| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
qrac
   |
Posted - 2004.05.11 12:34:00 -
[1]
what do you guys think? i don't think they're viable for pvp since they deal less damage and use more cap than other guns if you calculate with ship bonuses.
for those of you with large energy turret skill at level 5. do you regret training this skill to level 5 or not? i sure do. i wasted 1 months training on something that's apparently not viable for pvp according to ccp.
-------------------------------------------
Insanes numquam moriuntur! |
fras
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 12:43:00 -
[2]
I think if you want to run fully armour tanked on an Apoc a load of dual heavy beams can be a reasonable option, although you can fit 6x 425, 2 launchers np with a full armour tank which is probably better.
Megabeams and especially Tachyons are useless for pvp imo though. They don't do anything that a 425 can't do for alot less cap usage.
I'm guessing there's going to be some kind of boost at some point though, the problem is clear to see and I'm sure the devs are aware of it.
|
Kaylona Tso
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 12:49:00 -
[3]
One laser might be good to eat shields if you don't use EMP ammo on Projectiles and If you use hybrids that don't do EM damage at all. But unless you setup for a short gank or in a really big fleet... then no not as a complete setup.
-----
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 12:59:00 -
[4]
Ohh, it's viable allright 
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
qrac
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 13:30:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Discorporation
Ohh, it's viable allright
you really think they are viable compared to other guns? the only laser that seems to be somewhat reasonable is the dual heavy beam. the rest aren't worth fitting.
-------------------------------------------
Insanes numquam moriuntur! |
JoCool
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 13:35:00 -
[6]
I think CCP is aware of that and will think about some adjustments according lasers, or are doing already. Have faith 
|
DREAMWORKS
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 15:05:00 -
[7]
Currently an apoc with 6x 425mm can beat any other laser setup apoc with the greatest ease.
__________________________
http://www.nin.com/visuals/thtf_hi.html |
dalman
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 15:16:00 -
[8]
Lasers are good for fleet combat.
Lasers are not good for 1vs1.
Making lasers good for 1vs1 would make them ³ber for fleet combat. (not to mention NPC hunting)
They could do with a 10-15% increase in damage mod though...
M.I.A. since 2004-07-30 |
qrac
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 15:31:00 -
[9]
Originally by: dalman
Lasers are good for fleet combat.
Lasers are not good for 1vs1.
Making lasers good for 1vs1 would make them ³ber for fleet combat. (not to mention NPC hunting)
They could do with a 10-15% increase in damage mod though...
why are lasers good for fleet combat? i only see one advantage and it's the crystal swap IF the targets are stringed out.
-------------------------------------------
Insanes numquam moriuntur! |
Istvaan Shogaatsu
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 15:34:00 -
[10]
I agree wholeheartedly. Lasers need a good 10-15% damage boost. For their demented energy drain, they certainly don't pull their weight - especially since they run out of steam once they're through the shields and hitting into the armour.
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 15:39:00 -
[11]
Tachyon can use a bit of a boost, lasers in general are perfectly fine. If you have cap issues, get a cap injector, that's what they're there for.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 15:54:00 -
[12]
Ah, the usual Jim + dalman Caldari lobbying ...
Why does cap usage not matter in fleet battles?
Since when do Lasers do decent damage? (hybrids on megathron do a lot more damage)
Why do you think that crystal swapping has no lag problems? In laggy battles its everything except instant.
And Jim: No need to respond to your post, you did not say why you are of that opinion and I guess you actually can't say why you are as there are no reasons to think that lasers would be okay. I am very sure that the only reason for your post, as so often, is that you think you have to do everything you can to make the other Races' ships stay weaker than Raven.
|
qrac
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 15:57:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Jim Raynor
Tachyon can use a bit of a boost, lasers in general are perfectly fine. If you have cap issues, get a cap injector, that's what they're there for.
even if u don't have cap issues they don't deal enough damage. let's say i want a close range laser apoc setup. i fit dual heavy pulse lasers. for one of them to compare to let's say a dual 425mm on a tempest i have to fit 2 heatsinkII's to get the same damage output!
let's say i want to go long range. i fit 6 megabeams.. but wait why fit 6 mega beams when i can fit 6 rails and use less than half the cap the megabeams use and do even more damage than them.
-------------------------------------------
Insanes numquam moriuntur! |
qrac
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 16:07:00 -
[14]
Quote:
Because in fleet combat, their cap usage doesn't really matter.
pretty much true when u have good skills.
Quote:
And they deal pretty good damage.
both rails and projectiles deal more damage yet rails use less than half the cap and projectiles use ~0 cap.
Quote:
Instant crystal swapping.
instant crystal swapping is subject to lag too.
Quote:
No need to reload, which may take a loooooong time when it's laggy.
autoreload will be put in in a not so distant patch so it'll become a non-issue.
