| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Caldreis
   |
Posted - 2007.12.03 15:05:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Ellaine TashMurkon
Because Gallente is about doing more damage and Caldari is about running missions semi-afk with FoF cruises :)
FoF doesn't let you target what to shoot so you may even shoot your own loots.(Loss of wreckage and loots) This is a loss-loss-loss situation.
Originally by: Amarr Holymight
I just PvPed against a golem on SISI with my abaddon and it's 86% resists ... it pwned me in about 1 minute with torpedoes.
What else you expected? Winning in a t1 ship vs a t2? (Other than that torpedoes doesn't benefit from a very small increase in range. Something like 6km increase on maxed out t2 torp javelin.)
Originally by: Amarr Holymight
I don't agree with anything here. Torps now do large damage close range so be happy that caldari actually got a PvP boost. In most PvP all you need to do is be able to hit under 20km. If you want to use ur golem for missions use cruise missiles you can now loot and salvage quicker anyway.
Problem with cruise is that it HAS no benefit from explosive velocity.(Only real bonus is double damage) Do you expect cruise missile to hit 1050m/s moving battleship in mission? This is why golem's bonus is kinda useless for both torp and cruise. (Torp can already hit without golem's bonus without nerf and even after nerf still can hit just lack range.) Salvage faster on a 125 m/s baseline (360m/s maxed out with AB II) is still slow although on mission like world collide(any level 4 really) with lot of ship 3 hard point will take a while where I already can do better with destroyer. Raven does missile better even with torp nerf since it has usable bonus plus destroyer move faster and does salvage better. You expect me to use golem for level 4 right? Nope I will only use them on level 3 since they orbit much closer(no need to move) and actually don't need a tank with high resist. (except for passive em)
|
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 15:27:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Reggie Stoneloader
Cruise for PvE, torp for PvP?
Best post in this whole whine-thread....
Originally by: Caldreis
Reggie while true Golem isn't broken however I am not saying golem IS broken just having useless bonus that is more of pvp bonus than actual pve that it was design for.
Except it WASN'T designed for PvE! It was designed for long-distance operations, with no mention of type, but made so it could be used for both PvE and PvP.
The ship is absolutely fine!
L4 mission running income needs a nerf as it is (the current ISK going into the game from it is way too high), and the torp nerf is a nice beginning.
Torp PvP needed a boost and got that too.
If you want to use torps in PvE, you'll need to make some sacrifices for that uber-damage, like fitting speed rigs and speed mods. The idea of a cookie-cutter PvE fit (as you seem to want) is against everything EVE stands for.
The golem in itself is a very nice ship for PvE if fitted with cruise missiles. It has slighty lower theoretical damage than a CNR, but a few things to offset that:
1. Higher alpha damage. This'll reduce time-to-kill on some types of NPC's. 3 volleys instead of 2 is a hell of a boost!
2. Painter bonus. Very nice for cruisers and below (dunno whether there's any effect on BC's).
3. Two extra highslots compared to CNR. This means you can tractor wrecks to a single position, and loot some of them. This is a big timesaver for the looting/salvage stage, and should add greatly to mission income/time.
4. Half the ammo usage. Faction ammo suddenly looks a LOT more attractive for missions!
Personally I'll probably get one since I see these four points together make for even better mission completion time (incl. the looting/salvaging stage) than my current cruise CNR.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Caldreis
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 19:09:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Kerfira
Except it WASN'T designed for PvE! It was designed for long-distance operations, with no mention of type, but made so it could be used for both PvE and PvP.
Ok so going by your comment titan should be used on a daily base PVP? I am sure there are 300 thousand titans floating somewhere on eve online for fleet to fleet combat.  (Joke here not based on any actual number at all.)
Originally by: Kerfira
The ship is absolutely fine!
L4 mission running income needs a nerf as it is (the current ISK going into the game from it is way too high), and the torp nerf is a nice beginning.
Torp PvP needed a boost and got that too.
I never said torp couldn't be used for pvp at all. So exact what make L4 mission running income too high? Facts please.
Originally by: kerfira
If you want to use torps in PvE, you'll need to make some sacrifices for that uber-damage, like fitting speed rigs and speed mods. The idea of a cookie-cutter PvE fit (as you seem to want) is against everything EVE stands for.
The golem in itself is a very nice ship for PvE if fitted with cruise missiles. It has slighty lower theoretical damage than a CNR, but a few things to offset that:
1. Higher alpha damage. This'll reduce time-to-kill on some types of NPC's. 3 volleys instead of 2 is a hell of a boost!
2. Painter bonus. Very nice for cruisers and below (dunno whether there's any effect on BC's).
3. Two extra highslots compared to CNR. This means you can tractor wrecks to a single position, and loot some of them. This is a big timesaver for the looting/salvage stage, and should add greatly to mission income/time.
4. Half the ammo usage. Faction ammo suddenly looks a LOT more attractive for missions!
1) I never said alpha damage was going to suffer on golem because alpha damage from torp is useless especially if they can't hit in the first place with BOTH MWD(if you could use in deadspace) and those modules for tanking.(Not sure if golem is strong with passive or active beside this isn't covered in this thread.)
2) Cruise with painter bonus? Let do the number/math.
T1 Cruise exp radius:
300mX.75percent(Skill maxed)=225m
T1 Torpedoes exp radius:
450mX1.00(skill doesn't apply)=450m
T2 painter bonus T1 cruise:
225m/(1.30X1.25(skill maxed)x1.375(golem bonus))= 100.7m
T2 painter bonus T1 torpedoes:
450m/(1.30X1.25(skill maxed)x1.375(golem bonus))= 201.4m
Ok hopeful that was simple enough to not blow up your calculator. 
Now what does the number mean? With cruise t1 you will be hitting those destroyer for at least nearly full damage but do we actually need that small radius? The answer is no because you can already kill those smaller ship with your drones. (75m3 can easily fit your need) T1 torp with it's 201.4m will be hitting those recon and indy for nearly full damage but do we ever see recon and indy in mission of course not.(except for ship size bigger than 200m) Another factor is that painter doesn't reach further than 90km (30km optimize range) and cruise mission fly further. The painter is great for torp since it doesn't benefit from reduce skill however since anything below battleship is already killed by drones and torp can't hit that far which meant the painter has no function exception for increase dps on cruise on target that painter can't paint at all.
3) Yes placing all loots and wreckage in one place can save time but some mission are not friendly about that especially deadspace mission when you have more than one group 50km plus away from each other.
4) Refer to my comment about useless bonus on #2 above.
About cookie-cutter, I asked for either change of golem's bonus to something more benefit like bonus to 5% damage per level to missile.(All other faction have it why not golem?) Both explosive velocity and painter can be used for both pvp and pve true but damage bonus can apply to both pve and pvp. However problem is we can either avoid using bonus or gimp our fit to hit anything without a tank. Which you prefer?
|
Caldreis
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 19:22:00 -
[34]
Add comments (Ran out of room):
Ok you say golem will offer increase ISK/hour rate correct? Then why did earlier you said too much money was coming in from level 4 mission and not disagree with increase profit that is offer by golem(either from low sec with risk of blowing up and mission running with no risk)?
Well while true they said nothing about what we should use marauder for. The cost and risks of losses in pvp make it way too unattractive unless you are in fleet vs fleet combat and don't trust the other fleet not to call primary on you.
|
Amarr Holymight
deii feram
Aegis Militia
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 22:43:00 -
[35]
I'll hand it to you, you put up a good case. Try it out on sisi though, see how it does before casting judgement.
|
Caldreis
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 23:32:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Amarr Holymight
I'll hand it to you, you put up a good case. Try it out on sisi though, see how it does before casting judgement.
Well I would on Armageddon day however it would take me at least 180 day to train even for golem and patch is only 3 day away and I will let those with the skill test for themselves before passing any final judgment.
|
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 09:52:00 -
[37]
(cut a bit here and there in quoting to make it shorter)
Originally by: Caldreis
Originally by: Kerfira
Except it WASN'T designed for PvE! It was designed for long-distance operations, with no mention of type, but made so it could be used for both PvE and PvP.
Ok so going by your comment titan should be used on a daily base PVP?
I haven't seen any titans used for PvE. You argument on this is rambling....
You claimed the Golem was 'designed for PvE'. It wasn't! I just corrected your misquote.
The design was for long-distance operations, not PvE. It'll make an excellent PvP ship with torps (if anyone dares fly it), and an excellent PvE ship with cruises.
Originally by: Caldreis
So exact what make L4 mission running income too high? Facts please.
Oh, I dunno. Maybe the 50m/hour I can make in a CRUISE CN Raven? Granted its faction fitted and my skills quite good, but nothing too unusual. That is simply too much income to make from a completely safe activity compared to 0.0 (I'm Gist perma-tanked, so it IS completely safe apart from suicide gankers).
If high-sec no-risk activities are better than low-sec and 0.0 activities for ISK-making, they're too good. Risk vs. reward you know...
Originally by: Caldreis
...The answer is no because you can already kill those smaller ship with your drones.
Only in the last group (for me at least). Releasing drones before everything remaining is aggro is a good way to cause mass-aggro and loose drones (and/or your ship).
Originally by: Caldreis
...Another factor is that painter doesn't reach further than 90km (30km optimize range) and cruise mission fly further.
Most battlecruisers and smaller in missions either are within 30 km or just a little bit beyond to begin with, or get there pretty soon. Makes the painter bonus quite valuable.
Originally by: Caldreis
Yes placing all loots and wreckage in one place can save time but some mission are not friendly about that especially deadspace mission when you have more than one group 50km plus away from each other.
You have 40km range on the tractor on the Golem. You only need to move a little bit while fighting to reach almost all cans.
Originally by: Caldreis
Ok you say golem will offer increase ISK/hour rate correct? Then why did earlier you said too much money was coming in from level 4 mission and not disagree with increase profit that is offer by golem(either from low sec with risk of blowing up and mission running with no risk)?
I said it'll offer ME an increase, but I go from a cruise CNR to a Golem! I know perfectly well that a torp CNR is somewhat faster than mine in making money, but I just don't like to fly it.
The high-income cookie-cutter torp Raven (in any of its shapes) gets a nerf, which is about high time. It also brings torps into line with the other short range weapons.
Game balance wise, this ship is fine.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Caldreis
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 19:44:00 -
[38]
(Not going to quote here due to space issues.)
I never said titan was being used for pve and I was joking about cost of titan vs maruader. I never said Golem was PURE pve designed just too much emphasis on pvp than pve which make it a problem concern torp range and cruise not benefiting from golem's bonus.(Except for torp hitting close range pvp targets.)
I understand that you can get 50 million per hour however keep in mind that golem with cruise missile may or not get more than that. Are you saying 0.0 should be more profitable than empire correct? It already is especially with low sec and 0.0 moon harvesters.(You can't make t2 ships/modules/etc... without them anyway.) Grant some t2 are not worth much now but marauder/black ops etc... may raise in price in the future.
All 4 marauder have drone bay of 75m3 and most mission runner learn that lesson usually early in their mission running career anyway where you have less chance of aggroing whole room. (Hell I even aggro some entire room on level 3 in a drake and I didn't lose it.)
Little 20km on 125m/s baseline will take at full acceleration about 2 min 40sec and 156.3m/s with nav level 5 will take two min 8 sec. That is little exactly how? Beside it take time for a container to move over 40km anyway after you cross those 20km.
Ok excellent we can then process to brash you for being a hypocrite about too much income per hour from level 4.  The problem is cruise raven didn't get nerf in dps so, unless you consider ALL cookie-cutter raven to use torp, the ISK/hour income hasn't been nerf.
|
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 20:20:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Caldreis
Little 20km on 125m/s baseline will take at full acceleration about 2 min 40sec and 156.3m/s with nav level 5 will take two min 8 sec. That is little exactly how? Beside it take time for a container to move over 40km anyway after you cross those 20km.
The speed of tractored stuff has also been increased by 100%, not just the range. Besides, it takes my CNR SIGNIFICANTLY more than 2m40s to finish one stage of a mission. Plenty of time to move around while you're shooting stuff to tractor wrecks, especially with 3 tractors.
Originally by: Caldreis
Ok excellent we can then process to brash you for being a hypocrite about too much income per hour from level 4. The problem is cruise raven didn't get nerf in dps so, unless you consider ALL cookie-cutter raven to use torp, the ISK/hour income hasn't been nerf.
So I should not play the game as it is just because I think that it gives too much income? That'd be pretty stupid since everybody else is and I'd just be putting myself behind.
Not to mention this... The original argument was whether the Golem needed changes, and since you accept my argument that it's actually better than the CNR, we can conclude it doesn't.
Your issue is with torps, not the Golem.
My argument was that the ship was ok as is and doesn't need any changes. QED 
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Amarr Holymight
deii feram
Aegis Militia
|
Posted - 2007.12.05 01:44:00 -
[40]
NEXT!
|
Caldreis
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 02:28:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Kerfira
The speed of tractored stuff has also been increased by 100%, not just the range. Besides, it takes my CNR SIGNIFICANTLY more than 2m40s to finish one stage of a mission. Plenty of time to move around while you're shooting stuff to tractor wrecks, especially with 3 tractors.
So I should not play the game as it is just because I think that it gives too much income? That'd be pretty stupid since everybody else is and I'd just be putting myself behind.
Not to mention this... The original argument was whether the Golem needed changes, and since you accept my argument that it's actually better than the CNR, we can conclude it doesn't.
Your issue is with torps, not the Golem.
My argument was that the ship was ok as is and doesn't need any changes. QED
While true tractor speed has been increase which meant the amount of time is exactly scaling to the old system.(Despiting the double range, time is still same without maruader bonus.)
I never said you had to earn less. Anyway my point is that you said income from mission was TOO much and you plan to get more income from mission which is conflict between both argument.
I never said cruise golem dps was actually more than CNR dps since I haven't done the math.(Even a nighthawk will outdps a golem minus the turrets/drones. You can look up the math in several other forum.)
Not just torpedoes because they are fine from purely pvp point of view whereas from a mission runner point of view in combine (key concept) between golem and torpedoes is totally useless.
|
joshmorris
Ravenous Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 09:33:00 -
[42]
Torps are better for pvp now, CCP didnt say they are mission ships ....
Uber idea solves all !! |
Caldreis
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 18:31:00 -
[43]
Originally by: joshmorris
Torps are better for pvp now, CCP didnt say they are mission ships ....
I never said they had to be change to be entire pure pve however with the bonus to velocity and explosive velocity (except for double damage) make it lent too much toward torp usage. However the problem is all other 3 marauder has either tracking or damage bonus for turret (all 3 types) which is usable for both pve and pvp. See the problem now? Velocity only help marginally with torp range (T1 torp range 16km; T2 torp long range 31km;those are without golem bonus) whereas if you switch to HAM T1 You can breeze with 58km. Cruise golem doesn't suffer the same problem however torp used with golem will.
My point? Either change the bonus to something more benefit to BOTH cruise and torp since either need velocity or explosive velocity. Only time either of those bonus are actually useful is when torp is trying to hit a 2km/s ship and since cruise has high explosive velocity they don't need it. Velocity is barely a boost to range (4km to 5km depend on skill) and since cruise already has the range to pretty much afk kill everything where does this bonus is strong? Answer is blatantly none to both. (Except for the pvp speeding tank.)
|
Eka Maladay
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 22:12:00 -
[44]
The whole arguement here only work when cruise missile are worst then railgun/artillary/beam lasr.
And it doesn't. Cruise is still better then any other weapon available on other races. Plus cruise on average do missions faster then pre-trinty torps, even.
So nothing you said really means anything.
|
Crimson Tides
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 08:07:00 -
[45]
No one is forcing you to do missions on your own. Do them in a small group and your torp range problem disappears, because you can fit your raven to go 500-1000m/s and catch up to those annoying BS's who like to sit far away and blow the F'nuc out of them.
If you want to do a mission solo you're going to have to use Cruise, or T2 torps
|
homunculi
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 11:16:00 -
[46]
The problem with golem is that it doesnt have a 5% rof or kin dmg bonus per skill lvl. If it had it would be great for lvl 4s, as it is now theres no point in using it there over cnr.
|
ZerKar
Caldari
Zen'Tar
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 15:16:00 -
[47]
The Raven itself seems out of date and its bonus are not that useful, so it is no suprise that is counterpart is not very similar. For the Torps, somewhere along the way it was decided that these weapons needed to be brought in-line with other weapons. This meant that the most damage dealing weapon of its class needed to be short range. This is fine for every race but the Caldari because their ships were made as slow as possible so that they could never pick their range in combat. Why? Possibly because a Missile's ability to hit at relatively any range inside of targetting (without boosting) gave them an edge over their gun wielding competition. However, with this change that status has been altered.
Anyway, I think this debate is a moot point because the patch has hit and rather it is intentional or accidental it seems rather obvious that the Caldari are not well liked by the Devs. I suspect they will get worse before they get better. I would suggest training up a different race's BS and just going for their Maurader instead, you are not going to find goodness with Caldari at anything but sucking it up.
On the upswing though, if they Nerf the Caldari enough the Amarr cannot whine, because they will not be the "Worst" race anymore  . So one problem solved.
+++++++++++++++
I saw the Sign...!
O.o |
Caldreis
|
Posted - 2007.12.08 04:12:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Eka Maladay
Edited by: Eka Maladay on 06/12/2007 22:19:40
Edited by: Eka Maladay on 06/12/2007 22:18:56
The whole arguement here only work when cruise missile are worst then railgun/artillary/beam lasr.
And it doesn't. Cruise is still better then any other weapon available on other races. Plus cruise on average do missions faster then pre-trinty torps, even.
So nothing you said really means anything, it is not 'uneffective' in pve. It still is the most effective ship there is. You just want it even better and your arguement is base on "Not every bonus on this ship benifies pve".
Obviously you didn't read any of my post throughly. Nowhere in any of my previous post did I compare Cruise to other artillery/railgun/beam laser however I did compare Torp to Autocannon/pulse laser/blaster and concluded that despiting the good dps torp have. Torp is out range BY all short range; EVEN T1 Heavy Assault Missile cruise size missile comparing to T2 Javelin torp, (of course they have other problem but covered only range in this thread) option. Grant Cruise is awesome on range attribute combine with dps however that doesn't make torp any better off. I never said that all bonus MUST be pve however from the trend of 3 non-caldari marauder they couldn't have choice a worst bonus. Golem's bonus is useless for both torp and cruise in pve except for torp pvp. (Look up other post for numbers direct from trinity.)
I asked for a simple change of golem to be more inline. There are few other thing to be brought inline as well but this thread isn't about them.
I never said for once that golem isn't effective because I can't find a word I said golem itself is totally useless in all situation. Only bonus was ineffective when you compare direct to other 3 marauders. All non-caldari marauder have pure damage/tracking bonus which is useful in all situation.
|
Caldreis
|
Posted - 2007.12.08 04:31:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Crimson Tides
No one is forcing you to do missions on your own. Do them in a small group and your torp range problem disappears, because you can fit your raven to go 500-1000m/s and catch up to those annoying BS's who like to sit far away and blow the F'nuc out of them.
If you want to do a mission solo you're going to have to use Cruise, or T2 torps
T2 torp are outrange by T1 HAM (Cruise size missile and YES that is T1 beside all other progress from medium to large doesn't have this glaring problem) which nullify your point about using T2 torp. How exactly do you set up golem to go 500m/s? I did number crunching for a simple set up speed max (Using nano,AB II, maxed skill) come up with about 365m/s which is vastly short of the need speed 460m/s I seen battleship fly at. (Yes I do level 4 thank you very much.) I am sure you can get more speed with implants and what not but that is just more expensive than retraining for another marauder. (I am already consider doing so.)
If you meant by small group having a tackler; I would agree, but how many of us are in a mission running corp? True I don't know the exact number but certainly can't be that many mission running corp out there. Cruise can't utilize the golem's bonus to explosive velocity and velocity fullly like torp can hence the reason behind this whole thread.
While you have a good point Zerkar generally except for ROF since it give increase dps. (Vastly better than 5 percent damage bonus to damage type.)
Originally by: Zerkar
This is fine for every race but the Caldari because their ships were made as slow as possible so that they could never pick their range in combat. Why? Possibly because a Missile's ability to hit at relatively any range inside of targetting (without boosting) gave them an edge over their gun wielding competition. However, with this change that status has been altered.
Going with what you say here. If torp has been nerf should caldari ship's speed be unnerf as well since you can't choice range with torp as easily and all faster caldari ship can't wield torp anyway? (HINT:If caldari ship got gallente "speed" then they would just gotten way better at pvp all over the board.) As a result, I call your logic flaw in only those sentences I quote.
|
Danjira Ryuujin
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.12.08 05:51:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 08/12/2007 05:52:40
Edited by: Danjira Ryuujin on 08/12/2007 05:51:31
Originally by: Buyerr
Originally by: Danjira Ryuujin
Originally by: Caldreis
Take this data and interpret what you will. I am almost sure golem is much better with bonus for pvp than pve. Therefore I suggest a urgent need of change to golem's bonus and improve torp range to be more inline.
Any range addition to torpedoes would make it even better at pvp, and I don't think thats going to happen. Have any suggestions for a replacement for the explosion velocity bonus? I can't think of any that wouldn't make it really overpowered.
yer not much of a thinking are you ;)
expl redius maybe :P
would let you hit cruisers much harder thereby finishing missions faster... although main problem is the dps wich is lower then the cnr... sigh what a t2 bs, cant believe i have been waiting for this for years :S it utterly sucks
Dude what do you think the painter bonus does? You want to replace the explosion velocity bonus with a bonus to make explosion radius even smaller? Dont get me wrong precision cruise sound like a hoot with 100ish meter explosion radius(+ painter bonus!) and 1500 m/s explosion velocity with skills but its not going to be great for people flying t1 frigs. See what I mean now about it being difficult to figure out a bonus that wouldn't throw it out of whack?
Amarr - Annoying the Eve Community since 2005 |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |