EVE Search - Small Blasters vs Autocannons

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Small Blasters vs Autocannons

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Pot Shot	Posted - 2008.08.01 12:53:00 - [1] Edited by: Pot Shot on 01/08/2008 12:59:09 I'm still new to gunnery, got about 3mil sp and all the basic skills trained up to 4 or 5. I have small blaster specialization at 4 and can't seem to hit other fast moving AF's like the jaguar. All my shots seem to keep missing yet the velocity of both ships is low (mutual webbing). In this case, I'm using a harpy with light neutrons and void ammo. I've tried using antimatter inside the neutrons but there's no real improvement, I still keep missing. Which combination allows for the best balance of tracking speed and damage in terms of blaster and ammo types? Autocannons seem to track so quickly that I might just forget blasters altogether. :[ I'm obviously doing something wrong here, any tips?
Bloody Love	Posted - 2008.08.01 12:54:00 - [2] Edited by: Bloody Love on 01/08/2008 12:56:07 Don't use void... Use faction antimatter... Void reduces your tracking by 50%... Edit: Oh, you tried antimatter already and it didn't work? Maybe downgrade to Ions with antimatter? Maybe you need to get closer?
Pot Shot	Posted - 2008.08.01 12:56:00 - [3] Edited by: Pot Shot on 01/08/2008 13:03:55 So does that mean tech II ammo is effectively useless for blaster equipped AFs? I'm on the test server currently and there's no way I can get faction ammunition for testing. ;] I'm guessing the next best thing would be antimatter in my neutrons? I'll have to mess about, ions seem to be more balanced. Edit: I'm orbiting at 500-2k
Slade Hoo Amarr xPlaguex	Posted - 2008.08.01 12:58:00 - [4] electrons and ions track better than neutrons. ACs always have better tracking than Blasters.
Terraform Gallente Recreation Of The World	Posted - 2008.08.01 12:58:00 - [5] Faction ammo should only be used against stuff that's bigger than you or is moving extremely slow. Get some standard or faction antimatter, results should prove more successful.
Bloody Love	Posted - 2008.08.01 12:59:00 - [6] Edited by: Bloody Love on 01/08/2008 12:58:59 Originally by: Pot Shot So does that mean tech II ammo is effectively useless for blaster equipped AFs? I'm on the test server currently and there's no way I can get faction ammunition for testing. ;] I'm guessing the next best thing would be antimatter in my neutrons? Standard antimatter will do just fine. Void ammo is not so great as the tracking penalty is quite severe (as you already found out). Null ammo is quite ok if you need a little more range, but for in-ur-face-dps, just use (faction) antimatter. About the same dps without the penalties.
Angelus Mox Caldari Duty.	Posted - 2008.08.01 13:07:00 - [7] As you'r using a harpy, you gain a bonus to range on hybrid guns. As the range between two targets increase, tracking becomes less of an issue unless moving and very high speeds. Therefore I ask what range were you from you target when you were missing? I only ask as you were either out of range all together (unlikely) or you were so close your tracking couldnt keep up with the orbital path around your target. If this is the case, try to take manual control of your direction, and move in a straighter line away or towards your target. This cuts the Transversal speed, and so makes tracking your target the much easier.
Pot Shot	Posted - 2008.08.01 13:11:00 - [8] Edited by: Pot Shot on 01/08/2008 13:11:49 Originally by: Angelus Mox As you'r using a harpy, you gain a bonus to range on hybrid guns. As the range between two targets increase, tracking becomes less of an issue unless moving and very high speeds. Therefore I ask what range were you from you target when you were missing? I only ask as you were either out of range all together (unlikely) or you were so close your tracking couldnt keep up with the orbital path around your target. If this is the case, try to take manual control of your direction, and move in a straighter line away or towards your target. This cuts the Transversal speed, and so makes tracking your target the much easier. I was orbiting at 500m, trying to keep it that way anyway. Most of the time it was around 1k-2k, I see your point. Just realised that the optimal is at about 3k.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.08.01 13:16:00 - [9] In a Blaster AF you will mostly use Null, especialy with the Harpy(Enyo got with Falloff a more effective Bonus for using Antimatter). Try to keep the Target at 4-5km with manual Piloting, don¦t orbit(at least against Frig Sized Targets). Void is only usefull against bigger ship at the small Guns, Faction Antimatter is usefull but Null will get you a better result most time, because you can hit at a better range, where Tracking is fare less a Issue(even with the -25% from Null). ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.08.01 14:11:00 - [10] Originally by: Pot Shot Edited by: Pot Shot on 01/08/2008 13:03:55 So does that mean tech II ammo is effectively useless for blaster equipped AFs? I'm on the test server currently and there's no way I can get faction ammunition for testing. ;] I'm guessing the next best thing would be antimatter in my neutrons? I'll have to mess about, ions seem to be more balanced. Edit: I'm orbiting at 500-2k Keep in mind that it doesn't take much speed at ALL to start missing because of tracking at 500m - 2k. (Take the tracking number your guns give you, multiply by the range and you get a number that is equal to the speed at which the gun can track a that distance or, in other words the max velocity at which both ships can fly in total without getting misses) Also keep in mind that the wolf's autocannons are pretty much the fastest tracking weapons in the game shy of say a minmitar destroyer (which don't fit A/C's anyway).
AstroPhobic Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.01 14:13:00 - [11] Edited by: AstroPhobic on 01/08/2008 14:20:42 Originally by: Slade Hoo electrons and ions track better than neutrons. ACs always have better tracking than Blasters. Untrue. Neutron Blaster Cannons have better tracking than 800s, Light Neutrons have better tracking than 200s... On topic: The reason you're not having so much success is partly due to the ship. Your harpy has an optimal bonus. It's meant for rails, and gets some pretty sick range with them. The blaster harpy is okay, but this is the main problem it faces. Neutron blasters actually have a better tracking against 200mms, .3165 vs .315. With no tracking bonus being on either the harpy or the minmatar AFs, I must say it was either piloting or skills that caused you to miss, or he was missing as well. Again what Derek said is true, the closer you get, the harder it is for your guns to track due to angular velocity. 500m is TWICE as hard to track as 1000m, and at 2000m, you'll have 4x the tracking. Also, as the others have mentioned, try faction antimatter or null. That said, most Jag/Wolf pilots I know prefer 125mms/150mms for their superior tracking (and small loss in DPS), so you should consider the same if you keep having issues.
Dzajic Gallente Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.08.01 14:24:00 - [12] I know that projectiles need some lovin', but please, dont pour additional nerf on top of blasters. They have lower optimal and lower falloff than ACs in all classes i looked (on unbonused ships), and in some cases slightly better tracking. But really just a little bit more tracking. And compared to blasters, more base tracking is not what projectiles need.
AstroPhobic Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.01 14:26:00 - [13] Originally by: Derek Sigres Also keep in mind that the wolf's autocannons are pretty much the fastest tracking weapons in the game shy of say a minmitar destroyer (which don't fit A/C's anyway). Only when considering the lower 2 tiers of a gun class. The enyo would have the fastest tracking guns of an AF, The catalyst would have the fastest tracking speed with the tier 3 guns, and the thrasher with tier 1 and 2.
AstroPhobic Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.01 14:28:00 - [14] Originally by: Dzajic I know that projectiles need some lovin', but please, dont pour additional nerf on top of blasters. They have lower optimal and lower falloff than ACs in all classes i looked (on unbonused ships), and in some cases slightly better tracking. But really just a little bit more tracking. And compared to blasters, more base tracking is not what projectiles need. Well, for one, blaster ALWAYS have higher optimal than ACs, I don't know what you're smoking. Second, I don't want to nerf blasters, I want to boost autocannons, but really I wasn't brining any of that into the thread, I was just answering the OP. Thirdly, an actual optimal for autocannons is (IMO) the best fix for them, so they'd outrange blasters and be lower range than lasers. But let's not get into that.
Spectre3353 Gallente The Python Cartel	Posted - 2008.08.01 15:05:00 - [15] - Have you put some time into training Motion Prediction in the Gunnery tree to help your tracking? I would recommend at least level IV. - Use faction antimatter instead of Void like everyone has already suggested. Yea it is expensive but it is so much better. - If you really want to play with blasters, you should perhaps train up some Gallente ships. If you can already fly a harpy then it should not be much training for you to get into a Taranis, Enyo, Ishkur or Incursus. All of these ships get tracking bonuses and I find that I have almost no tracking problems while flying them thanks to this fact. Good luck. ----- http://evenewb.blogspot.com/
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer Elitist Cowards	Posted - 2008.08.01 15:15:00 - [16] Originally by: Pot Shot Edited by: Pot Shot on 01/08/2008 13:03:55 So does that mean tech II ammo is effectively useless for blaster equipped AFs? I'm on the test server currently and there's no way I can get faction ammunition for testing. ;] I'm guessing the next best thing would be antimatter in my neutrons? I'll have to mess about, ions seem to be more balanced. Edit: I'm orbiting at 500-2k Depends. They nerfed damage on t2 ammo alot and didnt change the penalties to make up for it. Until CCP does so, stick with faction ammo. Caldari navy antimatter is pretty badass. ----------------- Friends Forever
Mag's MASS	Posted - 2008.08.01 15:24:00 - [17] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg Depends. They nerfed damage on t2 ammo alot and didnt change the penalties to make up for it. Until CCP does so, stick with faction ammo. Caldari navy antimatter is pretty badass. QFT Mag's Originally by: Avernus One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you.
Dzajic Gallente Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.08.01 15:44:00 - [18] Frack, sorry people, I got mixed up. Blasters do have considerable (near 50%) optimal advantage even with AM. Projectiles usually have 60-70% falloff advantage. Sorry, I mixed up numbers in my head.
AstroPhobic Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.01 15:46:00 - [19] Originally by: Dzajic Frack, sorry people, I got mixed up. Blasters do have considerable (near 50%) optimal advantage even with AM. Projectiles usually have 60-70% falloff advantage. Sorry, I mixed up numbers in my head. It happens. Not to mention blasters have a severe damage advantage. Support optimals for autocannons, 08!
Dzajic Gallente Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.08.01 16:57:00 - [20] Does damage linearly drop with falloff? In EFT the its a curve, but EFT takes both target speed and distance so I cant make much out of that.
AstroPhobic Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.01 17:03:00 - [21] Originally by: Dzajic Does damage linearly drop with falloff? In EFT the its a curve, but EFT takes both target speed and distance so I cant make much out of that. No... it's more of a square root function. It's a little bit straighter than that. There's evidence that says you can't achieve excellent hits etc in falloff (though, I have seen some of these hits just entering falloff), so your damage at optimal + .0001 falloff should theoretically be 75%. At optimal your hits range from 1.5 - 0.5 multiplier, averaging out at just over 1 (.01 chance of wrecking, 3x multiplier). Akita suggests that into falloff, the multiplier now ranges from 1.0 to 0.5, averaging about 78%. At Optimal + falloff, you should achieve about 40% of your actual DPS. EFT doesn't recognize this... and I'm not sure I believe it, as my experiences are somewhat varied. I do think hit quality also scales with falloff, leading to only "lightly" and "barely" hits after Optimal + falloff, but I have no evidence to back this up. Long story short, we do crap DPS in the range we're supposed to fight at, with now-nerfed speed, bad tanks, and bad ammo. But our guns are capless, so this obviously makes minmatar uber.
Gimpb	Posted - 2008.08.01 17:31:00 - [22] ACs have some pretty good advantages among short ranged weapons. Their damage is lower of course but that long falloff gives them more practical range than blasters, especially with the smaller gun sizes and short range ammo. Small ACs in each class still get that very nice falloff and have minuscule fitting requirements, that's not a bad deal at all. I must admit I struggle a bit seeing the purpose of the larger autocannons, I guess it's just for when you have surplus fitting stats? You can use the shortest range ammo in the tiniest gun and it doesn't really affect your range or damage much at all. On and since it's mandatory to include with any projectile weapons discussion... they use no cap!
AstroPhobic Minmatar	Posted - 2008.08.01 17:37:00 - [23] Originally by: Gimpb ACs have some pretty good advantages among short ranged weapons. Their damage is lower of course but that long falloff gives them more practical range than blasters, especially with the smaller gun sizes and short range ammo. Small ACs in each class still get that very nice falloff and have minuscule fitting requirements, that's not a bad deal at all. I must admit I struggle a bit seeing the purpose of the larger autocannons, I guess it's just for when you have surplus fitting stats? You can use the shortest range ammo in the tiniest gun and it doesn't really affect your range or damage much at all. On and since it's mandatory to include with any projectile weapons discussion... they use no cap! Their falloff only disguises the issues, you can tell as it scales into the larger ones. The great thing about optimal is as it scales into small weapons, it means very little. This is why I'm positive it's a range issue for autocannons. Giving 200mm AC IIs with max skills an optimal around... I don't know, 5km changes very little. They might fight a little bit further out, but not really at all. With web changes, it doesn't really matter anyway. Then when you get to large ACs, giving 800mm IIs an optimal of around 22km with max skills means a LOT more for them. They'd actually be decent in the range that they fight at, or rather are FORCED to fight at.
Jerid Verges	Posted - 2008.08.02 00:45:00 - [24] Standard Uranium Ammo works wonders. Though, I recommend upgrading to railguns. You get all the bonuses except better range and damage! The only problem is if an enemy gets too close.

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

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