| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ekalami
Pixies Under Pressure
   |
Posted - 2008.03.14 17:22:00 -
[1]
This post assumes you already have good armour tanking skills.
- perhaps first and foremost, this race has an incredible whine ratio, making them very vocal on forums, thus improving their chances of getting unnecessary buffs. For example, there is still much whining about the curse, which among recons is simply solo-pwn on a stick. Compare this ships solo capabilities compared to say a lachesis or arazu, if this statement needs clarification.
- the death of extra midslots for general purpose use in a non-nano configuration. As long as you have the midslots for propulsion mod, cap booster and warp scrambler you are good for pvp. Webifiers arent so important for a mid-range damage dealer.
Recent nerfs to e-war mods rendering them useless on ships without specific bonuses for their use, now mean excess midslots on an armour tanking configuration are a liability. Amarr ships sacrifice these now useless extra midslots to gain *very* useful low slots.
- The resistance changes. Amarr got so many lowslots, just fit a dedicated EM hardner. Furthermore, there is currently high volume in the nerf EANM whine. If this happens, many gallente ships will be forced to leave big holes in their resists, while amarrians have the extra slots to fill the holes. On top of the recent gallente nerfs, this one will really cripple the race.
- Damage and tank! Gallente and minmatar have to choose between tank and damage due to limited number of lowslots. Amarr have enough for both. This also means fitting 'wrong race' weapons is more viable on Amarr ships than other races, as whatever ship damage bonus is lost, can mostly be made up for by fitting extra damage mods, again due to abundance of low slots.
- 'We are the cap race'. Another crazy notion that ensures Amarr will never be short on cap relative to other races. I suppose gallente could similarly cry 'we are the drone race', but remember that amarr have a piece of that too.
- EM is now the lowest base resistance for most ships. Your effectiveness against amour tanks has been improved, while your effectiveness against shields remains absolute.
- Cost of inventing and building your own ships. Amarr decryptors and datacores are laughably cheap. For making t2 frigs and cruisers the ideal decryptor costs 1.3 mil. The same decryptor for gallente ships for the last 6 months or so has cost 20 mil, although it seems to be dropping to a still absurdly high 15 mil recently.
- Do you feel lucky on a whether there will be a nerf to nanoships? CCP nerfed warp stabs because they allowed risk-free pvp, because they didnt force a pilot to *commit* to a fight. I find it highly unlikely that CCP will allow the minmatar ships in nano configuration to continue to be unhittable by missiles, drones and gunnery for long, with the only counter being the same or one specific ship. However, if you feel CCP like unhittable ships, then ignore all this advice and crosstrain minmatar instead :)
Perhaps the final nail in the coffin for gallente will come if the amarr whiners get their EANM nerf. So get cross-training now. If you have good gallente skills its only a case of training racial ship type and, well, take your pick on guns :)
I was reluctant to make this post since it might detract from the advantage I will gain for myself by making the crosstrain (i am currently training amarr cruiser 5, my first deviation from 100% gallente specialisation), but realise that if others think as i do, the gallente nerfs might just stop.
Thats everything off my chest, feel free to take note of the advice, troll, or flame away, or even amarr-whine. Whatever you do, my amarr cruiser 5 completes soon, and soon I will have solo-pwn on a stick too. The nos-domi may be dead, but soon I will have a ship that not only has ship bonuses to the same effect, but amazingly an ewar bonus too. And t2 resistances.
And unbelievably, theres still heavy whining to make it even better 
|
Kia Rash
The Phalanx Expeditionary Conglomerate
Blue Sky Consortium
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 17:24:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Kia Rash on 14/03/2008 17:24:44
nerf amarr....
?
did i just say that....
why are those pigs flying
|
Wu Jiun
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 17:53:00 -
[3]
stealth gallente whine detected
curse got nerfed twice to bring it inline. what more can you expect? most people complain about pilgrim which is as broken as lachesis/arazu are.
half of your points outright false. the other half makes me wonder if you have ever flown an amarr ship or pvped at all. em hardener in a pvp ship lol?
em lowest base resistance on armor now lol? quite the opposite. in case you actually talk about hardened tanks then em is either very good or the worst of them all depending on the kind of armor tank. sounds balanced?
amarr ships having enough lowslots to fit extra hardeners *and* extra damage mods? we have at most +1 lowslot usually versus the gallente counterpart.
cap race? just lol. amarr ships generally have a tiny bit more cap than gallente counterparts but their guns use more cap in return. where do you get these ideas from?
cost of ships? ever wondered why that is the case?
possible minmatar nerf benefts only amarr but not caldari/gallente? lol?
eanm nerf? that topic is soo old. the cpu nerf hit amarr ships as hard as it hit gallente ones. and ccp has decided to go another route and actually pushes people to use more eanms rather than nerfing them.
extra mids not valuable? hello new tracking disruptors? hello dual scram/web? hello sensor booster? hello eccm?
whine ratio? have you actually read the forums since the amarr changes where announced? there are nerf amarr threads all over, boost gallente/minnie/caldari you have them all in abundance. not to mention your own disguised gallente whine.
that all being said. amarr have excellent ships hence why i fly them myself. whats wrong about that?
but what you have here is one sided and stupid. Gallente have a lot of great ships that are worth training for. This gallente is dead now propaganda is just your way to try and get unnecessary boosts as you put it.
however i will just lean back fly my amarr/minnie boats of pwnage and give you that stupid self-righteous phrase that we had to hear from gheyllente for years: adapt or DIE.
|
Imperator Jora'h
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:04:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Imperator Jora''h on 14/03/2008 18:07:24
 Originally by: ekalami
- Cost of inventing and building your own ships. Amarr decryptors and datacores are laughably cheap. For making t2 frigs and cruisers the ideal decryptor costs 1.3 mil. The same decryptor for gallente ships for the last 6 months or so has cost 20 mil, although it seems to be dropping to a still absurdly high 15 mil recently.
Wow...are you in for a disappointment.
You wrote a lot but I can't be arsed to pick it apart point-by-point. I think the part I quoted says enough.
Has it occurred to you why those things are so cheap? Probably because very, very few want the bloody things because Amarr ships compared to other race's ships are not so hot. Do you think you have stumbled on to the gem that all Amarr ships are and apparently the rest of the EVE community (over 100,000 of them) have just missed it? Do you think the Devs looked at Amarr and thought it really was an uber race but because of the whines they had better buff them more?
Or maybe, just possibly, Amarr are not the treat you think they are and is why the statistics put out by CCP show them as the least flown ships. While they are not bad as such there is rarely an Amarr ship you would opt for first in a given situation over another race's ship that does whatever it is far better.
The real kicker here is you admittedly have never flown an Amarr ship so really have no clue about it. But by all means train them up...I make Amarr ships...I'd be glad to have someone to sell them too (and I suspect I'll be selling you a lot of them).
--------------------------------------------------
"Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
ekalami
Pixies Under Pressure
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:09:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Wu Jiun
*edited for mostly drivel*
however i will just lean back fly my amarr/minnie boats of pwnage and give you that stupid self-righteous phrase that we had to hear from gheyllente for years: adapt or DIE.
I do believe that training amarr cruiser 5 falls into the category of adapting to the problems I identified?
I'll only comment on one of your other points. That of EM being the lowest base resitance. Here we go then:
picked random gallente ship for figures (thorax)
base em resist = 0% shield + 50% armour = 50
base expl resist = 50% shield + 10% armour = 60
base kin resist = 40% shield + 35% armour = 75
base therm resist = 20% shield + 35% armour = 55
and so i propose that 50 < 55 < 60 < 75
how would you measure lowest base resistance?
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:15:00 -
[6]
Where to start ... hmmm
1. Curse is a drone carrier, kill the drones and he is buggered. Highly vulnerable to missile ships even when nanoed.
2. Laser have severe tracking issues inside 1-2km mwaning blasters and drones have almost free reign, webifiers is only defense against them. Being mid range fighters necessitates ability to control engagement range.
3/4. Lasers require more low slots dedicated to damage mods in order to remain competitive. The supposed abundance of lows eludes me. Same argument for tank/gank .. you run out of slots before achieving either if going for both.
5. Cap race? Slightly higher base capacity with similar recharge times across all races. Extra cap is negated by higher cap drain from primary weapon system. Prior to MWD's being mandatory in PeeVeePee the claim was valid, but only because of the MWD penalty.
6. 80-90% of all combat ships are armour tankers, a majority field 2xEANMII+Suitcase as that is the single most efficient configuration when facing unknowns. I have yet to see anyone outside the PvE arena using triple hardeners which is the only way to have EM as lowest.
7. Nobody wants the damn Amarr T2 ships so there's no market for the invention tools meaning rock bottom prices. Matari and Gallente on the other hand ...
8. What on earth is that nano argument doing there? Looks like a copy/paste mishap from a separate thread about the Vagabond and Ishtar.
9. Don't think it will happen any time soon, but I honestly fail to see how any one race will benefit from a change to EANM. Maybe Gallente, Minmatar or Caldari as they have an easier time choosing damage types to combat whichever foe they face.
If you are worried about Amarr getting the upper hand in battle, I can highly recommend using the tracking disruptors .. really are nasty little buggers against turrets which is pretty much all the Golden Menace uses. Don't worry about them using it against you though, all Amarr mid slots are taken up by basic necessities.
I am currently cross-training to Caldari cruiser 5, got to try that 800dps perma tanked passive Onyx and the target denial of ECM.
|
ekalami
Pixies Under Pressure
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:20:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
The real kicker here is you admittedly have never flown an Amarr ship so really have no clue about it. But by all means train them up...I make Amarr ships...I'd be glad to have someone to sell them too (and I suspect I'll be selling you a lot of them).
I dont think you will be selling me any, I would never have made the point about the decryptors being so cheap without having acquired a significant stock of them 
It is true I have never flown them, but i did fly a nos-domi, and can only dream of what it would be like to have a cruiser sized equivalent with ship bonuses. And an ewar bonus. And noticeable whining for even more.
For the record i completely agree with lowering base EM resist to 50%. I'm not an amarr-hater. But the 10% taken off should have been put on shields to keep the base resistance totals the same. Same with explosive resistances.
What i'm against is the immense gallente nerfing recently.
But as the other guy said its adapt or die. And i'm adapting, and the whole purpose of this thread is to reccomend others to adapt too. Is that so wrong?
|
Wu Jiun
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:22:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Wu Jiun on 14/03/2008 18:23:04
Edited by: Wu Jiun on 14/03/2008 18:22:33
Originally by: ekalami
I do believe that training amarr cruiser 5 falls into the category of adapting to the problems I identified?
Unlike your miserable try to make gallente look gimped? Yes.
Originally by: ekalami
I'll only comment on one of your other points.
And you better don't comment on the other ones as there would be nothing you could nitpick on, right?
Originally by: ekalami
That of EM being the lowest base resitance. Here we go then:
picked random gallente ship for figures (thorax)
base em resist = 0% shield + 50% armour = 50
base expl resist = 50% shield + 10% armour = 60
base kin resist = 40% shield + 35% armour = 75
base therm resist = 20% shield + 35% armour = 55
and so i propose that 50 < 55 < 60 < 75
how would you measure lowest base resistance?
Simple. For an armor tanker the relevant base resistance is 50% now which is higher than exp/kin/therm base resistance. I will quote myself here and bold the part that you ignored so conveniently:
Originally by: Wu Jiun
em lowest base resistance on armor now lol? quite the opposite. in case you actually talk about hardened tanks then em is either very good or the worst of them all depending on the kind of armor tank. sounds balanced?
As for you adding shield resistance and armor resistance for an armor tanking ship without at least applying reasonable weights: it only reinforces my idea about you having no clue of pvp.
|
Quelque Chose
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:23:00 -
[9]
Originally by: ekalami
I'll only comment on one of your other points. That of EM being the lowest base resitance. Here we go then:
picked random gallente ship for figures (thorax)
base em resist = 0% shield + 50% armour = 50
base expl resist = 50% shield + 10% armour = 60
base kin resist = 40% shield + 35% armour = 75
base therm resist = 20% shield + 35% armour = 55
and so i propose that 50 < 55 < 60 < 75
how would you measure lowest base resistance?
Percentages don't work that way. Given that Gallente are armor tankers and given that rax pilots seem to love their 1600mm plates, you're going to be looking at a disproportionate amount of damage going to armor.
Just as a pulled- it- outta- my- hat figure, let's say you're going to have to kill 1 part shields to 2.5 parts armor. If you're dealing .5 part EM per volley, you're going to eat up the shields in 2 volleys and then do half that damage (.25 part) to the armor -- thus taking 10 volleys to deal with that for a total of 12 volleys to get into the hull.
Same figures but explosive damage: 4 (.25 part apiece) volleys to go through the shield, 6 (.45 part apiece * 6 = 2.7 parts) volleys to completely kill the armor and do some hull damage on top -- total of 10. Means explosive damage is more than 16.67% more effective than EM.
______________________________
"Eve Online is a massively multiplayer game about trolling in outer space." |
ekalami
Pixies Under Pressure
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:36:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Wu Jiun
And you better don't comment on the other ones as there would be nothing you could nitpick on, right?
Well I could, but (for example) when you started going on about some past EANM cpu nerf, when i was referring to the possibility of a future further nerf instead, I would have started deviating from the point of this thread.
Furthermore, you constrained my general comment about ship *total* base resists, to just armour. Again irrelevant.
Most of your other points acted to derail in a similar fashion and are therefore not worth responding to either
|
Christari Zuborov
Ore Mongers
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:37:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Quelque Chose
Edited by: Quelque Chose on 14/03/2008 18:31:16
Originally by: ekalami
I'll only comment on one of your other points. That of EM being the lowest base resitance. Here we go then:
picked random gallente ship for figures (thorax)
base em resist = 0% shield + 50% armour = 50
base expl resist = 50% shield + 10% armour = 60
base kin resist = 40% shield + 35% armour = 75
base therm resist = 20% shield + 35% armour = 55
and so i propose that 50 < 55 < 60 < 75
how would you measure lowest base resistance?
Percentages don't work that way. Given that Gallente are armor tankers and given that rax pilots seem to love their 1600mm plates, you're going to be looking at a disproportionate amount of damage going to armor.
Just as a pulled- it- outta- my- hat figure, let's say you're going to have to kill 1 part shields to 2.5 parts armor. If you're dealing .5 part EM per volley, you're going to eat up the shields in 2 volleys and then do half that damage (.25 part) to the armor -- thus taking 10 volleys to deal with that for a total of 12 volleys to get into the hull.
Same figures but explosive damage: 4 (.25 part apiece) volleys to go through the shield, 6 (.45 part apiece * 6 = 2.7 parts) volleys to completely kill the armor and do some hull damage on top -- total of 10. Means explosive damage is more than 16.67% more effective than EM. *edit* In that specific case, anyway. As armor : shield ratio approaches 1, efficiency of EM vs Explosive improves, but you're still wrong to think EM is the lowest resist.
Hey... If you continue to bring fact based arguments in here, I'm going to have to ask you to leave.
|
Wu Jiun
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:38:00 -
[12]
Originally by: ekalami
Most of your other points acted to derail in a similar fashion and are therefore not worth responding to either
You chose the easy way out. Given your lack of knowledge about the game i can't blame you for this. Good luck with your gallente whine crusade you have 2 years of hard work coming there.
|
ekalami
Pixies Under Pressure
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:46:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Wu Jiun
You chose the easy way out.
We can agree at last, amarr cruiser 5 while quite a long skill, is certainly way easier than trying to get things balanced
Originally by: Wu Jiun
Good luck with your gallente whine crusade you have 2 years of hard work coming there.
Hmm 2 years whining for balance or 12 days for amarr cruiser 5. I refer you back to the first point quoted in this post 
|
Yakuri Hirotami
Celestial Horizon Corp.
Valainaloce
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:49:00 -
[14]
This thread should be closed lol, just wasted a lot of time reading it, and in the end, what's the point? It's not the fiddle, it's the fiddler.
|
ED Grubermann
Boot To The Head
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 18:59:00 -
[15]
THIS THREAD DOES NOT DELIVER!!! 
but boy is it funny!!!
If you can't use proper spacing in your posts, use ALT+F4 to make it more readable
- yes the above is my siggy - |
Shira Rayborn
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 19:00:00 -
[16]
Originally by: ekalami
...
Can I have it it? You know, your stuff....can I have it?
|
ekalami
Pixies Under Pressure
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 19:23:00 -
[17]
Edited by: ekalami on 14/03/2008 19:25:35
Interesting couple of facts arising from this thread:
[A] Thread purpose was to encourage people to crosstrain to amarr.
[B] Every reply so far has been negative.
From this it is reasonable to suppose one of two things.
[1] The Amarr club would like to remain as exclusive as possible.
[2] That Amarr still arent good enough.
If its [1], hahahaha, really glad i made this thread.
If its [2], please CCP, can they we be boosted some more please? Perhaps a battleship with drone and nos bonus. And cap. Thanks :)
|
Ki An
Filiolus Of Bellum
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 19:34:00 -
[18]
I'm cross training Amarr from Gallente. However, it's mainly because Amarr ships look soooo pretty!
Filiolus of Bellum is recruiting
|
Imperator Jora'h
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 19:42:00 -
[19]
Originally by: ekalami
Edited by: ekalami on 14/03/2008 19:25:35
Interesting couple of facts arising from this thread:
[A] Thread purpose was to encourage people to crosstrain to amarr.
[B] Every reply so far has been negative.
From this it is reasonable to suppose one of two things.
[1] The Amarr club would like to remain as exclusive as possible.
[2] That Amarr still arent good enough.
If its [1], hahahaha, really glad i made this thread.
If its [2], please CCP, can they we be boosted some more please? Perhaps a battleship with drone and nos bonus. And cap. Thanks :)
There is another possibility:
You're wrong in your assessment. You'll find out soon enough...Amarr whiners can always use another to swell their ranks.
(Of course if your goal is to solely fly the Curse which is essentially a shiny Gallente ship fine but you can not extrapolate the quality of Amarr ships as a whole from the one [well two if you include the Arbitrator] ship that is nothing like the rest...funny how the best Amarr ship is more Gallente in function huh?)
--------------------------------------------------
"Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
|
ekalami
Pixies Under Pressure
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 19:54:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
Amarr whiners can always use another to swell their ranks.
Thank you for confirming my first point in the OP. And you're welcome, it is stunning how effective it has been.
Originally by: Imperator Jora'h
(Of course if your goal is to solely fly the Curse which is essentially a shiny Gallente ship fine but you can not extrapolate the quality of Amarr ships as a whole from the one [well two if you include the Arbitrator] ship that is nothing like the rest...funny how the best Amarr ship is more Gallente in function huh?)
A *shiny* gallente ship. Yes indeedy. Very shiny.
Did you just say its the best amarr ship? So why are your kind equating it with the arazu/lachesis saying it needs a buff to be 'on par with the others'?
The curse will be the first amarr t2 ship I fly, since it only requires the cruiser 5 skill to be max skilled for it. And it doesn't require the laser gunnery tree. And it is a solopwn mobile clearly needs another buff 
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |