Originally by: Trojanman190

---

Edited by: Trojanman190 on 20/06/2008 16:03:07

Originally by: To mare

---

ammo dont matter.
barrage have 44 dmg
scorch have 44 dmg
ammo have the same dmg, the gun its crap.

(hail & conflagration have both 56dmg if someone use them)

---
EMP have lower dmg because long range projectile have more dmg than others races long range ammo, i will never understand that but i live with it.

---

Maybe you are right, the (raw)damage itself isn't to much a problem. I still feel that the falloff is a huge problem and needs to be looked at.

---

Originally by: Gavin Darklighter

---

Edited by: Gavin Darklighter on 20/06/2008 23:22:19
Just boosting autocannon damage would not do anything meaningful for the tempest unless you boosted it to a level that made the Maelstrom unstoppable, and even then we still have the problem of the Maelstrom making the Tempest obsolete.

---

Originally by: Gavin Darklighter

---

Sure, if you don't want a meaningful tank.

---

Originally by: Veryez

---

Since we're brainstorming ideas, throw this on the pile. Those of us who fly the tempest really don't want the layout changed. The 8/5/6 layout means no matter how you set it up you will never armor tank as well as an 8/4/7 layout or shield tank as well as an 8/6/5 layout. While some have suggested giving the Tempest a 7th gun (which surprisingly a torp launcher in the 7th slot does about the same dps) or 7th low (better tank), how about this. Increase the bonuses. Make it a true DPS platform - it would be the simplest solution. Nothing overpowered, but enough to overcome the passive tanks that other races can field. While I haven't run the exact numbers, try something like 7.5% ROF per level, 7.5% Damage per level which should increase DPS by around 28.5%.

If we use Blind Jhon's numbers in post 112, the Tempest's DPS with that setup would be around 17.3 DPS - hardly game breaking, yet a significant step in the correct direction. Add in the suggestions for 150m3 drone bay and 100m3 bandwidth and the ship would be back without stepping on either the Mael's or Phoon's toes.

Even with these changes I think Artillery needs work (i.e. at very least a larger clip size) but this magnitude of change is the type that's needed.

---

Originally by: Kagura Nikon

---

[
eemm NO. LAsers are supposed to be the highest damage one before ship bonuses. That si why amarr ships get cap usage bonus and not damage bonus.

---

Originally by: Kagura Nikon

---

nope. Blasters are the highest damage AFTER ship bonus applied. Projectiles are SUPPOSED to be the WEAKEST before bonus applied. Why?because minmatar ships have ROF bonus (the best damage bonus) to compensate. If AC had same base damage as lasers, then a maelstrom would be spitting like 1400 dps!!! Completely overpowered

---

Originally by: Naomi Knight

---

Ah another matar whine thread ...
If you always sux in pvp it is your problem , the minmatar bses and guns are fine so stop whining over EFT numbers and learn the game. There are lots of counters that a matar player can use against enemy battleships use those and bring a buddy to help you,thats all is needed nothing else.

It is strange that nowadays there are more matari whine threads than the other 3 races alltogeather. Looks like all little kids are here after they skilled out their FOTM vagabonds.

---

Originally by: Blind Jhon

---

4) why the hell abaddon 110m/s, rock 110m/s, hyperion 130m/s, MAELSTROM 115m/s??? fix mael velocity asap

---

Originally by: Veryez

---

Edited by: Veryez on 27/06/2008 08:49:47
Edited by: Veryez on 27/06/2008 08:34:45
Expanding on my earlier post, since hybrid ships get damage bonuses and projectile ships get ROF bonus the differences in DPS becomes smaller. The DPS results are as follows:

Electrons > dual 425Æs by 19.1%
Ions > 650Æs by 20%
Neutrons > 800Æs by 21.8%

Since we want to close this gap (but not make projectiles overpowered) I suggest the following: Raise EMP (all types) to be equal to other high damage ammoÆs (even reduce carbon if you wish to keep total damage the same), increase the damage modifier on 650Æs by 1% and increase the damage modifier on 800Æs by 2.5%. Finally increase all minmatar battleship bonuses to be 6% ROF per level, instead of the current 5% now. Do not change any other bonuses. Now the results will be:

Electrons > Dual 425Æs by 11.1%
Ions > 650Æs by 10.9%
Neutrons > 800Æs by 10.9%

For the Tempest, since it gets a ROF and damage bonus, itÆs guns will actually do more damage than a mega one for one, however since the mega has an extra gun, it will still out damage the Tempest by 3.6% (not including drones where the difference becomes much larger) as opposed to the current 13.75% (before drones). Yes the Tempest can mount an extra Torpedo launcher, however it only does 94.25% of a t2 800, so it will not bring the tempest above an mega (when factoring in drones), only closer.

Artillery is another story, but with the 6% ROF per level, they will become much closer to being fixed.

Edit - For those gal pilots that are blanching at this, remember the mega has an important advantage over the Tempest (besides it's drones), for every mag stab added, it gains a damage bonus on 7 weapons while the Tempest can only bonus 6 weapons. So in the reality of Tranquility, the 3.6% difference is actually always bigger and with the extra low, the mega has an easier time fitting in damage mods.

---

Originally by: Gavin Darklighter

---

Just fix EMP and Hail, switch the fifth med slot on the Tempest to a seventh low slot, and give the Tempest less shields and more armor.

---

Originally by: Veryez

---

Maybe I wasn't clear in my post, but the total increase in DPS would be between 9% and 10% for 800's. By giving the majority of the bonus to the ship you don't make projectiles more powerful on non-matari ships, which has always been a concern @ CCP. Changing the ROF bonus on all matari battleships from 5% per level to 6% per level is a better than 7% increase in DPS by itself. AC's are not as underpowered as some make them out to be, they only need a little work, Artillery needs bigger changes.

Besides how much would you boost AC's?

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

Id be training amar if I didn't want a carrier so bad.

---

Originally by: Boz Well

---

The problem with increasing falloff is that it does little to impact how much damage you do at closer ranges. It just allows the autocannons to hit out to longer ranges, which tends to be artillery's role. It'd make them more versatile I suppose, but you'd still get outclassed by other battleships in all relevant ranges.

Would they become too similar to lasers? They still use no cap, they still use matar ammo (no lenses), they still are easy to fit, they still have longer falloff. The only difference is they'd be more useful than the present implementation.

---

Originally by: Siddy

---

Edited by: Siddy on 27/06/2008 18:28:52
Remove large projectiles from game, replase them with lasers and cover it all with Roleplaying that Minmatars switched to lasers on the bigger ships due to metals cant the the stress caused bla bla bla


EVERYONE HAPPY, oh and replace large wepons skills with lasers or something.

And devs dont need to use brains either.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

stuff i dont like

---

Originally by: Blind Jhon

---

0-3000m
Blasters > ACs > Lasers

---

Originally by: Forge Lag

---

Every time nanoes are mentioned someone muses in with "adapt, use minmatar recons" and "vagabond is ment to go fast".

So what about you adapt and use laserboats? Because those are ment for fleet work.

---

Originally by: Neutrino Sunset

---

Originally by: To mare

---

optimal boosted dont solve the problem.
for hit and run tactics you need the punch that projectile dont have.

---

See...

Originally by: Neutrino Sunset

---

Increase apha on artillery by decreasing rof and increasing damage mod... I see no reason why we can't have at least half as much alpha back as we used to have with a 25% boost or thereabouts.

---

---

Originally by: Ulstan

---

If 'train minmatar recons' is an adequate answer to people dissatisfied with how they can counter nanos, then I think it's appropriate to tell you all to just train gallente battleships. There's a definite sense of minmatar pilots wanting it both ways here.

Quote:

---

but AC shoud have more dps than laser at short range

---

Absolutely not. AC's use no cap, and thus should have less DPS than the other turret short range options.

I see you are unhappy at the active shield tank on Minmatar ships, but wouldn't all your same issues apply to caldari ships as well? What about changing the slot layouts on some of the 'versatile' minmatar ships so they can do one or the other thing better?

---

Originally by: Boz Well

---

Originally by: To mare

---

optimal boosted dont solve the problem.
why you would do wolf pack with minmatar BS where all other bs just do it better.
agility dont solve the problem.
cheaper hull is just useless (see insurance)
who told you that minmatar BS have to sux in dps, just look at the tempest the lowest defensive BS with 2 dmg mods its clearly made to hold some firepower.

for hit and run tactics you need the punch that projectile dont have.

---

Mael can hit over 1000 DPS, and if the optimal was respectable, that's plenty imho. If we could deal maelstrom DPS out to an optimal range between blasters and lasers, then our tracking/fitting/cap use more than make up for slightly less DPS. It'd be very competitive with other BS damage. I don't call that sucking at DPS.

If the tempest needs a seperate boost, so be it. But if you adjust projectiles based on the tempest, you'll throw off Mael/Phoon imo.

---

Originally by: Neutrino Sunset

---

One shotting a buffer tanked BS is absolutely not the objective. There is a whole spectrum of possibilies between where large arty currently is and giving it a bit more punch. Somewhere along that spectrum is a point at which a few Tempests would be the perfect tool for breaking up a small gate camp of HACs and the odd BS.

---

Originally by: Neutrino Sunset

---

The devs have decreed that versatility is the curse by which Minmatar BS are effectively crippled. Even if we wanted the same rational slot and hardpoint layouts as other race's BS we would not get it. Although personally I think turning the Minmatar BS into clones of the other races BS would be an unimaginative and undesirable solution to the current problem of our BS not being good at anything at all.

---

Originally by: Boz Well

---

Assuming faction ammo (which is fair for pvp), 3xgyro's puts you at 1058 with drones. I consider that fair.

---

Originally by: Boz Well

---

Originally by: To mare

---

if you boost the optimal of AC u will have a weak copy of laser but as a weak copy it dont shine in anything.

about boosting alpha AND tracking of arty is no possible CCP intentionally nerfed tracking to dont allow arty hit small things.
abut increasing alpha or you increase it alot to make it worthwile or 25% make close to nothing. a +25% dmg mod can be good if you dont touch the rof

---

A copy of a laser, except lasers use lots of cap, lasers are harder to fit, lasers have worse tracking, projectiles have superior falloff and projectiles have to reload. So basically your point is it's a copy of lasers because what, they both have range longer than blasters? My turn to .

If you were advocating higher DPS than lasers while at the same time making projectiles use cap again, then fine, I'd be on board. But it's silly to ask for higher DPS while retaining all our advantages.

---

Originally by: Siddy

---

Typhoon is not bound to use minmatar primary weponsystem.

---

Originally by: Veryez

---

I still think the problem is with the ships and not only the weapons. Besides boosting weapons only makes other races stronger when using projectiles, which I feel is the wrong approach to take. Since weÆre at the point of radical ideas, consider the following:

ACÆs:
1) Scale falloff as gun size increases in the same proportion as optimal scales.
2) Raise EMP (and RF EMP) ammo to equal other high damage ammos - feel free to reduce carbon if desired

Artillery:
1) Reduce ROF by 10% (this is a boost for the unsure).
2) Triple clip size.

Ships:
Phoon:
1) Switch shield and armor values
2) Increase bonus to 6% ROF per level for large projectiles (leave other bonus)

Mael:
1) Increase speed and agility to match current Tempest
2) Reduce PG so as not to fit Artillery
2) Increase Bonus to 6% ROF per level for large projectiles (leave other bonus)

Tempest:
1) Change bonus to 10% damage, 10% tracking (or optimal) per level
2) Change layout to 8/7/4 with 7 turrets/2 launchers
3) Increase PG/CPU to allow artillery/shield tank fit
4) Increase agility to match phoon, leave speed unchanged.

The attempt is to leave projectiles weak, so that other races wonÆt use them unbonused, yet boost the Minmatar BSÆs slightly. ThatÆs the key point, yes Minmatar BS are in general behind the other races, primarily because of the weakness of projectiles û so make them better at using projectiles, rather than boosting projectiles and making them attractive to other races. Much like Caldari battleships, setting the minmatar battleships up as sheild tankers allows the use of more damage mods to hide the weakness of projectiles better. The Tempest gains it's alpha back - but not overpowered and becomes a true artillery ship. The reason I chose those numbers was that the DPS per gun on the Tempest would be unchanged, but adding the extra gun would result in an increase in DPS, which as Liang has proven is what is needed for a fleet ship, (however it still lags a Tach Abbadon in DPS by 21% as opposed to the current 41%). Obviously balance in numbers needs to be worked out on SiSi, but this is a first cut at a radical idea (Even I'm not sure I like a shield tanking Tempest, but it is sorely lacking a role). Discuss.

---

Originally by: Noelle Fay

---

I suggest an exchange.

We buff your BS, but nerf your nano***gotry.

Deal?

---

Originally by: Mizear

---

I didn't say the tempest was fine, I said that the tempest shouldn't be boosted in terms of DPS to outdps a geddon with a capless weapons at any range (even with barrage you have more cap/second left then a geddon using pulses).

---

Originally by: Veryez

---

There is a way, and it might actually help the Tempest and all matari battleships in general. Boost active tanking, and I mean significantly boost. For example make active hardners (shield and armor) (t1) to 65% and (t2) to 70%, introduce a skill that reduces cap use on hardners (shield and armor) and reduce PG and CPU need of shield boosters and armor reppers by 15% each. Lastly reduce cap use of both by 20%. Make it so that an active tank can be made better than a passive tank. And for good measure stacking nerf plates and extenders again. CCP wants battles to last longer - there you go. We want capless weapons to matter - bingo, make people want to active tank again.

---

Originally by: Boz Well

---

There's room to buff autocannon DPS and optimal both, so that their DPS is comparable to lasers and their optimal is in between blasters and lasers. I just see it being a bit much for them to be capless/easy to fit/yada yada and outdamage lasers, which have lots of drawbacks. Equal damage, but shorter range, sounds fair to me though. Definitely a lot more fair than the current state of things.

---

Originally by: Veryez

---

First off, I doubt whether CCP is worried about balancing ships for PvE. I'm certainly not. If it was an issue, just add in more or harder hitting rats. The numbers are just suggestions, I had no time to run them and see it they were balanced. Reducing the fitting requirements and cap use is really for all races, not just matari. We want other races to use them, so that cap needs to be balanced between tank and gank. This is when matari ships can shine again, since we would only be using cap to tank.

It will have to be a significant boost to make it a better choice against passive tanks in some situations (better in all would be just as bad). Besides most people would less resistent to a boost for active tanking as opposed to a boost for projectiles alone. Just reversing some of the poor decisions CCP has made is another way to boost minmatar.

---

Originally by: Kagura Nikon

---

I always suggested , boost tempest and maesltrom making them WAY more agile. The curret extra agility has ZERO value because of MWD trick. MWD trick allows ALL bs no exception to turn and warp out in 10 second... always. no matter wich one. If tempest was able for example to turn and warp out in 8 second WITHOUT the MWD trick, then it would have a definitive advantage to be used on hit an d run and mroe survivability in fleet fights than other battleships.

---

Originally by: Kagura Nikon

---

Also change tempest to 10% damage per level and give 100M drone bay. result about same DPS but again an alpha increase.

---

Originally by: Kagura Nikon

---

Arties NEED to be changed, they need their alpha back. double damage , halves rate of fire. Solves the clip size issue and the alpha issue.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

That's what has to change. The close range damage isn't the problem, it's the damage we do at the range we are supposed to be fighting at that is our problem.

Giving the tempest a bigger drone bay will make it to much like the maelstrom to be good. The balances need to stop changing the ship into another ship, that can't possibly be what we want.

---

Originally by: Siddy

---

Why not all the times

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

Yea, the close range damage isn't a problem.

Your statement implies that simply because a weapon has the lowest optimal, it should have the highest damage, which is clearly not the case in this game. There are a lot more factors that come into play than simply optimal range.

Optimal, Falloff, Tracking, Damage Type, Damage Amount, RoF, Capacity, Capacitor, and even the ships the weapons are mounted on has to be taken into account.

CCP made blasters the close range king and lasers the long range king, that leaves one area left for a weapon to feel unique, mid range. Unfortunately, there is no way that a weapon in this game can do more damage at its mid range than it can its max range, so we have to take a hit there.

Lasers take hordes of cap to use. I'm sure if they were solar powered capless weapons they would have the weakest dps in the game, but that is not the case. In their current capless state I don't think AC have any bussiness doing more damage than blasters or lasers inside of 10 - 15km. It would take some major changes to AC to make this acceptable.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

I've never once made a statement to that effect. All of my arguments have pointed to balancing us with respect to the mid range battle, ie, making us the best there. If I wanted to make our ships the worst I would not be in this thread because there would be nothing I would want changed.

---

Originally by: Blind Jhon

---

MONEO UT: we should avoid the "boost tank" approach and concentrate upon how to maximize damage from our ships, and our guns

---

Originally by: Shinta Kobi

---

I just wish artillery wasn't so subpar to everything else. AC's do ok, but arty's just seem to(for the lack of a better term)suck.

---

Originally by: Siddy

---

Originally by: To mare

---

Originally by: Shinta Kobi

---

I just wish artillery wasn't so subpar to everything else. AC's do ok, but arty's just seem to(for the lack of a better term)suck.

---

ACs are ok?
ok in what?

---

didint you readthe memo?

They aperantly dont take cap, uh huh.

a huge minmatard advantage!!!!11

---

Originally by: Shinta Kobi

---

Edited by: Shinta Kobi on 09/07/2008 14:24:39

Originally by: Blind Jhon

---

Edited by: Blind Jhon on 09/07/2008 14:10:40

Originally by: Shinta Kobi

---

With proper skills and setup, you have a reasonable amount of DPS and accuracy to kill off everything from drones to BC's in quick time. BS's take a little longer by nature, but they pop in the long run. RoF can't be ignored either.

---

wtb shinta's modified 650mm

did you compared you rasonable amount of dps whit others?

EDIT is this become a "nerf laser asap" or it's still a boost minmatard stuff topic?

---

Erm, as a matter of fact, yes.

Also, please read before posting. The comment you quoted was about AC's.

My 'Cane with a friend's Drake ratting; using 720mm II's at optimal, I was doing half his damage. After refitting with 425mm II's, I was able to keep just up with his damage output.

So, back to what I was simply stating... Artillery kinda sucks...

---

Originally by: Nian Banks

---

Guys, I don't give a rats ass if its small, medium or large, even XLarge projectile weapons, they all have the same problems. They all need the same boost, all in proportion ofcourse but they need it.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

Dude the guns should do less damage because they use no cap, not the ships. I agree 100% that a ship with two damage bonuses should top out for raw EFT dps. I completely agree that it's not fair that a ship with two bonnuses can't touch a ship with one damage bonus and a tracking bonus or a repair bonus. It's stupid and the minmatar ships with only 1 damage bonus end up with the crappiest dps of all.

---

Originally by: Eledh

---

guys, are you all forget that AC's is falloff weapon? are you forget that all projectile weapon has little fitting requirements? are you forget that we didn't need capacitor to activate our guns? are you forget about heavy energy destabilizers what we can use without any problem?

Few words about my Tempest fitting:
1.Think now full passive tank is more interesting than active on the Tempest
2.Rigs: 3x Trimark armor pump 3x 1600 Rolled 2x Gyrostabilizer's t2 1x DC t2
3.Weapon: 6x 650mm LAC's t2 (RF EMP Faloff near 20km / Barrage L faloff near 30km) 2x Heavy Energy Neutraliser's
4.We can fit without any problems all needed electronic: disruptor/web, then we need MWD/Heavy Cap booster and we have ONE FREE medium slot - we can fit ECCM or Sensor booster there :)

---

Originally by: Kagura Nikon

---

stuff

---

Originally by: Veryez

---

1) Please swap the armor and shield values on the phoon (and a bit more PG would be nice - but I won't hold my breath on that), how can it possibly have more shields than armor?

---

Originally by: Veryez

---

The 'chaining ammo' idea, while I like it - I don't think it is something easily done with eve's engine, only CCP could tell us that.

---

Originally by: Boz Well

---

When I looked at the CSM post, it was listed as 'large autocannon buff' and was low priority. Considering it didn't mention artillery or large projectiles in general, well, I think CSM's are kinda clueless on the topic and aren't going to be of much help. Artillery needs much more help than AC's.

---

Originally by: Jim McGregor

---

Seriously, the Tempest could easily have 7 turrets without being overpowered. It would still be a average minmatar battleship, just less sucky. Compare it to the mega, dominix, raven, abaddon, rohk... it doesnt stand a chance.

I think the ship should at least have something to make it viable for combat.

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

The only problem with your first solution is you'll have to do one of two things:

1. Drastically increase damage. This makes problems when balancing vs. blasters. Autos shouldn't do more damage than blasters (even though they have more ehp ), so you have to be careful there.

2. Drastically increase falloff to make autos better than lasers at midrange. This introduces problems with autos getting stupid ranges with barrage, falloff rigs and falloff bonuses.

Now, I haven't run any numbers yet, but I don't think you find the balance between 1 and 2 without encountering either problem.


Which is why I'm promoting an optimal.

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

But then we're still outdamaged by lasers by the time midrange starts due to the wonderful falloff damage.

---

Originally by: Fifi LeFume

---

Originally by: To mare

---

my idea: leave the guns as they are but give us the choice to connect them or not to capacitor, disconnected gun use no capacitor and same dps as now, connected gun gain a rof bonus and use capacitor (capacitor usage need to be balanced with weak minmatar cap), this can be done only docked and only on minmatar ships.

---

So you want double overload? It would add another layer of game mechanic and would add uneeded complexity to alot of things.

---

Originally by: Kagura Nikon

---

Edited by: Kagura Nikon on 22/07/2008 12:29:59
People are really insane with this make ac have long range. With the exemplified 18 km range they would have better effective range than lasers. YES way better. because you need to put short ragen ammo on both before compare them.

Also don get why people want minmatar to have a huge punch at 3km. Forget that! Trying to change the race completely is not the way because is very unlikely devs would do it. Try to focus on improving their current advantages. An increase of about 30% of the falloff itself would be more than enough MORE than enough to achieve a realistic boost in the range department.

The damage department is completely different. And I still support that the best way to solve the damage issue is fixing the ammo.

Make AC short range ammo have same base damage as antimatter and the same to barrage (and faction short range same as faction antimatter). Done. You have a reasonable (10%) increase in damage. I would also suggest making Fusion the highest damage ammo , swap fusion and EMP on the damage chart.

FOLLOWING FIGURES ARE ON AC USING THEORETICALLY CORRECTED AMMO OF SAME POWER THAN HYBRID AMMO AND THE SUGGESTED FALLOFF BOOST.

That would make a temepst armed with 6 dual 425mm (barrage) and no damage mod do 485 dps (from GUNS only) with a 5km range and 40 km falloff (and most damage being explosive that is very good against 3/4 of BS or other big targets). Change into 800mm and you get 530 dps.

Might not look much.. but then you look at a maelstrom with 3 gyros and 800mm (barrage) and falloff rigs. Then you will be seeing 754 DPS with range 6 KM and falloff of 48 km. Considering that a neutron Megatron with 3 damage mods can do 730 dps at 11km and with 16 falloff this must be realistically seen as a GOOD damage. You cannot reasonably expect more than that! Doing MORE dps than a megathron at point blank from your guns and with a much broader range of engagement, better damage type, no cap issues.

So people need to start focusing in things that have some chance of being implemented!


The tempest itself is another issue.. need to be careful. You cannot try to correct tempest solely using guns changes of you make the maelstrom woo powerfull (since it will 90% of time have 3 damage mods).

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

I do agree with kagura that it is unlikely to be implemented but that's just because ccp dislikes large changes.

The way I see it the only way to have more damage at mid range than blasters with out having more damage inside of blaster optimal is to increase the optimal of autocannons. If we just get a falloff boost it would have to be huge to have any effect on our dps at mid range. The only other option is to just up dps which would make us the kings of close range, which is wrong.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

Maybe... but it is far more unlikely that they will boost the falloff enough to matter. That would mean with rigs we could get 50% of our damage at 90km. No other ship can... wait. Apoc with a rig and two tracking computers can get its range to 92km optimal... thats 100% damage at that range. Maybe... with falloff rigs... the tempest should be allowed to have it's falloff go that far.

I mean when you think about it it sounds no more crazy than 100km pulses. It actually sounds more balanced because it would only be possible with rigs and it would be 50% top damage.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

I think I'm the only one that does not feel we need a raw damage boost. I really don't want to give blaster users a thing to whine about, their damage gap should remain wide.

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

After working on my numbers with the optimal and falloff, it doesn't seem to be a big big deal. 5% should be plenty.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

At close range the better tank on the blaster bout should NOT be why a minmatar battleship loses. The Minmatar battleship should lose because blasters are supposed ot be the shortest range weapon and are supposed to output face melting dps at close range.

Also, the 15% straight dps boost still makes us useless at the edge of our optimal. It makes our guns some bastardized version of a blaster yet still nowhere near as good.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

Also, the 15% straight dps boost still makes us useless at the edge of our optimal. It makes our guns some bastardized version of a blaster yet still nowhere near as good.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

The phoon is the complete oddball and for that reason really does not suffer from the other problems the minmatar have.

The 8 - 5 - 6 layout is fine the way it is. Dropping a mid will mean you can't snipe with the tempest. It needs the 5 mids. Even without an mwd it has horrible targetting range and optimal.

The 5th mid is one of the things that make the tempest unique, might not be the greatest right now but it keeps a little bit of flavor.

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

Clearly I should be accounted in that everyone. Also the slot issue was being talked about, on this page, 4 or 5 posts above yours.

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

Not sure if I was being entirely clear; I know that minnie BS don't have good speed or agility at the present, this is what I was suggesting to be buffed. I do realize that blasters outtrack ACs, however they dont have the effective range that we would have after an optimal boost. While it still might not be "enough" to track cruisers etc, this is why I suggested a small painter boost, to make use of one of our lovely utility slots, as they're currently silly things like cap boosters or ECCM(Seriously, who jams a minnie BS?).

The only (and it looks big) problem with an optimal boost is the lower classes of ACs. A vagabond with ACs with an optimal of 10km? People are going to whine, *****, *****, whine, moan, whine, and ***** some more. The hurricane would step out infront of the BC class. Other than those two ships, I can't see any other big changes, but that would be enough to set off an anti-minmatar buff crusade.

As for small ACs, it can hardly be an issue there. Our t2 frigates aren't exactly uber.

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

I'm not trying to "copy" anything. The optimal is still well below that of a laser, and that comparison doesn't even hold water when switching to scorch, because barrage doesn't even give any optimal.

ACs have much better tracking than lasers and I think it should be utilized. We're NEVER going to truly compete with laserboats or blasterboats because of our EHP. By the time that our EHP and DPS evened out with theirs, we'd have 1500 DPS autocannons. Stop trying to think about balancing the battleships in a 1 on 1 BS fight, that's never going to happen. Instead, think about balancing the battleships around a useful niche in gang combat. Killing cruisers, HACs, and BCs seems to be an excellent niche for a minmatar BS to hold considering their current status in BS vs BS combat.

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

Originally by: To mare

---

when you say we never going to compete with blaster-laser boat you are just doing it wrong, minmatar BS was used to kill blaster and laser boat very often, why now we cant?

---

Negative. This is a big thanks to the utility slot nerf. You're not using multispec ECM or nos on your tempest. You're not kiting a mega. You're not nossing out a geddon. We just can't compete. Period

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

Originally by: jim

---

Every other battleship out there can do the same better so its not really a niche... except they suck more, but thats not a niche we want is it?

---

Gallente certainly doesn't do it very well, nor caldari. Amarr, yeah maybe, but this is why I want to emphasize agility, tracking, speed. We need to be good at something, and BS v BS doesn't seem to be realistic.

---

Originally by: Cpt Branko

---

I don't see the Tempest ever slugging it out with the best BS out there, unfortunately, but improvement from its current (bad) state would be good.

How about a number of small fixes:
- gave tempest 25m3 more bandwidth (to make it 100m3, provides somewhat more damage) and more dronebay (spares, gives it more usability as it could switch to, say ECM drones, or warrior IIs)

---

Originally by: Cpt Branko

---

- switch its shield and armour HP (more eff HP for normal armour-tanked setups, shield tanked gank ones are for silly people who didn't notice the existence of the Maelstorm)

---

Originally by: Cpt Branko

---

- give large ACs more tracking (more usability vs smaller things, the Tempest is actually preety bad vs small things compared to a, for instance, Mega)

---

Originally by: Cpt Branko

---

- cut its align time a bit (agility should be a Minmatar trait, having the same agility as Mega/Hype is bad (it would enable it to keep at range better as well)

---

Originally by: Cpt Branko

---

- slightly (say, between 5% and 10%) improve its capacitor (helps if you run a tank where you have issues even with a T2 heavy cap injector*, helps a lot if you use neuts in spare highslots which are arguably the most interesting spare highslot choices for a Tempest)

Imo, it'd be a bunch of small fixes with a good overall end result. It'd probably go a long way towards fixing the Tempest by giving it more all-around usability while (somewhat) improving its performance vs other BS. Also, none of the suggestions can be disputed as overpowered (in fact, many of them are purely logical such as armour HP / shield HP switch).

*assuming dual-LAR tank with a rep speed rig+2x rep amount rigs while running point/web/ECCM (or sensor booster or whatever), which is the standard way to fit it.

---

Originally by: Cpt Branko

---

I have no idea what to do about artillery.

Originally by: To mare

---

+10% powergrid to fix the tempest

---

Which does absolutely nothing for AC fits. Stop trolling.

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

Edited by: AstroPhobic on 25/07/2008 14:56:47

Originally by: To mare

---

stop thinking at minmatar as a support killer

---

And this... this is not good.

Because that's what minmatar do. Take a look at our ships.

Vagabond.. Rapier.. Huginn.. Stabber. All excel at taking out smaller ships. To Mare, any way you cut it, we are not going to do more damage, and we're not going to tank better. You need to stop thinking of minmatar as a BS killer. We're simply not a same-class killing race.

Branko's on the right track. I truly, truly love my optimal idea, but I'm truly truly biased. We need more range, and falloff gets messy. What's wrong with being good at killing everything smaller than you? No we won't be the best at BS v BS combat, but we won't suck like we did before. We'll actually have a place in the BS spectrum.

I hate to say it, but if you expect to out-tank or out-damage your opponents, maybe you trained the wrong race.

---

Well I think to mare was saying battleships should not be support killers, especially since our cruisers are so good at it.

---

Our cruisers are good at smaller support killing. A minnie cruiser meets up with a drake? That's never easy. A rep setup myrmidon? Oh my.

Yes, it lacks a definitive role. There are other ships to do the job. However, minmatar BS should be the BEST at the job. A huginn + a tempest should kill anything sub-BS with ease... in comparison with a huginn and say a vagabond, where they do loldps. Our cruisers (Save the ruppie and hurricane... because you can fit them like they're gallente) aren't doing the best of DPS. 300-400 DPS in actual ranges, maybe.

Whereas a tempest would push 900 at twice the range, with (proposed) good tracking. That's a world of pain.

While I recognize that this may not be the most... comfortable answer for a lot of you, It also boost us in BS v BS combat at the same time. We can't go out and expect to take on an abaddon in a maelstrom tbh, given even skills. Even post-boost.

---

Originally by: Siddy

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

Edited by: AstroPhobic on 25/07/2008 14:56:47

Originally by: To mare

---

stop thinking at minmatar as a support killer

---

And this... this is not good.

Because that's what minmatar do. Take a look at our ships.

Vagabond.. Rapier.. Huginn.. Stabber. All excel at taking out smaller ships. To Mare, any way you cut it, we are not going to do more damage, and we're not going to tank better. You need to stop thinking of minmatar as a BS killer. We're simply not a same-class killing race.

Branko's on the right track. I truly, truly love my optimal idea, but I'm truly truly biased. We need more range, and falloff gets messy. What's wrong with being good at killing everything smaller than you? No we won't be the best at BS v BS combat, but we won't suck like we did before. We'll actually have a place in the BS spectrum.

I hate to say it, but if you expect to out-tank or out-damage your opponents, maybe you trained the wrong race.

---

Shenanigans, my Naglafar is not good BS killer!

i call BS!

Fix Artys!

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

Right, and my proposed optimal + damage boost will do that. If you ask for much more than that, we start moving in on either amarr or gallente territory. Not to mention that I seriously doubt CCP would do much more than that, if EVEN my suggestion. As it's pretty far-gone as far as boosts go. (Torp boost surprised me ). Some range, some damage, some tracking, some mobility, some hp switches. A little bit here and there will go a long way to improving our battleships on a whole.

---

Originally by: AstroPhobic

---

Check the latest devblog.

Annyyyway.

It's not the damage boost, it's the optimal boost. Right now my suggested optimal + damage boosts leaves us about TWICE as good at our current optimal +falloff. If getting double the damage at our fighting distance is a "joke" to you... I don't know what to say.

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

- Triple damage, cut ROF to a third (6.6% DPS increase due to reload).

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

AC Boost Options:
- Higher tier weapons gain higher falloff
- Higher tier weapons gain noticeably higher damage potential

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

General Projectile Boost Options:
- EMP should be boosted so that it has the same damage as other short range ammo
- All ammos should have a "range modifier". This should affect both optimal and falloff. This option gets bonus points because it boosts all races, but Minmatar the most.
- Tracking Computers/Enhancers/Links should affect falloff. This should affect both optimal and falloff. This option gets bonus points because it boosts all races, but Minmatar the most. It also serves to provide falloff based weapons (Projectiles, Blasters) with a prayer of countering unbonused TD's.

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

Originally by: Trojanman190

---

What about that crap about getting crud hits in falloff to top off missing more often?????? That's awful!!!!!

---

I agree, but unfortunately I think that we're not going to see those formulas revised. I'd try to concentrate on something that will give us a tangible advantage to overcome that problem.

-Liang

---

Originally by: Aleus Stygian

---

See my above posts.

---

Originally by: Aleus Stygian

---

Originally by: To mare

---

Originally by: Aleus Stygian

---

See my above posts.

---

the one about phnater vacuum cleaner?

---

Well, yes. That one and making artillery some other sort of weapons system with residual D.O.T., so that you give it damage to compete, and give pilots a reason to use hit-and-run tactics.

---