-------------------------------------------
Insanes numquam moriuntur! |
Vangelis
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 16:13:00 -
[15]
Tachs arnt as usless as u say they are but you are correct they are not on par with hybrids and projectiles.
They are however prob the best for NPC hunting in groups as u tend to eat up alot of ammo when chaining.
|
Bobby Wilson
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 16:29:00 -
[16]
L beams deff need a boost.
That being said, there is as has been said a place for SOME lasers in fleet battles. Since any competent fleet uses concentrated fire, the addition of a lot of EM damage to drop shields is very handy. A good fleet has a mix of turrets and launchers, as well as interceptor and EW support.
It's also handy in large scale chains for the same reasons. A pile of 425 rails DOES do a lot of damage, but dropping the shields of a strong ship takes a LOT longer than if there is some mega-beam help.
BW
Originally by: Selim
Cool, congrats.
Oh, stupid idea by the way.
|
Garramon
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 16:51:00 -
[17]
Lasers are designed for 1 thing - shield killing.
Why does this make them good for fleet battle? You can kill the shields on many of the opponents fast, leaving your buds to chew through their armor with the other weaps.
So what happens when all the enemies lose their shields? You are worthless? No, you can swap crystals and "help out." Just dont expect to do the damage that the others do. Armor isn't your forte. Just as shields weren't theirs.
------------------------------------------------
 |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 16:59:00 -
[18]
Quote:
And Jim: No need to respond to your post, you did not say why you are of that opinion and I guess you actually can't say why you are as there are no reasons to think that lasers would be okay. I am very sure that the only reason for your post, as so often, is that you think you have to do everything you can to make the other Races' ships stay weaker than Raven.
I am so biased against lasers I am training them and plan to use them on my Raven!
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
qrac
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 17:01:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Garramon
Lasers are designed for 1 thing - shield killing.
Why does this make them good for fleet battle? You can kill the shields on many of the opponents fast, leaving your buds to chew through their armor with the other weaps.
So what happens when all the enemies lose their shields? You are worthless? No, you can swap crystals and "help out." Just dont expect to do the damage that the others do. Armor isn't your forte. Just as shields weren't theirs.
yet the megathron will******through shields faster with its rails.
-------------------------------------------
Insanes numquam moriuntur! |
qrac
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 17:04:00 -
[20]
Quote:
I am so biased against lasers I am training them and plan to use them on my Raven!
you're training to fit 2 dual heavy beams as secondary weapons right?
-------------------------------------------
Insanes numquam moriuntur! |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 17:05:00 -
[21]
Originally by: qrac
Quote:
I am so biased against lasers I am training them and plan to use them on my Raven!
you're training to fit 2 dual heavy beams as secondary weapons right?
that or mega beams, id rather use lasers and a cap injector than have to carry hybrid ammo around for 2 turrets.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Hellek
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 17:14:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Hellek on 11/05/2004 17:16:50
do you have 6500 grid and 110 CPU (-skills) for the two megabeams?
Anyway, I appreciate your move, it will be a lot more interesting and fruitful to discuss with you once you know about the problems which I and the other Amarr pilots are facing.
|
Arthur Eld
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 17:15:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Jim Raynor
Originally by: qrac
Quote:
I am so biased against lasers I am training them and plan to use them on my Raven!
you're training to fit 2 dual heavy beams as secondary weapons right?
that or mega beams, id rather use lasers and a cap injector than have to carry hybrid ammo around for 2 turrets.
I've heard you say many times that lasers are "not that bad" yet you've never used a Large laser? Also, cap charges use alot of cargo space. How is lugging around cap charges different from lugging around hybrid ammo. And dual heavy beams have crap range and bad tracking. Two things that don't mix very well.
____________________
First comes smiles, then lies. Last is gunfire. We deal in lead.
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 18:12:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Arthur Eld
Originally by: Jim Raynor
Originally by: qrac
Quote:
I am so biased against lasers I am training them and plan to use them on my Raven!
you're training to fit 2 dual heavy beams as secondary weapons right?
that or mega beams, id rather use lasers and a cap injector than have to carry hybrid ammo around for 2 turrets.
I've heard you say many times that lasers are "not that bad" yet you've never used a Large laser? Also, cap charges use alot of cargo space. How is lugging around cap charges different from lugging around hybrid ammo. And dual heavy beams have crap range and bad tracking. Two things that don't mix very well.
I've used large lasers before, just not on this character, if that answers your question.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 18:13:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Hellek
Edited by: Hellek on 11/05/2004 17:16:50
do you have 6500 grid and 110 CPU (-skills) for the two megabeams?
Anyway, I appreciate your move, it will be a lot more interesting and fruitful to discuss with you once you know about the problems which I and the other Amarr pilots are facing.
Yes I do.
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
DarkMatters
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 19:06:00 -
[26]
There is currently a serious lack of balance, mostly this stems from certain ships such as the raven and the tempest being able to put almost their entire cap into complete defense or into defense and electronic warfare.
amarr ships currently just cant do this, they may have bigger caps but they are not big another to support both types, and cant use electronic warfare in their wildest dreams let alone at the same time.
SomeoneÆs posted that they are good in fleet battles because they take down shields, seams a poor argument to me, lasers only do two damage types, come on how many of you have em and thermal harders? A raven launching 6 em cruse a go will get throes shields down just as fast but with almost no cap usage.
The way to balance lasers which appears to me is to increase damage over other gun types in proportion to the damage over time (so that reload time is taken into account) compared to the cap used. Of cause this is a silly idea and would lead to uber lasers.
So I guess its fit up those projectiles and rails...(plz no one give me any rubbish on how you have to carry ammo)
come-on devs give us a bit of balance how about switching our ship bonuses to projectiles., looks like its going to be the only way 
|
Man'corr
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 19:24:00 -
[27]
hmm so jim says laser users are to use cap injectors...........so the lasers do use "used up" kind of ammo, which makes the whole "but lasers use no cap" argument naught.
So im stuck with a weapon thats only good against shields, quite a difference against rails, which are about equal ahainst shields and armor, and proj, which are ok against shields with em/phased plasma and as good as lasers on shields against armor............weehaa........
All of above post was formulated wth 100% honesty and 100% sarcasm. Now i only need to get drunk
The 3rd turret is the Malediction is missing. Plz make as much noise as possible so that CCP gets us a remedy for that, possibly before X-Mas this year. |
Krendig
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 19:54:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Krendig on 11/05/2004 19:58:39
I've actually taken a slightly odd stance with regard to lasers recently-- Their damage is OK, their cap use is "a little high", and their range blows chunks.
Falloff sucks (erm, by definition, lasers travel at pretty near the speed of light-- whyfore then do they have much worse falloff than hybrids, which are, presumably, traveling at a significantly smaller fraction of c?), and is the biggest limiting factor on my 'geddon. In order to do the damage output of hybrids, I have to be at half the range.
And the RoF bonus on the Armageddon is one of the most underappreciated bonuses in the game. For *0* extra capacitor usage, I get significantly better damage.
Rough stats:
6x425's fitted to an Apoc with my (modest) skills, and antimatter ammo:
Range: 28,800 + 25,200
Fitting: 16,500 PG, 357 CPU
147 damage/second (Not including reloads, types of armor/shield, hardeners, etc, just raw damage) for 20.9 cap/second.
Or, for each unit of capacitor spent, 7.03 damage.
My current beam setup on an Armageddon (2 megapulse, 3 dual heavy beam, 2 megabeam):
Range: 21,000 + 8,400 to 30,000 + 16,8000 (Setup is optimized for 25k)
Fitting: 16,750 PG, 293 CPU
165.8 raw damage/second, for 32.8 capacitor
or, 5.06 damage / 1 unit capacitor.
If the falloff was doubled across the board, it would be *very* easy to armor tank the 'geddon, and wreak havoc in PvP. As it is, to be effective, that setup requires being in someone's face-- the laser version of a blasterthron.
BTW - The same beam config on an Apocalypse produces 137.0 damage for 28.9 cap/second-- a measly 4.74 damage/cap. Adding a 3rd megabeam, however, raises it to 154.3 damage for 37.7 cap-- 4.09 damage/cap.
It seems in this game, you get range, or damage, which is reasonable. Problem is, lasers sacrifice range to maintain the same level of damage output, for more capacitor usage.
Naturally, of course, the result of this post will be the immediate and fatal nerfing of the Armageddon. My apologies.
--Krendig the Mathematically Challenged
/edit typos
|
Arthur Eld
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 20:09:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Arthur Eld on 11/05/2004 20:11:22
Originally by: Krendig
And the RoF bonus on the Armageddon is one of the most underappreciated bonuses in the game. For *0* extra capacitor usage, I get significantly better damage.
Faster RoF mean faster depletion of the capacitor. RoF bonus only compounds the problem.
I've pretty much given up lobbying for laser improvements and have started training for other battleships and weapons. Why fight the uphill battle when i can get into a tempest or raven too and level the playing field? 
____________________
First comes smiles, then lies. Last is gunfire. We deal in lead.
|
Krendig
|
Posted - 2004.05.11 20:13:00 -
[30]
Quote:
Faster RoF mean faster depletion of the capacitor. RoF bonus only compounds the problem.
I've pretty much given up lobbying for laser improvements and have started training for other battleships and weapons. Why fight the uphill battle when i can get into a tempest or raven too and level the playing field?
Except that in the case of the Armageddon, there's a corresponding decrease in capactior usage required, that balances out to a net increase of 0.
So while you don't *gain* anything in terms of capacitor use, you don't lose anything, either. But you gain damage, and that's a Good ThingÖ.
--Krendig
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |