|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 01:18:00 -
[1]
I'm gonna keep quoting this till the ******s in this thread stop ignoring it.
Originally by: Rastigan Medium short range guns , with a 50% optimal and falloff penalty applied..
Heavy Neutron Blaster 2: 1.15op + 3.15fo = 1.15km/4.3km/7.45km ranges for 100%/50%/0% chance to hit.
425mm Autocannon 2: .75op + 5fo = .75km/5.75km/10.75km ranges for 100%/50%/0 chance to hit.
Heavy Pulse Laser 2: 3.75op + 2.5fo = 3.75km/6.25km/8.75km ranges for 100%/50%/0% chance to hit..
Autocannons dont seem be the the worst of the lot here, and they still can fire without cap.
|
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 03:23:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Reto
Originally by: Aramendel
Ceptor wolfpacks attack soliatry targets, not equal gangs (due to obvious reasons). They will simply swarm and kill you, 1-2 TDs will not be of much use vs them.
With his guns. 5 war2 and his missile launcher will kill it easily. EW frigs cannot speedtank drone efficiently and have no real conventional tank.
I did? Quote please.
I would be highly surprised by this considering I actually did multiple times what you "advice" me to do. Hell, I even got myself a bunch of cosmos maximum efficiency TDs like 6 month ago to see if I could make them viaable if I maximize their efficiency. I couldn't.
rubish! ppl who have balls fight equal groups (for obvious reasons) even in friggangs. dont speculate about pvp situations u never took part in.
a crucifier does not die to a vagabond, its 5 warrior II nor a single launcher if u have half a brain. do not speculate on pvp if u dont know how to setup ur ships correctly or fight as a part of a team.
u bought cosmos tds and didnt had success using em. u know that the price does not determines performance and u also know that a module alone does not decide a battle. what were ur exact expectations form ur investment?
Pray tell, what magical crucifier setup survives 5 warrior IIs?
|
Gamesguy
Amarr D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 04:15:00 -
[3]
Quote: The implementatin of a falloff reducing module would be extremely detrimental to ships that rely entirely on falloff (read: every single minmatar ship). It would have to be balanced very carefully (by introducing the ability to counter being crippled) even if the penalties are affected by stacking.
About as detrimental as an optimal range reducing module against amarr ships that rely entirely on optimal.
Whats the matter? Dont like it when the shoe is on the other foot? And the whole nonsense about TCs is just that, nonsense, as if amarr had the midslots to fit TCs to "counter" TDs before.
And before you mention TEs, amarr ships have to give up tank to do it, there is no such thing as an "utility lowslot", while there are utility midslots on many 5 midslot ships.
|
|
|
|