 10, then SAY SO.
It was perfectly clear if you read more than the first sentence. Face it, you read the first sentence and then quoted everything with some non applicable statement. How much clearer does it get than "People seriously need to stop including ship and skill bonuses when comparing torpedo range to base blaster/autocannon optimal".
Ok, I'll underline : "People seriously need to stop including ship and skill bonuses when comparing torpedo range to base blaster/autocannon optimal"
|
IamBen
Caldari Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency
|
Posted - 2007.10.15 23:56:00 -
[194]
this is so freaking awesome. I cant believe my raven will actually be useful in pvp.
|
ChiShen
Fox-Force-Five Blood Raiders Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 01:18:00 -
[195]
Originally by: illusionary beauty BOOST POS TORP BATTERIES!
Yeah boost em!
|
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 01:26:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Danjira Ryuujin Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 15/10/2007 23:50:43
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
Then next time make your statements clear. You said "Where this 30km figure comes from?". If what you intended to say is that the maximum range WITHOUT considering ship bonus or skills is 10, then SAY SO.
It was perfectly clear if you read more than the first sentence. Face it, you read the first sentence and then quoted everything with some non applicable statement. How much clearer does it get than "People seriously need to stop including ship and skill bonuses when comparing torpedo range to base blaster/autocannon optimal".
Ok, I'll underline : "People seriously need to stop including ship and skill bonuses when comparing torpedo range to base blaster/autocannon optimal"
Thats the most ******** thing ever, why should people stop?
And for your information, 800mm AC II has 6km optimal and 20km falloff with max skills. So it deals 50% damage at 26km, where as torps deal 100% damage at 30km.
Obviously the ac user would load barrage, which would increase that to 36km optimal+falloff. However, at 36km the maelstrom or tempest is doing way less damage than a javelin raven with the new launcher.
|
Benn Helmsman
Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 01:36:00 -
[197]
Tbh, the torp change looks more like a Bellicose and Typhoon buff. Typhoon will now deal a lot more damage and it can spare a med slot without much trouble, while the Bellicose now will become a part in most ganksquads, just because there will be a lot of ravens around (lots of people fly caldari ships, still).
I would like it more if they would change the -25% rof to +25% damage, even if it would reduce the buff, torps should be one punch killer and not like a hailstorm of missiles.
And PLZ CCP: make us be able to turn the torp explosion effects off, with that buffed rof and more torp boats around, my computer will freeze.
|
Nathrezim
Gallente Darwin With Attitude oooh Shiny
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 12:08:00 -
[198]
Well, here comes the era of ravens with mwds, webs, scrams, painters, cap injectors and armor tank. This definetaley makes things more interesting for the raven pvp-wise. might bother training for missile skills and raven :P
rawr !!!!
Brings in mind the dual-mwd'ing ravens back in the days
|
LVirus
Enterprise Estonia Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 12:16:00 -
[199]
Originally by: Nathrezim Well, here comes the era of ravens with mwds, webs, scrams, painters, cap injectors and armor tank. This definetaley makes things more interesting for the raven pvp-wise. might bother training for missile skills and raven :P
rawr !!!!
Brings in mind the dual-mwd'ing ravens back in the days
please give me that setup. It just cant be done. Raven has no powergrid to fit 6 siege II, mwd, ijector and large repper. It just cant be done.
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 12:42:00 -
[200]
Powergrid rigs? ------------------------------------------
What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs. |
|
Benn Helmsman
Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 12:45:00 -
[201]
Originally by: Shadowsword Powergrid rigs?
Use EFT and calculate a fitting that works with your stuff, then post it here. Baseless assumptions are just embarrissing.
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 17:42:00 -
[202]
The idea that all ships must armor tank in order to have warp disruptors and webfiers is just plainly stupid. I would rather stick to a mass reduced, i-stabbed, damage boosted, MWD shield tanked torp-raven, and let the scrambling to a lachesis or an interceptor.
=====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Subruz
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 18:04:00 -
[203]
I don't see why you have to fit an MWD on a raven? Most fights seem to be at below 20-30km range anyway.
- Also, would one painter really suffice?
|
Borasao
|
Posted - 2007.10.16 19:58:00 -
[204]
Originally by: Brodde Dim I wonder if this is the first step towards a Khanid MKII BS...
We can only hope
|
NCP S2
|
Posted - 2007.10.17 02:40:00 -
[205]
side note, i'm glad i skipped pages 2-7 :D
I think the change is interesting, it'll definately provide a slight shift in some tactics at the pvp level, wont destroy raven pve too much i don't think... but yeah...
guess i'll make a nano torp raven with no tank and dual webs, tripple painters, and a warp scram... because in order to pvp every ship has to have webs and a scram on it... *adding in a disclaimer that that was sarcasm because at least half of you posting are too dense to catch that*
this makes a raven pretty decent for 0.0 gate camps, and pretty good at POS warfare, and if you were tackled with BS's hitting you before, you were probabally in just as much trouble as you would be if you were tackled with BS's hitting you with this new change... only huge difference i can see coming about all of this is the fact that you'll see a few more ravens out in pvp, which would be a huge change from the 2 that were out there before...
maybe this makes the raven a viable bait ship even more now, i can just imagine the "solo ratting raven" in 0.0 seemingly oblivious to the guys coming into get the easy gank, and then woah, the raven pilot comes out with a decent punch, and a managable shield to last long enough for his buddies in the next system to get there and give a hand. it's all situational, of course, and doesn't mean the raven becomes an omgwtf king of pvp either. a blasterthon in range would still tear one up i'd imagine, but he'll at least take some dmg also.
i mean, does this mean any ship with a sniper set up is too overpowered against a torp raven now? with all the talk of "this is too overpowered" and "omg i can't deal with change" it really shows those who are unable to adapt to anything. it happens with every single mention of a change, and then a few weeks later, all of that talk is gone because everyone has adapted to the change.
learn to deal with it, or better yet, let me know where you're at so i can show up with a crappy fitted torp raven, and let me fire on you as you sit still and activate your civilian gattling guns on a BS of your own. then please, flame on and cry about pvp, and how it's not fair.
isn't that what eve's all about anyways?
-S2
|
Grendelsbane
|
Posted - 2007.10.17 03:35:00 -
[206]
Edited by: Grendelsbane on 17/10/2007 03:35:50
Originally by: NoNah This once again calls for a anti-missile ew.
Or defender missiles that can intercept any incoming to your gang, not just your own ship. Which is exactly how anyone who isnt a developmentally disabled lemur would design them.
|
Neuromandis
|
Posted - 2007.10.17 12:07:00 -
[207]
I think the change was warranted and positive.
That said, my blasterokh is now obsolete. Unless I did a terrible mistake in the damage sheet, a raven with torps will now outdamage it at all ranges when rokh is using null, and the rokh only outdamages it when "in your face" with void. In which case, I might as well fly a mega/hype... Oh well... --- If someone else from my Corporation or Alliance agrees with me, he will say so. Assume nobody does :) --- WTB: Scorpion wing (left)
|
Benn Helmsman
Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.17 21:51:00 -
[208]
Update to torp stats on SiSi atm:
Bane torp: Explosion radius 530m flight time 8.25 secs velocity 1100m/s expl. veloc. 100m/s damage 540
Javelin torp: Explosion radius 350m (yes thats right, less than 400) flight time 5 secs velocity 2700m/s expl. veloc. 500m/s damage 380
T1 torps : Explosion radius 450m flight time 6 secs velocity 1500m/s expl. veloc. 250m/s damage 450 (CN: 517)
T2 siege launcher base rof: 14.4 secs T2 cruise launcher base rof: 17.6 secs [lol]
|
iiOs
|
Posted - 2007.10.17 22:09:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Benn Helmsman Update to torp stats on SiSi atm:
Bane torp: Explosion radius 530m flight time 8.25 secs velocity 1100m/s expl. veloc. 100m/s damage 540
Javelin torp: Explosion radius 350m (yes thats right, less than 400) flight time 5 secs velocity 2700m/s expl. veloc. 500m/s damage 380
T1 torps : Explosion radius 450m flight time 6 secs velocity 1500m/s expl. veloc. 250m/s damage 450 (CN: 517)
T2 siege launcher base rof: 14.4 secs T2 cruise launcher base rof: 17.6 secs [lol]
so its 25% dps buff and +50 explosion radius and minus lots of range
and banes are still just as crappy
Click me and get isk
|
Benn Helmsman
Caldari Dark Prophecy Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.17 22:17:00 -
[210]
actually its 33,3%, i added the numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |