EVE Search - For interested blaster ship pilots: patch changes vs. blaster ships

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

For interested blaster ship pilots: patch changes vs. blaster ships

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.14 04:10:00 - [1] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: El Yatta As much as I've agreed with you every step of the way about how bad our blasters are, Im not sure this test is very useful - I wonder if the hurricane wasnt omg wtf pimp tanked or something? I thought they removed the web stacking penalty, so two webs should perform to 90% like old school, so you should easily track a hurricane. If they changed their mind about web stacking, disregard the above (and curses). Webs are still stacking nerfed, and 2x60% webs are actually 0.4*0.4 = 0.16, or rather, they would, in theory, preform like a 84% web (meaning the webbed Hurricane has 60% more speed then before). You couldn't hit a webbed Hurricane at point blank distances with a single 90% web on TQ with the old patch anyway if you yourself were multiple webbed so you couldn't move with a Hyperion. With the stacking nerf, two webs preform at level with a 80% web. Dont hit a point blank then stay at your optimal in fact scrams gonna help with that cause noone can move very fast so easier to dictate your range.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.14 15:51:00 - [2] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Amarr Holymight Dont hit a point blank then stay at your optimal in fact scrams gonna help with that cause noone can move very fast so easier to dictate your range. Vs faster ships with multiple webs on you? Durrr... So nothings changed then?
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.14 15:57:00 - [3] Fit a scram and web if anything comes close to you they will most likey die, learn to play nublets.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.14 16:15:00 - [4] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Amarr Holymight Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Amarr Holymight Dont hit a point blank then stay at your optimal in fact scrams gonna help with that cause noone can move very fast so easier to dictate your range. Vs faster ships with multiple webs on you? Durrr... So nothings changed then? So if I rob a poor person of all his remaining cash and leave him peniless, he should not complain as nothing has changed for him? Binary outlook on things much?
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.14 16:24:00 - [5] Ok let's be civil and I'll assume you play Eve and aren't an economist, cause economy bankroll analogies aren't gonna convince anyone. Blasters are fine I have tested on SISI and on TQ since the patch went up as long as you aren't point blank range on a smaller target you will hit fine. If you fit a web and scram there is no ship that can web you and avoid your drone or turret damage and capable of tanking if you can provide me with an example then I can see your point.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.14 17:15:00 - [6] Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 14/11/2008 16:21:24 Originally by: Amarr Holymight Quote: Binary outlook on things much? Hey. 1000% speed boost (80% v 98% , QR and pre-QR dual web Hype). Nothing has changed from before? Before, single web one could have its dps avoided by most ships by being at point blank (assuming hype has multiple webs on it), but not v dual webs, post patch you can easily do it v both single and dual webs if multiple webbed+scrambled. Pulse-lasers and Autocannons are even worse off then considering their tracking is less than blasters. So maybe we should rename this thread "Large turrets not being able to hit small ships that are stupid enough to get too close".
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.14 17:19:00 - [7] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Amarr Holymight Edited by: Amarr Holymight on 14/11/2008 16:29:42 Ok let's be civil and I'll assume you play Eve and aren't an economist, cause economy bankroll analogies aren't gonna convince anyone. Blasters are fine I have tested on SISI and on TQ since the patch went up as long as you aren't point blank range on a smaller target you will hit fine. If you fit a web and scram there is no ship that can web you (excluding ewar ships that could always do it), avoid your drone damage and is capable of tanking, though if you can provide me with an example then I can see your point. If by 'fine' you mean 0 DPS, then sure, blasters are 'fine'. Like I said it isn't the patch that caused this the problem it was always there and it isn't only blasters that suffer from this problem seeing as I have said in previous post other short range turrets have worse tracking.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.14 20:21:00 - [8] Wow cutting edge stuff there Gaelanus glad you are coming to terms with the fact that different turrets have different ranges you should make a new thread with your insights into this valuable information. Here's some more info for you blasters do the most DPS (crowd roars) & have the best tracking (crowd hollers), but hey I thought we were talking about not being able to hit smaller ships at point blank range obviously you missed that part.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.14 20:31:00 - [9] That being said I would like to see faster reload times for blasters I think this would help being able to switch to null if needed.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.15 01:26:00 - [10] The reason I denigrate your posting is because you are making moot statements not because they are wrong.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.15 01:31:00 - [11] Originally by: Gaelenus Effectively now blasters are usless becuase they do less effective DPS whilst still having the disadvantage of being short ranged, i.e. you can kite them etc. You do realise this has been the case for a long time and not since the speed patch?
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.15 02:04:00 - [12] Originally by: Ni'Kuth Edited by: Ni''Kuth on 14/11/2008 21:00:49 Quote: Here's some more info for you blasters do the most DPS (crowd roars) & have the best tracking (crowd hollers), but hey I thought we were talking about not being able to hit smaller ships at point blank range obviously you missed that part. At 1/3 the range of pulse lasers, with a lack of options to help mitigate the loss of tracking from nerfed webs. ~10% (OMGUBER) more dps (comparing the top tier guns loaded with faction damage ammo) is worthless when you are fighting in a pathetically small envelope of effectiveness. If it wasn't for the greater tracking of blasters they would be completely useless, as opposed to being somewhat underpowered. Yes I understand the problem I think what I am saying is that it's nothing new it was always hard to hit targets using an afterburner at close range with any large turret. So therefore it's a moot statement to say this was caused by the speed patch just that it's way more exploitable because obviously webs power has been reduced. So in a nutshell what needs to be looked is how all large turrets behave at close range against smaller targets not just blasters.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.15 04:40:00 - [13] Edited by: Amarr Holymight on 15/11/2008 04:41:13 Yes ok good points the DPS/range tradeoff does seem to be a little lobsided in favour of lasers espeically when you look at null. Though I think autocannons are more problematic even with the large falloff their optimal optimal is even tighter before they stop being able to hit. I think it would be better to think of any given scenario in 1v1 terms because it will dumb things down enough to look at them rationally. My conclusion is I don't think anything has changed, now that doesn't mean to say that a problem that might have been already there has just been exacerbated.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.15 16:11:00 - [14] Edited by: Amarr Holymight on 15/11/2008 16:11:34 After a quick test on SISI I have found I have to agree with you for the most part not that I didn't in some sense anyway, the tracking on blasters and I would say to reinforce my argument to say all close range large turrets is gimped cause you can't even hit a triple LSE BC orbiting at 140m/s. This severely needs to be looked at I don't know if making target painters a high slot option would be a possible solution or perhaps some sig increase for using afterburners.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.15 16:15:00 - [15] Perhaps a web has a stronger impact the closer you get now that would really be a solution scaling from 90% at point blank to 60% at 10km.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.15 17:23:00 - [16] Edited by: Amarr Holymight on 15/11/2008 17:25:21 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 15/11/2008 16:47:35 Adding the sig radius multiplier.... *ln[AFalloff/Range]**, where A is an integer, probably between 2 to 4. ...to the tracking formula, fixes the close-range tracking problem once and for all, but does so without removing frigates new-found immunity to large guns while webbed. Cruisers would have to fit appropriately to avoid all damage up close... I'm no mathematician but I trust your calcs are correct so would I be right in saying that currently sig radius/tracking is borked and hasn't been looked at for a long time?
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.15 20:02:00 - [17] Originally by: The Djego .... I was long aware of this problem by merely using the DPS graph on EFT and obviously yes it's more exploitable now with webs only 60% power, I never had an argument against this. My main argument is that it isn't just blasters that are suffering it's all large turrets and this needs to be looked at. I mean you would gain more support for a fix so what I'm saying is you're doing it wrong. & before you say yes obviously I understand blasters/ac users suffer more cause we operate mainly at these ranges. Originally by: Gabriel Karade .... To say a closer object is larger seems to be veering into relativity so I'm not sure if the current physics engine would accept this kind of formula. But it seems to be an interesting, if maybe not workable, way of looking at a fix.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.15 23:25:00 - [18] Edited by: Amarr Holymight on 15/11/2008 23:26:49 Originally by: Gabriel Karade Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 15/11/2008 21:51:58 Originally by: Amarr Holymight Originally by: Gabriel Karade .... To say a closer object is larger seems to be veering into relativity so I'm not sure if the current physics engine would accept this kind of formula. But it seems to be an interesting, if maybe not workable, way of looking at a fix. er, not relativity, just geometry dude... Look at (say) a parked car 100m away... now walk towards it until you're 10m away... or this Haha I was thinking about linking that scene back at you didn't realise it was an awesome troll.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.16 01:29:00 - [19] Originally by: Bellum Eternus What is your deal? Do you just like to troll? 30+ pages, nothing from you, and then after QR is here you show up and start being a pest. GTFO of my thread. 30+ pages and nothing from you.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.16 01:30:00 - [20] Originally by: Mag's Originally by: Amarr Holymight Awesome troll. You sure are. You seemingly don't understand the issue, best stop making yourself look foolish. Agreeing with the OP would make myself look foolish but thanks for the advice.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.16 01:34:00 - [21] Originally by: Chi Quan Originally by: Amarr Holymight no offense here, but just leave EFT out of the equation (i'm just glad you finally realized it) this thread is for blasters because on them the effect is very pronounced. You saying it doesn't effect autocannons and lasers aswell? By the way awful awful post come back with some punctuation.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.16 01:46:00 - [22] Ok let me make myself clear what I'm trying to say the OP's argument is unpresentable and doesn't discuss the why's or hows or even take into account the fact that this effects all turret classes so no wonder it got ignored by CCP. Try something other than ummm blasters are broke errrr fix it ... and someone might pay attention (if you're lucky).
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.17 18:52:00 - [23] Give the mega a web bonus similar to the marauder instead of tracking bonus maybe?
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.18 03:47:00 - [24] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Gaelenus i considered that but i thought it would be too overpowered, it would bascally make the mega a must have tackler no? A web strength bonus as a role bonus, in addition to the other standard bonuses, would be just fine. A 90% web wasn't overpowered on TQ before hand, and won't be now. And a BS as a 'must have' tackler? Yeah right. You can't go handing out role bonuses to battleships just to fix one ship then every battleship will need one. Besides a Mega doesn't need a tracking bonus most of the time and if you have 90% web it's a lot more powerful at close range so it's a fair tradeoff, though it removes some of it's sniping ability.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.18 03:49:00 - [25] Originally by: Gaelenus i considered that but i thought it would be too overpowered, it would bascally make the mega a must have tackler no? Yes you could be right but bloody slow for a tackler.
Amarr Holymight Celestial Janissaries Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.18 07:06:00 - [26] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Amarr Holymight Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Gaelenus i considered that but i thought it would be too overpowered, it would bascally make the mega a must have tackler no? A web strength bonus as a role bonus, in addition to the other standard bonuses, would be just fine. A 90% web wasn't overpowered on TQ before hand, and won't be now. And a BS as a 'must have' tackler? Yeah right. You can't go handing out role bonuses to battleships just to fix one ship then every battleship will need one. Besides a Mega doesn't need a tracking bonus most of the time and if you have 90% web it's a lot more powerful at close range so it's a fair tradeoff, though it removes some of it's sniping ability. The devs can hand out anything they like. The Kronos has a 25% tracking bonus and a 90% web, and it's not overpowered. It would be just fine on the Mega/Hype/Astarte/Brutix. And of those 4, only the Mega has a tracking bonus. I tried killing an Ishkur today with my Astarte. Now, I have a 6% tracking implant (best in game) and a single fleeting web (60%), and was unable to hit the Ishkur at all while he was in my optimal range (2250m or so). Total crap. These days you pretty much can't engage frigs with anything other than light drones. Medium guns won't track them unless they're something other than blasters. Total junk. The Kronos is T2 battleship so yeh for 600-800m I would say it's underpowered. Of course the devs can hand out boosts and nerfs nilly willy I'm pretty sure they won't suddenly decide to add role bonuses to all battleships to cater then needs of one ship. Seriously man think out of your gallente bubble seems you've been sipping that kool aid for too long it's rotted your brain.

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.