Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Blutreiter
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 10:10:00 -
[121]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Nian Banks
WETHER TD's EFFECT THE MINMATAR THE MOST OR NOT IS 100% IRRELEVANT!
If TD's effect falloff then so should TC's, TE's & TL's. That is all.
This.
I call bull****. Falloff is still unaffected by 99% of the ammotypes.
Also if you want falloff boni on simple Tracking Computers, I want a damn module to reduce my signature!
Because Target Painters increase my sig! Whine! Nerf! Rage!
Cogito ergo boom - I think i'll blow sh*t up
Originally by: CCP Explorer I know we have said this before, but this time we really mean itÖ
|
Nian Banks
Minmatar Berserkers of Aesir
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 10:29:00 -
[122]
Originally by: Blutreiter
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Nian Banks
WETHER TD's EFFECT THE MINMATAR THE MOST OR NOT IS 100% IRRELEVANT!
If TD's effect falloff then so should TC's, TE's & TL's. That is all.
This.
I call bull****. Falloff is still unaffected by 99% of the ammotypes.
Also if you want falloff boni on simple Tracking Computers, I want a damn module to reduce my signature!
Because Target Painters increase my sig! Whine! Nerf! Rage!
No worries, CCP give this man a module that reduces a ships signature radius. I am 100% for it.
Oh and to be honest, though I love TP's, tey arnt worth crap all, infact they are so bad compared to the other ewar that who cares if theres a module that counters it.
|
SirDanceAlot
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 10:39:00 -
[123]
Ok lets say this one more time for the whiners that still dont understand:
TC AFFECTING FALL OFF WOULD BE STUPIDLY OVERPOWERED. ITS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN EVEN WITH THE TD CHANGES. LIVE WITH IT.
|
Blutreiter
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 10:42:00 -
[124]
Originally by: SirDanceAlot Ok lets say this one more time for the whiners that still dont understand:
TC AFFECTING FALL OFF WOULD BE STUPIDLY OVERPOWERED. ITS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN EVEN WITH THE TD CHANGES. LIVE WITH IT.
This!
*dances a lot*
Cogito ergo boom - I think i'll blow sh*t up
Originally by: CCP Explorer I know we have said this before, but this time we really mean itÖ
|
Diomidis
Amarr Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 10:46:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Nian Banks I call bull****. Falloff is still unaffected by 99% of the ammotypes.
Also if you want falloff boni on simple Tracking Computers, I want a damn module to reduce my signature!
Because Target Painters increase my sig! Whine! Nerf! Rage!
No worries, CCP give this man a module that reduces a ships signature radius. I am 100% for it.
Oh and to be honest, though I love TP's, tey arnt worth crap all, infact they are so bad compared to the other ewar that who cares if theres a module that counters it.
So, instead of asking of a better TP which has no counter, you are asking for a worse than the already broken and under-utilized TD or a script that makes it useless as soon as it's fixed?
Tell u what: TPs are not useless. It's just that webbers are so overpowered in the Minmatar Recons that no-one cares to fit one instead of a webber
So yes plz, nerf webbers and boost TPs a tad
"I wan't it all - YEEH YEAHH" "I wan't it all" "And I want it now!"...(tm) whine...
Get a grip m8. Nano Gangs with Vagas and Huginns need counters - live with it.
And another thought: Ewar is ewar: counters to it should weaken them, not make them useless. So even if TC/TE get a boost, this should be minimal compared to TD's boost, cause already TC/TE >> TD. Just like ECM >> ECCM, as it should be.
Now, think a way so that webbers are less effective or have a DIRECT counter as all these wise@#)*!$% propose for TD's, and then think way to boost TPs along with their DIRECT counter...
Direct counters is the answer...EVE should be as complicated as the Paper/Rock/Scissors - "PRS - Online"Ö
|
Cpt Branko
The Bloody Red
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 11:07:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Diomidis
TPs ARE A DIRECT AND GLOBAL COUNTER TO TDs! So are Webbers. TP's also indirectly and globally boost scan resolution, tracking, damage etc. for everyone in your gang - and doing it SIMULTANEOUSLY and WITH NO SCRIPTS of each one. USE THEM AND STFU! U already have MORE than enough.
LOL@NOOB.
Yeah, beacuse Target Painters affect range.
Oh, wait.... Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 11:09:00 -
[127]
Edited by: Amira Shadowsong on 04/02/2008 11:11:25 Edited by: Amira Shadowsong on 04/02/2008 11:09:29
Originally by: Nian Banks
No worries, CCP give this man a module that reduces a ships signature radius. I am 100% for it.
Oh and to be honest, though I love TP's, tey arnt worth crap all, infact they are so bad compared to the other ewar that who cares if theres a module that counters it.
Fail. You also have to give us a counter for 40km webs. A mid slot item that boosts our speed AND makes us more immune to long range webs. How about that? No? Well youre not getting TCs that affect fall off. Its stupidly overpowered. Stop whining, its not gonna happen.
edit: TP+long webs is minmatar racial ew, not only TP.
|
Blutreiter
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 11:11:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Diomidis
TPs ARE A DIRECT AND GLOBAL COUNTER TO TDs! So are Webbers. TP's also indirectly and globally boost scan resolution, tracking, damage etc. for everyone in your gang - and doing it SIMULTANEOUSLY and WITH NO SCRIPTS of each one. USE THEM AND STFU! U already have MORE than enough.
LOL@NOOB.
Yeah, beacuse Target Painters affect range.
Oh, wait....
So what you want is not a counter, it's med-range AC usage.
Aren't ACs better in close range anyway?
Cogito ergo boom - I think i'll blow sh*t up
Originally by: CCP Explorer I know we have said this before, but this time we really mean itÖ
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 11:22:00 -
[129]
Originally by: Blutreiter
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Diomidis
TPs ARE A DIRECT AND GLOBAL COUNTER TO TDs! So are Webbers. TP's also indirectly and globally boost scan resolution, tracking, damage etc. for everyone in your gang - and doing it SIMULTANEOUSLY and WITH NO SCRIPTS of each one. USE THEM AND STFU! U already have MORE than enough.
LOL@NOOB.
Yeah, beacuse Target Painters affect range.
Oh, wait....
So what you want is not a counter, it's med-range AC usage.
Aren't ACs better in close range anyway?
No. At close range AC are massively overpowered by blasters. AC are medium range guns with good tracking and bad dps. Pulse lasers are medium range with good dps and poor tracking.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Kykio
Caldari The All-Seeing Eye
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 11:29:00 -
[130]
Edited by: Kykio on 04/02/2008 11:29:14
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Diomidis
TPs ARE A DIRECT AND GLOBAL COUNTER TO TDs! So are Webbers. TP's also indirectly and globally boost scan resolution, tracking, damage etc. for everyone in your gang - and doing it SIMULTANEOUSLY and WITH NO SCRIPTS of each one. USE THEM AND STFU! U already have MORE than enough.
LOL@NOOB.
Yeah, beacuse Target Painters affect range.
Oh, wait....
You are the noob branko . What he said is true TP increase turrets hit chance for all of the attackers, oh but it isnt good enough for u ,is it? You just want a module that boost your already good projectiles range while you can use the EMP ammo right?
And projectiles won't do more dmg after resist nerf.
Oh, wait....
|
|
Cpt Branko
The Bloody Red
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 11:35:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Blutreiter
So what you want is not a counter, it's med-range AC usage.
Aren't ACs better in close range anyway?
(a) People use ACs a lot in 'med-range' already. Using ACs at point blank range is often quite suicidal, especially and particularly versus blasterboats. Why do you think Barrage M is as expensive as it is? Furthermore, ACs with barrage loaded enable you to fend off people trying to stick outside of webrange a lot of the time.
(b) You only really want to use ACs in close-range when you're fighting ships which outdamage you at mid-range but don't at close range.
What the new TDs are is a uncounterable way to control the other guy's effective range.
On the other hand, it's utterly useless for me as a Minmatar pilot to fit TCs and TEs on anything, because there's practically nothing I can do to boost my range except rigs. I used to be fine with this, beacause nobody could touch that unmodifiable range anyway, but since now people can modify it, why can't I modify it as well?
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Sephra Star
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 11:42:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Dromidas Shadowmoon Edited by: Dromidas Shadowmoon on 03/02/2008 04:52:04 Considering a vast majority of minmatar t2 ships rely on hanging at the edge of falloff (since we don't have real tanks, for the most part), if they can cut down our falloff from 22k-ish to 11k-ish, we will be completely neutralized. Last I checked, tracking disruptors don't have a very short optimal range, and so will never fail.
The point isn't that the modules might or might not suck. It's that everything in EVE has a counter. ECM vs ECCM Tracking Disruptor vs Tracking Computer (pre-boost) Sensor Dampener vs Sensor Booster
If they add falloff to tracking disruptor and don't add falloff to tracking computer, there will be an imbalance.
I'm not sure you should be the one to call someone whining, considering your sig.. You want a boost for one of the most powerful recons? (curse) I could understand pilgrim, as they suck solo :)
Hard to argue with this logic...
|
Cpt Branko
The Bloody Red
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 11:53:00 -
[133]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 04/02/2008 11:55:26
Originally by: Kykio
You are the noob branko . What he said is true TP increase turrets hit chance for all of the attackers, oh but it isnt good enough for u ,is it?
Well, TPs increase only tracking-related hit chances; and webs are equally effective as TPs which increased your sig radius by 1000% for all the attackers, as far as guns are concerned anyway.
TPs don't do absolutely a thing for range, so.
Originally by: Kykio
You just want a module that boost your already good projectiles range while you can use the EMP ammo right?
Whichever modules/rigs you use to boost falloff, Barrage M still outdamages EMP M at 14-15km, making it quite stupid to use EMP M outside of close webrange situations. Even when shooting at 7-8km you will still be using Barrage M.
Originally by: Kykio
And projectiles won't do more dmg after resist nerf.
They will if you're a bad pilot and use sub-par ammo (EMP M on armour tanks or shield tanks is sub-par ammo and will be sub-par ammo post patch*) or are shooting Barrage M at shield tanks (again sub-par ammo for the job, but I see it happening if you're trying to stick out of webrange of a shield-tanked ship which isn't that often).
*In fact, EMP M is the optimal ammo in certain situation, such as shooting untanked ships or hull-tanked ships which happen to not hit very hard so you don't care about range. For everything else, there's PP M (better vs shield tanks) / Fusion M (better vs armour tanks) / Barrage M (better vs armour tanks, better for shooting at any range larger then 2km).
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
DennoTheHunter
Caldari Kernkraft 400
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:00:00 -
[134]
I'm wondering why no one has said anything about TE/TC on amarr ships would be overpowered atm, since they boost the already high optimal range pulses have, giving them godlike range on shortrange guns.
If TE/TC will affect falloff too, then i personally think it wouldn't be near as overpowered as proposed or even not affect any kind of ballance at all except to work as a counter to TD.
And yes i support the OP's idea _____________________
If I am in a fair fight.... Something went wrong! |
Blutreiter
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:02:00 -
[135]
Edited by: Blutreiter on 04/02/2008 12:04:58 Right. So what you want is something that works outside webrange, so you can utilize speedtanks.
What about trying to kill the guy using the Tracking Disruptors? It's not like they shut down your weapons completely, or do I miss something?
Whereas having common modules boosting falloff range would open up a massive box of problems.
Edit: We can all see how range disrupting works by applying it on laser turrets nowadays. The only thing that falloff reduction dies is getting this to work on blasters and autocannons as well.
Did any amarr player whine about range getting disrupted before? Considering they lost their only real advantage over the other weapon systems - range.
Cogito ergo boom - I think i'll blow sh*t up
Originally by: CCP Explorer I know we have said this before, but this time we really mean itÖ
|
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:03:00 -
[136]
Edited by: Twilight Mourning on 04/02/2008 12:07:09
Originally by: Cpt Branko
What the new TDs are is a uncounterable way to control the other guy's effective range.
Kinda what the huggins dual webs are? So how about this? So if TCs effect falloff then shouldn't which module do we get that negates webs? =p Not so fun when your Recon is **** is it? Besides... who wastes a slot to ECCM? If you want a dedicated module to counter TDs then how about a module that only negates the effect of TDs? That way you have to waste a slot JUST to counter TDs just the way ECCMs waste a slot JUST to counter ECM? That I could live with.
|
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang Mashen T'plak
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:09:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Blutreiter Edited by: Blutreiter on 04/02/2008 12:04:58 Right. So what you want is something that works outside webrange, so you can utilize speedtanks.
What about trying to kill the guy using the Tracking Disruptors? It's not like they shut down your weapons completely, or do I miss something?
Whereas having common modules boosting falloff range would open up a massive box of problems.
Edit: We can all see how range disrupting works by applying it on laser turrets nowadays. The only thing that falloff reduction dies is getting this to work on blasters and autocannons as well.
Did any amarr player whine about range getting disrupted before? Considering they lost their only real advantage over the other weapon systems - range.
Well 2 Track Disruptor do really completely shut down any non point blank weaponry.
I really think CCP should make all ewar strong and usable even in a non specialized ship. But the problem becomes people fitting 3 or 4 of them.
I would love if ecm was usable again in non specialized ships, but not more than 1 same with dampeners and TD. Woudl add some variation to combat.
|
Cpt Branko
The Bloody Red
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:32:00 -
[138]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 04/02/2008 12:33:43
Originally by: Twilight Mourning
Originally by: Cpt Branko
What the new TDs are is a uncounterable way to control the other guy's effective range.
Kinda what the huggins dual webs are?
Huggins don't prevent you from shooting at his engagement range. You can still force away the Huggin/Rapier (which is what I did a number of times in my Hurricane). Of course, once Huggins start fitting TDs, you're screwed, even with just one of them.
Anyway, if you look at damps vs sensor boosters, that's how it basically needs to work.
Post-patch, damps are way less effective at shutting mid-range ships then falloff & optimal distrupting TDs are - it takes two damps to have a noticeable effect (one is entirely useless) and three to shut it down.
I see any ship with a spare midslot not fitting a TD post-patch being stupid; take, for instance, a Myrmidon (which today you can quite reasonably fight in your typical T2-fit Hurricane firing Barrage M outside of webrange as long as he doesn't web you in which case you're screwed); post patch it can simply force you to engage close to heated webrange via one unbonused module Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
UGLYUGLY
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:38:00 -
[139]
Minmatar boats that used fall off as a means to fight at range use to be immune to the range script of tracking disruptor did that seem fair?
Reading through this thread all the people that say it will render their ship useless are talking like every ship in eve will be fitted with a full rack of tracking disruptor's. Or is going to run into a curse or pilgrim in every engagement.
If a ship is fitted with TD's and hitting you with range scrips and you can't hit them and you don't want to get close, disengage and run. I thought this is what minmatar specialize at? Hit when you have the advantage and run when you don't.
And the very very simple counter for TD's range script is to burn close, uses no mods .
|
Cpt Branko
The Bloody Red
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:42:00 -
[140]
Originally by: UGLYUGLY
Reading through this thread all the people that say it will render their ship useless are talking like every ship in eve will be fitted with a full rack of tracking disruptor's. Or is going to run into a curse or pilgrim in every engagement.
...
And the very very simple counter for TD's range script is to burn close, uses no mods .
Using TDs is going to be extremely popular on unbonused short-range ships with a spare midslot, I can already tell you that one.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
|
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:48:00 -
[141]
Edited by: Twilight Mourning on 04/02/2008 12:51:03
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 04/02/2008 12:33:43
Huggins don't prevent you from shooting at his engagement range. You can still force away the Huggin/Rapier (which is what I did a number of times in my Hurricane). Of course, once Huggins start fitting TDs, you're screwed, even with just one of them.
Anyway, if you look at damps vs sensor boosters, that's how it basically needs to work.
Post-patch, damps are way less effective at shutting mid-range ships then falloff & optimal distrupting TDs are - it takes two damps to have a noticeable effect (one is entirely useless) and three to shut it down.
I see any ship with a spare midslot not fitting a TD post-patch being stupid; take, for instance, a Myrmidon (which today you can quite reasonably fight in your typical T2-fit Hurricane firing Barrage M outside of webrange as long as he doesn't web you in which case you're screwed); post patch it can simply force you to engage close to heated webrange via one unbonused module
Damps effect all weapon systems. So if what you say were to go I would expect the TDs to be able to effect missiles systems too. =p
Edit: Posting inside the quote ftl. lol
|
Jin Entres
Malevolent Intervention
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:57:00 -
[142]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
I see any ship with a spare midslot not fitting a TD post-patch being stupid; take, for instance, a Myrmidon (which today you can quite reasonably fight in your typical T2-fit Hurricane firing Barrage M outside of webrange as long as he doesn't web you in which case you're screwed); post patch it can simply force you to engage close to heated webrange via one unbonused module
Yeah, people seem to think that this change will hurt Minmatar most while the fact is that Minmatar and Gallente have the most ships with spare utility midslots which are now mostly used for ECCM, double web or sensor boosting but will after this change be used more with Tracking Disruptors. Therefore it hurts Amarr most because the optimal range disruption already hurts them a lot and the additional falloff disruption only adds to it. As it is, Amarr have not suffered from it that much because they haven't been widely used. But now they will be.
The consequence will be that armor tanking 5 mid ships will become better: Dominix, Hyperion, Myrmidon, Eos, Tempest, Typhoon, Ishtar and Sacriledge. And among them, the ones fighting in webbing range will be dominant, which is why arguably Gallente benefit from this the most because they do most damage within that range.
As a side effect, ECM will also become better as ECCM will be used less, and Caldari benefit from increased use of TD's which they are unaffected by. --- CEO
|
Ishida Natari
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:59:00 -
[143]
I'm all for boosting TDs, however I believe it should be done in a way that does not make "one module counter to close range".
I do not have problem for recon to use 6 slots to shut down 3 ships, but if many other ships start to fill their remaining slots by TDs, things could get out of hand, especially because this would significantly nerf all the Minmatar close range ships.
The bonus to falloff reduction should be very small and be significantly boosted on ewar ships only to preserve the current state where single unbonused module (ECM, Damps) is basically worthless against anything bigger than frigate but bonused and dedicated ships are very viable. Such ship would be one more counter to vaga roaming nano gangs (albeit not deadly to them) and would make the gangs more diverse. It would also make Amarr cruisers more team-oriented (although some would prefer them to be more of a solo pwn mobile as it used to be).
|
Cpt Branko
The Bloody Red
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 13:02:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Twilight Mourning
Damps effect all weapon systems. So if what you say were to go I would expect the TDs to be able to effect missiles systems too. =p
Edit: Posting inside the quote ftl. lol
Only if the target is firing outside of dampened lockrange. Furthermore even if you throw three damps on someone and mostly disable him (short of burning next to you and then locking you), people can always load FOFs.
Of course, missiles have sub-par DPS except in case of Torps or heavily bonused HAMs (neither of which have FOF variants so they can be shutdown by ewar, and HAMs don't fit on most T1 caldari ships very well), so they don't worry people that much.
Problem is, one (falloff+optimal-reducing) TD is all it takes to give a blasterboat a significant advantage over a AC boat in terms of DPS at practically any range. Do you see the problem now?
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
UGLYUGLY
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 13:05:00 -
[145]
I have no problem with re balancing TD's so that amarr recons get the same benefits (or if not even a bit better). By reducing the base amount of unbonused TD's but increasing the % bonuses on amarr ships to compensate. This would make them near useless on any ship other than race specific ships.
|
Twilight Mourning
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 13:13:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Twilight Mourning
Damps effect all weapon systems. So if what you say were to go I would expect the TDs to be able to effect missiles systems too. =p
Edit: Posting inside the quote ftl. lol
Only if the target is firing outside of dampened lockrange. Furthermore even if you throw three damps on someone and mostly disable him (short of burning next to you and then locking you), people can always load FOFs.
Of course, missiles have sub-par DPS except in case of Torps or heavily bonused HAMs (neither of which have FOF variants so they can be shutdown by ewar, and HAMs don't fit on most T1 caldari ships very well), so they don't worry people that much.
Problem is, one (falloff+optimal-reducing) TD is all it takes to give a blasterboat a significant advantage over a AC boat in terms of DPS at practically any range. Do you see the problem now?
I think the issue for me is that TD's are useless against just about every weapon system. Nobody can deny that. Their only point at this juncture is on the Curse/Pilgrim with tracking script to protect the drones. While every other race has EW that is effective in any given situation. TPs work against any ship for the entire fleet. SBs work against any ships locking range. EW can shut down any ship. Of course there are counters to two of these three things. The problem with TDs is that unless you are flying a ship which fights in your optimal (Amarr) or have crap tracking then these are useless. Minmatar and Caldari are pretty much immune (pretty much, not completely). What do they need to counter TDs? Nothing. So while the other three races have EW that can effect anyone effectively Amarr's specialized EW is only useful half the time and for the times when it is there are still coutners for it. This to me has me flying a Curse (which has bonuses to TDs) mostly using damps or ECM. If the TDs screw a couple more races, I'm not going to complain. If you have a better fix, go for it, untill them I'm ok with them boosting TDs in this way.
|
UGLYUGLY
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 13:13:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Twilight Mourning
Damps effect all weapon systems. So if what you say were to go I would expect the TDs to be able to effect missiles systems too. =p
Edit: Posting inside the quote ftl. lol
Only if the target is firing outside of dampened lockrange. Furthermore even if you throw three damps on someone and mostly disable him (short of burning next to you and then locking you), people can always load FOFs.
Of course, missiles have sub-par DPS except in case of Torps or heavily bonused HAMs (neither of which have FOF variants so they can be shutdown by ewar, and HAMs don't fit on most T1 caldari ships very well), so they don't worry people that much.
Problem is, one (falloff+optimal-reducing) TD is all it takes to give a blasterboat a significant advantage over a AC boat in terms of DPS at practically any range. Do you see the problem now?
I don't, I see a ship that set itself up to deal specifically with another ship, that TD would be useless if they came up against a torp raven. Gallente are really the only ships that have mids to "spare" anyways, amarr boats bearly have enough to get by with the basics and caldari use theirs for their tank. Armor tanked minmatar ships might have some spare mids.
|
Ariel Dawn
Beets and Gravy Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 13:34:00 -
[148]
Originally by: UGLYUGLY Minmatar boats that used fall off as a means to fight at range use to be immune to the range script of tracking disruptor did that seem fair?
Reading through this thread all the people that say it will render their ship useless are talking like every ship in eve will be fitted with a full rack of tracking disruptor's. Or is going to run into a curse or pilgrim in every engagement.
If a ship is fitted with TD's and hitting you with range scrips and you can't hit them and you don't want to get close, disengage and run. I thought this is what minmatar specialize at? Hit when you have the advantage and run when you don't.
And the very very simple counter for TD's range script is to burn close, uses no mods .
Hey, lets counter the number of different T1 ammo types that affect AC range. Zero. Hail reduces your range by 50%, Barrage increases it by 50%. Thats it. Unlike Amarr players, Minmatar cannot change ammo according to engagement ranges and always have to fight at the exact same distances always. Autocannons are balanced because while they have the lowest raw DPS and even less after factoring falloff, they use no cap and nothing modifies their range.
The thing about Minmatar about burning close is that doing so is an excellent way to finish the engagement sans-ship. Comparative DPS/Tanks to other racial equivalents is the lowest of the bunch.
If TCs/TEs don't get falloff, then I don't see why they should retain their optimal bonuses as well. Those are significantly more imbalanced when compared to falloff as they do not have to deal with a miss chance.
|
Aramendel
Amarr North Face Force
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 13:42:00 -
[149]
Originally by: Cpt Branko Only if the target is firing outside of dampened lockrange. Furthermore even if you throw three damps on someone and mostly disable him (short of burning next to you and then locking you), people can always load FOFs.
Same applies for TDs. If the target is within the TD reduced weapon range they do not do anything.
And then they can use missiles of all kinds (not only FoFs which are also only available for longrange missile types), drones even if they were in the bay or at another target by the time they got TDed (and you can also recall & redeploy them if needed) and most importantly all kinds of EW - ECM, damps, TDs of your own - and you can also scram and web your target (which makes countering the range based TDs a lot easier. And as a little cream on the top TDs also have a good deal lower effective range than damps.
Quote: Problem is, one (falloff+optimal-reducing) TD is all it takes to give a blasterboat a significant advantage over a AC boat in terms of DPS at practically any range. Do you see the problem now? ... it's a boost to Myrmidon , Eos, Dominix, Megathron, Hyperion
Yes, because gal ships have in general more med slots than minmatar ships, so minmatar are compared to gal ships totally unable to fit them. Like the hurricane, claymore, typhoon, tempest and mealstrom.
Right. Hypocrisy much?
For 4 slot ships - like the mega, typhoon or cane - a TD will only be fitted on cost of a cap injector. Thats a rather hefty tradeoff.
Only 5 slot ships can really fit a TD without gimping themselves elsewhere. The only gal gunboat which can do that is the hyperion - but so can the pest.
The other gal ships are all no full gunships, but gunship/droneboat hybrids. ACs are even with a TD on them excellent weapons to kill drones rather fast. It isn't that much of a problem to pull their drone teeth while staying out of their blaster range.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 13:42:00 -
[150]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 04/02/2008 13:42:50
Originally by: Ariel Dawn
If TCs/TEs don't get falloff, then I don't see why they should retain their optimal bonuses as well. Those are significantly more imbalanced when compared to falloff as they do not have to deal with a miss chance.
1. There is nothign wrong with the tanks of minmatar ships. Youre blatantly lying if you claim minmatar ships cant hold their own close up. There are stupidly sick tanks like sleipnir and maelstrom and more...
2. You cant remove TCs opti bonus, youll kill sniping.
3. You cant give fall off boost on TCs because it would increase AC boats damage off the charts. You know this, ccp knows it, we know it. Youre not going to get this overpowered boost.
4. Live with the changes that TDs now work very effectively against prior immune turrets. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |