EVE Search - Gunnery Specializations: Why do they require lower level spec IV ?

All Channels

Skill Discussions

Gunnery Specializations: Why do they require lower level spec IV ?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Shippon Shima Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.02.22 05:54:00 - [1] I'm at a loss as to why to train Large guns specialization you need to have small gun specialization 4 and medium specialization 4. It makes no sense. Missile skills dont have this. I can specialize in cruise missiles without having to specialize in rockets, standard missiles and heavy missiles first. Has CCP made any mention of removing this ridiculous requirement for gunnery?
Jameroz Art of War	Posted - 2008.02.22 06:41:00 - [2] Yeah I would prefer I could just train for large guns without training mediums/smalls at all.
Zekky Caldari Free Galactic Enterprises Infinite Innovation	Posted - 2008.02.22 08:34:00 - [3] i like it that its a long train to t2 guns keeps them a little bit more special ;)
Jei'son Bladesmith The Storm Knights The Cool Kids Club	Posted - 2008.02.22 09:01:00 - [4] its the ol' gotta learn to walk before running argument. ☼☼☼ 12 Seconds ☼☼☼
Ask Unbeatable Tenacious Danes	Posted - 2008.02.22 10:07:00 - [5] The missile specs were actually an error made when the game was first developed (said on Eve-TV during last year's tournament by some CCP person)
Ikserak tai Caldari Ghengis Tia Corp	Posted - 2008.02.22 17:06:00 - [6] T2 guns special indeed. The skill requirements are mind boggling. Named modules are only about 10X as expensive if you want near the same performance. Although after training all 12+ skills to IV or V the bonuses will make them kill hoses for sure. YOU'VE NEVER ROCKED 'TIL YOU'VE UNDOCKED.
Shippon Shima Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.02.23 19:18:00 - [7] That's the thing though. The guns are really expensive and the T2 ammo is as punishing as the T2 missiles .. so the only real benefit is in the gun itself. And named T1 stuff almost performs the same as the T2 items. So why is there a massive pre-req to use large guns ...what if the player doesnt CARE about flying frigates or cruisers? its bullcrap that we have to train 2 weapon specializations we dont care for.
Corstaad	Posted - 2008.02.23 20:16:00 - [8] I find it annoying that with missle there's no ladder for T2 Spec's. Playing Minny I'd like to have all T2 secondary missles yet I have to base train all of them.
Corstaad	Posted - 2008.02.24 21:55:00 - [9] Bumping this so we don't find anymore gunnery skills sucks threads
Lamias	Posted - 2008.02.25 06:49:00 - [10] Realize that you are going to get an extra +20% damage on ANY AMMO with T2 guns and that gun's spec skill at IV. You have to sacrifice to get to the 'end game.' Also, the missile bonus from the spec skill to ANY AMMO is less due to the bonus they get: 2% ROF, which doesn't even equate to 8% damage gain at IV of the spec skill b/c they already have a lot of factors cutting down their time. The same could be said about the guns damage skills, but in the end they are more effective for some things. Guns are not missiles. If you want missiles, GO TRAIN THEM.
Estel Arador Minmatar Damage over Time Angels Of Discord	Posted - 2008.02.25 07:38:00 - [11] Originally by: Lamias Also, the missile bonus from the spec skill to ANY AMMO is less due to the bonus they get: 2% ROF, which doesn't even equate to 8% damage gain at IV of the spec skill b/c they already have a lot of factors cutting down their time. This makes no sense. An 8% reduction in ROF is a 8.7% increase in damage whether you are firing every second or every 10 seconds.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Black-Out	Posted - 2008.02.25 16:34:00 - [12] Originally by: Corstaad I find it annoying that with missle there's no ladder for T2 Spec's. Playing Minny I'd like to have all T2 secondary missles yet I have to base train all of them. Missiles are quicker to train to compensate for their other disadvantages. However, you have to train TWO skills to get both specialisations. Eg: Medium hybrids 5 (rank 3) leads to T2 rails AND blasters. but to get T2 HAMS AND heavy missiles, I have to train heavy missiles 5 AND heavy Assault 5. That's actually more SP required. Additionally, certain missile support skills are higher rank and give less bonus, eg: Warhead Upgrades rank 5 for +2% per level vs Surgical strike rank 4 for +3% per level. (And guns do a lot more damage to start with.) Missile bombardment is better than Sharpshooter, I guess. All Missile Projection does is reduce the delay to hit, and it's still too long at any worthwhile range. The sniper gunner has still got 2-3 hits in at 150Km well before the first cruise missile arrives. Basically, if you think missiles are so much better per SP trained, train missiles. Missiles != gunnery. When I can buy a mid-slot item that gives me a bonus to range and explosion velocity (equivalent to a tracking computer) then we can talk about it. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
WardogX Minmatar Outkasts	Posted - 2008.02.25 18:12:00 - [13] The problem is once you head down a road you are stuck going in that direction. Example I am trained up to 4 types of large t2 turret types now (pulse/beam and blaster/rail) It took me a great deal of time getting all those lower level turret pre requisites knocked out of the way. If a patch came out tomorrow that allowed people to go directly to t2 large turrets without all the current pre-requisites... how would ccp handle all the "give us our SP back" hate mail. I know even I wouldn't be happy about it either... it would literally mean I wasted 3.5 million SP in gunnery in my case. Thats like what 2 months maybe 3 of training time? As I said once you go in a certain direction and everyone has been on board with it for quite some time you are kind of stuck. Unless you come up with ways to make concessions to make the population at large happy... which ultimately makes an equal amount unhappy at same time. Rig Ship Repackage Solution
DHG Precision Engineering Insurgency	Posted - 2008.02.25 23:09:00 - [14] Edited by: DHG on 25/02/2008 23:13:38 Originally by: Shippon Shima That's the thing though. The guns are really expensive and the T2 ammo is as punishing as the T2 missiles .. so the only real benefit is in the gun itself. And named T1 stuff almost performs the same as the T2 items. So why is there a massive pre-req to use large guns ...what if the player doesnt CARE about flying frigates or cruisers? its bullcrap that we have to train 2 weapon specializations we dont care for. I strongly disagree with you here. Modern fleet warfare is based around BS snipers, and they require t2 ammo to function properly. Be it spike, tremor or aurora (all +80% optimal), they are needed to achieve the insane ranges required on fleet BS's (we're talking about 160km-180km optimal). Ok, it nerfs your tracking but you're shooting other BS's (or you're supposed to shoot these first), so not that much of a drawback. Same for close range weapons (pulses, blasters and autocannons), long range t2 ammo is really worth it. Why do people prefer t2 long range ammo? Well, it's simple, there's no t1 ammo which has the same range and damage advantage as the t2 long range ammo. High damage, short range faction ammo outshines high damage t2 ammo though. The drawbacks on the short range high damage t2 ammo is quite painfull while it only outdamages faction ammo slightly. Hence most people use faction ammo.
Danorium	Posted - 2008.02.26 08:37:00 - [15] after you were born did you start on the university? guess not. isn't it always like this? you start with the basics and then grow. you don't start riding trucks before you ride a car. i must agree tho that it's a bit unfair that heavy missile's don't need the basics trained.
Marine HK4861 Caldari Radical Technologies	Posted - 2008.02.26 09:09:00 - [16] The way the two weapons systems work; Gunnery tree is sequential while the Missile tree is selective; suggests that missiles were intended to be a secondary weapon system. It's best illustrated by BS with split weapon systems - train up through the small, medium and large guns, then pick the large missiles to suit your ship. I think this philosophy's become a bit distorted with Caldari ships - I can quite easily see the Raven, Kestrel, etc being support ships, but they've been made into primary combat ships. The other races receiving missile based ships have further diluted the 'missiles as secondary' concept.
Mudkest Ekliptika Engineers Ekliptika	Posted - 2008.02.26 17:37:00 - [17] Edited by: Mudkest on 26/02/2008 17:39:58 Originally by: Malcanis Missiles are quicker to train to compensate for their other disadvantages. However, you have to train TWO skills to get both specialisations. Eg: Medium hybrids 5 (rank 3) leads to T2 rails AND blasters. but to get T2 HAMS AND heavy missiles, I have to train heavy missiles 5 AND heavy Assault 5. That's actually more SP required. yes, but not a great deal more SP needed ;) med blaster and railgun spec need small hybrids 5 as well as small rail adn blaster spec4, sharpshooting and motion prediction at 4 so that's total of a rank 4 skill at 5 and a rank10 skill at lvl 4 against for ham/heavy missile spec a rank6 at 5 and a rank3 at 3 in other words, 1,570,000 Sp needed in prereqs for both ham and heavy missile spec against 1,476,548. The real fun goes when you compare the battleship weapons though(torp adn cruise missiles at 5 compared to small, med and large turet at 5, small adn med long/short range at 4 and motion prediction and sharpshooting at 5) Originally by: Malcanis Missiles != gunnery. When I can buy a mid-slot item that gives me a bonus to range and explosion velocity (equivalent to a tracking computer) then we can talk about it. can we get an EWAR mod to lower those things too then, equivilent of tracking disrupter for missiles ;) but like you allready said, missiles are not guns so this whole discusion is kind of pointless anyway ----- GIEV custom ship paint jobs! I want my hello-kitty-kessie!
Sue Mee	Posted - 2008.02.27 09:27:00 - [18] Originally by: Ssstupido this is a new character i made just to see how much would it take to get large tech 2 weapons. atributes are perc=14, willpower=11 1. time to get large blaster spec 4 + all secondary skills 5 (motion pred., sharpshooter, controlled burst, gunnery, etc) = 271 days, 22 hours 1.1. + large railgun spec 4 = 297 days, 17 hours (total time) 2. time to get large cruise spec 4 + all secondary skills 5 = 251 days, 6 hours 2.1. + large torp spec 4 = 300 days, 15 hours (total time) what do we see here? to train for one specialization is faster with missiles, but to train for the 2 large specializations is faster with turrets. BUT... not only is faster to train the 2 large weapons spec with turrets, but also as a reward you get small and medium specs too. BUT... now, the best part. what if i want to fly another race? for example, minmatar. 3. large blaster and rail spec 4, + all secondary turret skills to level 5, + large autocannons and artillery spec 4 = 431 days, 7 hours 4. large cruise and torp spec 4, + all secondary missile skills to level 5, + large autocannons and artillery spec 4 + all secondary turret skills to level 5 = 598 days, 8 hours so, this is where turret users are clearly in an advantage. when training for one weapon large spec, time is quite balanced (297 days for turrets, 300 days for missiles), but when you decide to train for a secondary weapon, if you are a turret user, you need 431 days, but if you are a missile user, you need 598 days. that is 167 more days. more than 5 months faster with turrets than missiles. and you get small and medium spec for free too. so, from my point of view, turret users have a much easier time training their specializations than missile users. this is from 2006, and is as true today as is was then, even more now with heavy assault missiles. for those too lazy to read it ---> missiles take longer to train + are at a big disadvantadge when cross training
Heikki Gallente Wreckless Abandon Un-Natural Selection	Posted - 2008.02.27 11:32:00 - [19] Originally by: Shippon Shima named T1 stuff almost performs the same as the T2 items Then just use the training time for something you feel more useful? Thats the way Eve balances high SPs: to get that small edge, you have to train for long time. Actually, I'm pretty happy they made the training time long by forcing it through semi-useful cruiser guns, instead of making up 'T2 Enabling Support Skill That Does Nothing'. -Lasse biased by already having trained the tree
Chelone Stone Shadow Syndicate	Posted - 2008.02.28 00:06:00 - [20] Originally by: Lamias Realize that you are going to get an extra +20% damage on ANY AMMO with T2 guns and that gun's spec skill at IV. No you aren't. The T2 gun itself has the same damage as highest NORMAL named guns (and that's ignoring faction.) The only bonus on normal ammo is from the spec skill. At L4 you get 8% more damage. Now pile on that the T2 takes more CPU and Grid than the named counterpart, and it often is not even worth it to bother. Originally by: Lamias Also, the missile bonus from the spec skill to ANY AMMO is less due to the bonus they get: 2% ROF, which doesn't even equate to 8% damage gain at IV of the spec skill b/c they already have a lot of factors cutting down their time. You couldn't be more wrong. If T2 launchers get a 2% ROF bonus per level, that is MORE DPS than a 2% dmg boost: (1 / 0.92) = 1.08696x vs. 1.08x.
Malcanis R.E.C.O.N. Black-Out	Posted - 2008.02.28 17:28:00 - [21] Originally by: Mudkest can we get an EWAR mod to lower those things too then, equivilent of tracking disrupter for missiles ;) but like you allready said, missiles are not guns so this whole discusion is kind of pointless anyway Side note: Defender missiles should be the counter to missiles. They just need fixing rather than another module adding IMO. Yeah they're very different from tracking disruptors, and that's cool. CCP: give us our midslot missile mods so we can shoot at vagabonds, and give us working defenders so the vagabonds can defend themselves! CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Squidgey	Posted - 2008.03.01 07:35:00 - [22] Originally by: Danorium you don't start riding trucks before you ride a car. I did. I also learned how to drive a semi before I ever got behind the wheel of a passenger vehicle, not legally of course.
Kyanzes Utopian Research I.E.L. Hedonistic Imperative	Posted - 2008.03.02 02:25:00 - [23] Originally by: Shippon Shima I'm at a loss as to why to train Large guns specialization you need to have small gun specialization 4 and medium specialization 4. It makes no sense. Missile skills dont have this. I can specialize in cruise missiles without having to specialize in rockets, standard missiles and heavy missiles first. Has CCP made any mention of removing this ridiculous requirement for gunnery? Time and ISK sink. --------------------------------------------- GET TO THE CHOPPA!!! The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Riho Mercenary Forces	Posted - 2008.03.02 08:11:00 - [24] Originally by: Shippon Shima I'm at a loss as to why to train Large guns specialization you need to have small gun specialization 4 and medium specialization 4. It makes no sense. Missile skills dont have this. I can specialize in cruise missiles without having to specialize in rockets, standard missiles and heavy missiles first. Has CCP made any mention of removing this ridiculous requirement for gunnery? nope... and its fine (i have hybrids trained up to large spec for both and projectiles trained to medium both... atm training laser turrets up) missiles for me are support weapons and guns primary... support weapons are allways easyer to train than main weapons. ---------------------------------- This is Me, fighting stupidity one post at a time. PS: There are no computer BUGs, there is stuff called "Random Features"

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.