| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
   |
Posted - 2008.02.06 10:56:00 -
[1]
that you're trying to boost the effectiveness of EM-damage and make it useful again is commendable... but this fix is purely a PvP-fix.
will you be making lasers work in PvE as well?
As it is now, once the NPC-ship's shields are gone, you might as well be shooting with bananas.
I dug up an old list of NPC Weaknessess:
Amarr Navy - EM (shield) - Explosive (Armor)
Angel - EM (Shields) - Explosive (Armor),
Blood - Thermal
Caldari Navy - Explosive,
Gurista - EM (Shields) - Explosive (Armor),
Khanid - EM (Shields) - Explosive (Armor)
Mercenary - Explosives
Mordus - EM (Shield) - Explosive (Armor)
Rogue Pirate - EM (Shield) - Explosive (Armor)
Sansha - Thermal
Serpentis - Thermal
Zazzmatazz - EM (Shield) - Explosive (Armor)
(I'm not sure why the gallente and minmatar fleets aren't on that list)
only 3 out of 12 are marginally weak against lasers past shields, and even then, the usefulness of the laser is very diminished (large crystals go from 28em/20thermal to 20em/0thermal damage)
... the concept of making EM be the 'amarr damage type' is somewhat ludicrous, since two of the four races can choose freely what damage to do, and the remaining one does Kinetic/Thermal (~60%/40%) both of which work excellent against shields and armor.
Amarr clearly lost the damage-type lottery.
I still maintain that lasers doing primarily thermal damage would make more sense, since they BURN through things... BURN = HEAT = THERMAL.
|
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 15:16:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Shadowsword
You have a valid point about the usefulness, or lack of it, in pve, but you undermined your own argumentation with a wrong assumption: npcs have the same resists on their shields and armor.
Oh. I stand corrected.
you mean an NPC that has a weakness against explosive has that weakness on both shields and armor? odd... must be the 'hitting a wall after downing their shields'-issue I had must've been cause their armor has more HP or something. *shrugs*
eeeeither way, yeah.
IF that list is correct, then none of the NPCs have a weakness against EM beyond shields... 3 have a weakness against thermal, and 9 have a weakness against explosive.
and if that list is wrong, then we can't trust anything that list is saying, so my whole argument falls flat on it's arse.
|
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 09:16:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
You see amarr has been sucking for so long that when people see an amarr ship win an engagement against a gallente or minmatar ship the conclusion is that the other ship needs a buff.
ROFL. so dang true.
|
Karma
Vortex Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 21:13:00 -
[4]
Originally by: HayesDuSid
... [ snip ] ...
some thoughts... considering that CCP seems bent on fixing the EM damage-type... the 25% damage increase across the board might be over-doing it.
Here's a thought on that:
with lasers taking up less CAP, amarr pilots need no more fill up their low- and mid-slots with cap rechargers and capacitor power relays. and add in useful things like heat sinks and whatnot.
that's a damage increase right there... especially to the smaller ships with very few low-slots.
I am slightly concerned that it is just flipping one place-holder bonus for another though... if all of the amarr ships get one bonus that is the same for virtually EVERY ship in the amarr fleet... then that leaves each ship with only one bonus to specialize themselves with.
|
| |
|