Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xenomorphea
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 10:41:00 -
[1]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Gallente boosted: Last weekend on SISI :)
Erm ... could Zulupark or Nozh elaborate on this, please? Either it is a bad joke, or I was too distracted to notice. I hope the latter.
Cheers, Xeno
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 11:03:00 -
[2]
The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Xenomorphea
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 11:09:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left.
OK, I am of course aware of this change, but did not most ships get agility changes? It is not something affecting Gallente only. Minmatar and other races (and smaller ships) should also profit out of this, not?
Cheers, Xeno
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 11:13:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Xenomorphea
Originally by: Kagura Nikon The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left.
OK, I am of course aware of this change, but did not most ships get agility changes? It is not something affecting Gallente only. Minmatar and other races (and smaller ships) should also profit out of this, not?
Cheers, Xeno
Minmatar and gallente ones got significant boost on agility. So at least you are boosted against half of the game ships. Not perfect but its something. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Xenomorphea
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 11:30:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Minmatar and gallente ones got significant boost on agility. So at least you are boosted against half of the game ships. Not perfect but its something.
Agreed.
I must admit that I quite like the "feeling" and maneuverability in Sisi compared to TQ, in spite of lower top-speeds.
However it is still a crux for a blaster-BS (and to a certain degree a minnie AC-BS as well): either fit an MWD, get in range fast and then be unable to move once the MWD is shut down by a scrambler, or be unable to get in range, but keep a certain degree of mobility wtih AB. Both situations suck.
As far as I could test, if you do not fit an AB and webber you are delivered against close range CS/BC/Cruiser class ships. But how to dictate range, if you cannot get in range in the first place? :-)
WTB blaster-BS with 6 mids to fit both.
Cheers, Xeno
|
Nuts Nougat
SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 11:49:00 -
[6]
Imo they should make a script for the MWD to turn it into an AB, turning both mods into one. AB should still be available though, for people that can't spend the PG/cap on teh mwd? ---
|
Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 13:26:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Nuts Nougat Imo they should make a script for the MWD to turn it into an AB, turning both mods into one. AB should still be available though, for people that can't spend the PG/cap on teh mwd?
Just a little overpowered, MWD for closing, then switch to AB to reduce damage.... No real disadvantage. Current system requires some forethought.
Originally by: CCP t0rfifrans CCP is a greedy money chewing monster
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Out of Order
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 13:41:00 -
[8]
Or fitting both, :-p
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 15:08:00 -
[9]
Having seen the effectiveness of the deimos, ishtar and astarte on sisi Id say theyre pretty much bang on right now.
C.
Originally by: Tarminic Your continued whining is somewhat diminished by your continued willingness to give your money to CCP.
|
Shard Merchant
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 15:37:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Megan Maynard Or fitting both, :-p
Which consumes two slots and more fittings for one task.
|
|
Gavin Darklighter
THE FINAL STAND
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 16:14:00 -
[11]
Between the MWD/AB and Scram/Disruptor choices, going out solo is going to feel more like playing rock/paper/scissors than playing EVE.
signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 16:22:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left.
Erm...
So just to be clear: changing the stats on SISI so that Blaster ships perform 80% as good as TQ speed wise, vs 50% of TQ is an improvement?
That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam. [Vid] I M M O R T A L
|
Mag's
MASS
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 16:37:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
so true.
Mag's
Originally by: Avernus One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you. |
phanthom chancer
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 18:16:00 -
[14]
Edited by: phanthom chancer on 30/10/2008 18:17:24
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Kagura Nikon The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left.
Erm...
So just to be clear: changing the stats on SISI so that Blaster ships perform 80% as good as TQ speed wise, vs 50% of TQ is an improvement?
That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
Meh, time to 25km using 2 reps of OL on a triple trimarked, plated mwd megathron was achieved in 38 and 39 seconds on TQ and SISI respectively. If I'm only 1 second slower to a target 30km away (25 + 5km optimal firing range), I'm not really worried about the speed issue anymore. And to be honest, 38 and 39 to me really means the SISI setup has the advantage as you will slow down faster and thus will be able to get that extra bit of MWD in before having to cut it and throw on the brakes so you don't overshoot.
Tracking is where my concerns are now.
|
Xenomorphea
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 19:17:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Xenomorphea on 30/10/2008 19:18:28
Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Between the MWD/AB and Scram/Disruptor choices, going out solo is going to feel more like playing rock/paper/scissors than playing EVE.
This is so true ...
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Erm...
So just to be clear: changing the stats on SISI so that Blaster ships perform 80% as good as TQ speed wise, vs 50% of TQ is an improvement?
That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
LOL :-)
More like amputating your legs and arms, then reattaching the legs and call it a "boost".
TBH top speed is less of a concern for me (however, I have been able to outrun slower cruiser in the past overloading my MWD, and this is a thing of the past now). Main concerns are tracking and lack of maneuverability if you fit a MWD once offlined.
Cheers, Xeno
|
Odhinn Vinlandii
Shadows of the Dead Elitist Cowards
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:06:00 -
[16]
Ishkur is way over powered.
Nos, Neut, ECM, Web, Scram, perma armor tank, Turrets and 5 drones? wtf?!
My wolf that normally can solo battlecruisers now dies to a frig?
Gallente are sickly over powered.
|
Fistme
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:09:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Odhinn Vinlandii
My wolf that normally can solo battlecruisers now dies to a frig?
Gallente are sickly over powered.
Please let this be a joke post
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:34:00 -
[18]
I was checking the inertia modifiers of the BS on SISI: the Hype/Mega's inertia mods were reduced from around .155 down to .11 in order to make their MWDs work a little better.
Ok, so in theory this was a 'buff'. But the thing is, all the BS now have inertia mods of approximately .11: the raven, the Rokh, Geddon, Dominix, Tempest, Typhoon, Abaddon, Apoc. The spread is basically from .10 to .12.
So how is this a Gallente boost? All BS were buffed. Additionally, how does this affect BS's time to warp? Is it going to be harder to catch them now that they're more agile? My Kronos has a painfully long lock time without any remote sensor boosting or a sensor booster (after all, it only has four mids). Will it be even more difficult for me to solo in my Kronos?
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. [Vid] I M M O R T A L
|
GirlScout
Amarr OEG Academy GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 18:40:00 -
[19]
Most agile hac's are Vagabond and Cerberus (lol!). Deimos is far behind.
|
Vengal Seyhan
Sten Industries
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 19:49:00 -
[20]
Originally by: GirlScout Most agile hac's are Vagabond and Cerberus (lol!). Deimos is far behind.
They still haven't smacked the Cerberus back into line? Oh well.
|
|
El Yatta
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 22:18:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Kagura Nikon The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left.
Erm...
So just to be clear: changing the stats on SISI so that Blaster ships perform 80% as good as TQ speed wise, vs 50% of TQ is an improvement?
That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
Yes. But we need to accept, that BS are going to be slower. They've said its in their design to have more definition in speed between the classes, and BS are going to be slower than on TQ. Its just how its going to be. The agility change isn't actually bad, overall. Sadly its let Zulupark claim everything is fixed when they havent looked at tracking yet.
I think you need to be realistic with that as well - we will NOT get the 300% increase that would be required to bring it back to TQ efficiency within web range. Its not going to happen, it skews the performance of null and makes the numbers look hell weird compared to other turrets.
I think maybe a 25% tracking boost might be something to realistically lobby for. _______________________________________________ Mercenary Forces |
Praxis1452
20th Legion Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 22:23:00 -
[22]
Originally by: El Yatta
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Kagura Nikon The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left.
Erm...
So just to be clear: changing the stats on SISI so that Blaster ships perform 80% as good as TQ speed wise, vs 50% of TQ is an improvement?
That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
Yes. But we need to accept, that BS are going to be slower. They've said its in their design to have more definition in speed between the classes, and BS are going to be slower than on TQ. Its just how its going to be. The agility change isn't actually bad, overall. Sadly its let Zulupark claim everything is fixed when they havent looked at tracking yet.
I think you need to be realistic with that as well - we will NOT get the 300% increase that would be required to bring it back to TQ efficiency within web range. Its not going to happen, it skews the performance of null and makes the numbers look hell weird compared to other turrets.
I think maybe a 25% tracking boost might be something to realistically lobby for.
see that's the thing 25%? If that isn't enough to hit webbed BC's then blaster's are still absolute ****. Basically, blasters should have awesome tracking. In fact they should kill webbed cruisers within 5km. 5km! that's pretty ****in close. If a Blaster BS can't work well within 5km then it's ****.
Blaster's have one thing going for them: damage. Oh wait, torps just got more damage with rage and Blaster's are unable to apply that damage. If you can't even apply the damage what's the point of a measly 5% increase in damage compared to a huuuuuuuuge increase in range. -------------------------------------------- ôHe who must expend his life to prolong life cannot enjoy it, and he who is still seeking for his life does not have it and can as little enjoy it" |
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 23:19:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Praxis1452 Blaster's have one thing going for them: damage. Oh wait, torps just got more damage with rage and Blaster's are unable to apply that damage. If you can't even apply the damage what's the point of a measly 5% increase in damage compared to a huuuuuuuuge increase in range.
Torps have higher actual DPS than blasters vs anything moving faster than walking pace on TQ already. Rages were just to make it absolutely clear that they don't like blaster and AC boats... just in case we hadn't noticed.
|
El Yatta
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 03:14:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Praxis1452
Originally by: El Yatta
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Kagura Nikon The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left.
Erm...
So just to be clear: changing the stats on SISI so that Blaster ships perform 80% as good as TQ speed wise, vs 50% of TQ is an improvement?
That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
Yes. But we need to accept, that BS are going to be slower. They've said its in their design to have more definition in speed between the classes, and BS are going to be slower than on TQ. Its just how its going to be. The agility change isn't actually bad, overall. Sadly its let Zulupark claim everything is fixed when they havent looked at tracking yet.
I think you need to be realistic with that as well - we will NOT get the 300% increase that would be required to bring it back to TQ efficiency within web range. Its not going to happen, it skews the performance of null and makes the numbers look hell weird compared to other turrets.
I think maybe a 25% tracking boost might be something to realistically lobby for.
see that's the thing 25%? If that isn't enough to hit webbed BC's then blaster's are still absolute ****. Basically, blasters should have awesome tracking. In fact they should kill webbed cruisers within 5km. 5km! that's pretty ****in close. If a Blaster BS can't work well within 5km then it's ****.
Blaster's have one thing going for them: damage. Oh wait, torps just got more damage with rage and Blaster's are unable to apply that damage. If you can't even apply the damage what's the point of a measly 5% increase in damage compared to a huuuuuuuuge increase in range.
I couldnt agree more that blasters ought to **** smaller stuff in web range, because small stuff can kite them which they cant do to most other weapon types. However, thats clearly not the way CCP are going. They've made it clear that wont change, so instead we need to focus on actually persuading Nozh to do anything about tracking. Asking for things to stay the way they are on TQ (which is currently fine, imo, but things ARE a-changing thanks to the speed nerf revamping half of all combat) isn't practical, because they've put their mind to this.
We blaster pilots have to start to lobby for small changes that might actually happen, rather than ask for what would be a complete rebalance but actually get nothing. _______________________________________________ Mercenary Forces |
black vodka
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 11:17:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Xenomorphea
That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
LOL :-)
More like amputating your legs and arms, then reattaching the legs and call it a "boost".
Cheers, Xeno
indeed
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 11:40:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Kagura Nikon The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left.
Erm...
So just to be clear: changing the stats on SISI so that Blaster ships perform 80% as good as TQ speed wise, vs 50% of TQ is an improvement?
That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
this patch is about a nerf! You cannot expect to all things continue ok for everyone. Stop acting like a child! Life is unfair! Its impossible to please one groups without unpleasing another. The best that can be done is minimize it.
------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Kunming
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E White Core
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 11:41:00 -
[27]
I demand more blaster DPS than a torp raven, or alternatively nerf torp range to 5-10km with added cap consumption!
CALDARI ONLINE anyone?
|
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 17:04:00 -
[28]
Originally by: El Yatta
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Kagura Nikon The agility changes. REmoved 1 of the problems that blaster ships were facing in SISI. Now there is only the tracking left.
Erm...
So just to be clear: changing the stats on SISI so that Blaster ships perform 80% as good as TQ speed wise, vs 50% of TQ is an improvement?
That's like me kicking you in the balls, and telling you to smile about it because I didn't do it twice.
Yes. But we need to accept, that BS are going to be slower. They've said its in their design to have more definition in speed between the classes, and BS are going to be slower than on TQ. Its just how its going to be. The agility change isn't actually bad, overall. Sadly its let Zulupark claim everything is fixed when they havent looked at tracking yet.
I think you need to be realistic with that as well - we will NOT get the 300% increase that would be required to bring it back to TQ efficiency within web range. Its not going to happen, it skews the performance of null and makes the numbers look hell weird compared to other turrets.
I think maybe a 25% tracking boost might be something to realistically lobby for.
I'm hoping there will be some tweaking of the tracking formula, if the small adjustment discussed in the Blaster thread were to be incorporated then there would be no need to arbitrarily boost Blaster tracking - the updated formula would cover it, frigates would still be virtually immune, cruisers a damage reduction but not invulnerable, and you would never again miss another Battleship up close with Large Blasters.
That sorts the hitting issue, I still believe given the performance of pulse lasers/Torpedoes that either reducing their damage output, or boosting blasters is required.
--------------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Gabriel Karade
Nulli-Secundus
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 17:30:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 01/11/2008 17:33:41
Even if there was no tweaking of the tracking formula, simply doubling the tracking would not be unreasonable. The following is for a perfect Ion II megathron with 5% tracking implant using AM ammo (0.083 rads/sec), vs. an Incursus and vs. a Thorax.
1. Current Sisi situation
-Incursus-
http://eve-files.com/dl/177394
As you can see once inside 6km hit chance falls off to zero on base speed alone (375 m/sec, webbed to 150 m/sec).
-Thorax-
http://eve-files.com/dl/177396
Down to 20% hits at 2km, again base speed while webbed.Orbiting at 1km is virtual immunity.
2. Doubling tracking
-Incursus-
http://eve-files.com/dl/177395
At 4.5km we are down to 10% hits, roughly 90 dps for a perfect 2 MFS Ion II Megathron, while 3km becomes the new 0% hit range. Again this is for base speeds while webbed.
-Thorax-
http://eve-files.com/dl/177397
At 2km the Thorax is taking about 67% hits, but going into 1km (pretty much medium blaster range) reduces the hits to about 15%, again this is just using the base speed that the thorax can attain while webbed.
In short, doubling tracking would not be OTT if you had a corresponding nerf to the tracking with Null. But IMO it would be far better to correct the tracking formula.
--------------
Video - 'War-Machine' |
Aokie
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 17:38:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Aokie on 01/11/2008 17:38:24
Originally by: Gabriel Karade technical stuff
This sounds pretty solid.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |