| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
   |
Posted - 2008.11.25 09:31:00 -
[1]
Due to a number of compounding factors large and medium blasters have been rendered almost totally ineffective in QR.
A short list of *some* of the factors contributing to their ineffectiveness:
- Increased agility of all ships allows for higher base transversal at tighter orbits than ever before
- Web effectiveness reduced by a factor of *four*, increasing relative transverse by over 400%
- Blasters are forced to operate at *extremely* close range, forcing blaster pilots to give up any sort of advantage they have of reducing relative transversal by maintaining slightly longer ranges (10-14km)
- Null ammunition (long range blaster ammo) has a 50% tracking penalty, negating any sort of transversal advantage attained through operating at longer ranges
Only one blaster ship (Hyperion) has enough mids to fit a second web, and due to it's lack of a tracking bonus still can't hit a double webbed BC that orbits at blaster optimal (~2500m for a max skilled T2 Ion fit)
Battleships are not the only ships affected- all cruisers and battle cruisers are affected as well, as the optimal range of medium blasters is severely truncated compared to that of large blasters, and the increase in tracking of medium blasters doesn't compensate for the loss of optimal and hence the increased relative transverse velocity of a *webbed* target.
The issue here isn't about not hitting frigs or AFs or inties with your BS sized guns. It's about not being able to effectively hit targets of the same size, or maybe one class smaller, *at all*, once they attain a tight orbit around your ship. No, 'limiting transversal velocity' isn't an answer to this problem. Most blaster ships simply don't have the agility to out fly an opposing ship due to speed and agility limitations imposed by armor plates and rigs.
Further more, blasters do *not* do enough damage relative to all other weapons. The concept is for blaster ships to do massive amounts of damage once they're in range, and hopefully they'll still be alive after burning up almost all their cap and using up almost all their armor to get into range and actually start fighting.
Right now most other weapon systems can achieve as good or better performance over a much wider range of distances than blasters can, particularly when factoring in comparable tanks for PVP fit ships.
Improve blasters.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
El Yatta
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 18:11:00 -
[2]
Arf, new CSM provokes spurt of people bringing up issues the last one ignored in the hope of change. How foolishly optimistic.
Nevertheless, agreed.
_______________________________________________
Mercenary Forces |
Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 18:16:00 -
[3]
I've been beating the dead horse about stupid T2 ammo nerfs for over a year now... and no response.
Yes, NULL is useless no matter its size. VOID isn't much better. T2 missiles are *slightly* more used now (javelin mostly) but still the nerfs obviate any and all bonuses to the point that T1 base is better.
I've never used blasters because of the freakish short range, but I understand perfectly how you feel, and I support some drastic fixes to the heavy handed Quantum Fail changes.
|
Bellum Eternus
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 20:12:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: El Yatta
Arf, new CSM provokes spurt of people bringing up issues the last one ignored in the hope of change. How foolishly optimistic.
Nevertheless, agreed.
The way I figured, if a bunch of morons are bringing up useless self serving garbage 'issues', I might as well post something worthwhile in the off chance it might make a difference. 
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 22:20:00 -
[5]
I see you are still campaigning for this to be corrected. Good.
|
Ticondrius
Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 22:26:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Ticondrius on 25/11/2008 22:26:40
I just use Fed Navy Antimatter. I'd like to see the T2 ammo fixed a bit, but I really don't have a problem in PvP with my blaster ships. In fact, my more recent kills were with a Taranis with Light Neutrons. Today I tried out my Deimos against other cruisers and did just fine, winning most duels with my corpmates. Only against a couple different HACs did I have any trouble, but that's more by racial design than a failing of blaster tracking.
Sorry folks. I'm a diehard blasterboat pilot, but I don't seem to have these problems. 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
PROPOSAL: Good Bug Reporting Incentives
MMORPG: Many Men Online Role Playing Girls |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 22:38:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Ticondrius
Edited by: Ticondrius on 25/11/2008 22:26:40
I just use Fed Navy Antimatter. I'd like to see the T2 ammo fixed a bit, but I really don't have a problem in PvP with my blaster ships. In fact, my more recent kills were with a Taranis with Light Neutrons. Today I tried out my Deimos against other cruisers and did just fine, winning most duels with my corpmates. Only against a couple different HACs did I have any trouble, but that's more by racial design than a failing of blaster tracking.
Sorry folks. I'm a diehard blasterboat pilot, but I don't seem to have these problems.
Probably has something to do with the fact that you're not using larger ships. In my OP I clearly stated that the issue is with larger ships and larger guns, not smaller ones.
Another point to clarify: I never, under any circumstances, use T2 ammo. Ever. It's horrible and it's going to stay that way for a long while until CCP scraps it of fixes it. With faction lead/iridium/whatever you can get nearly the same range as null and similar damage, without the tracking penalty, and nobody in their right mind will use Void.
The above isn't to be construed as 'hey, just use faction lead/iridium ammo, your problems are solved!' The only ammunition suitable for use in blasters against like sized targets is antimatter, and lots of it.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Esmenet
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 22:38:00 -
[8]
Blasters are useless atm.
|
DEATHsyphon
8lack Wing
Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2008.11.25 23:10:00 -
[9]
Deff Time for a Gall Buff
--------------------
I'm not not going to pod you! |
Zibu 81
ANZAC ALLIANCE
Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 04:45:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Zibu 81 on 26/11/2008 04:48:18
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Due to a number of compounding factors large and medium blasters have been rendered almost totally ineffective in QR.
A short list of *some* of the factors contributing to their ineffectiveness:
- Increased agility of all ships allows for higher base transversal at tighter orbits than ever before
It also allows you to negate that traversal easier (you don't have to stand still during a fight you know).
Quote:
- Web effectiveness reduced by a factor of *four*, increasing relative transverse by over 400%
- Blasters are forced to operate at *extremely* close range, forcing blaster pilots to give up any sort of advantage they have of reducing relative transversal by maintaining slightly longer ranges (10-14km)
You know that autocannons have even shorter optimal, do you.
There are also other types of ammo than AM.
Quote:
- Null ammunition (long range blaster ammo) has a 50% tracking penalty, negating any sort of transversal advantage attained through operating at longer ranges
Null has only got 25% tracking penalty, and it also gives you extra falloff, so you now have 2.5 times longer optimal range over AM, plus 30% more falloff. I'd say it's a fair trade.
Also every other turret race uses long range ammo, sacrificing damage and tracking.
Quote:
Only one blaster ship (Hyperion) has enough mids to fit a second web, and due to it's lack of a tracking bonus still can't hit a double webbed BC that orbits at blaster optimal (~2500m for a max skilled T2 Ion fit)
Full skilled Ion optimal is 3.8 km with AM ammo, and then you have 10km of falloff (lets say that half of it is usable range) so this still puts you at almost 9 km range, no wonder that a BC can out-track you if you insist on fighting in such close range.
Quote:
Battleships are not the only ships affected- all cruisers and battle cruisers are affected as well, as the optimal range of medium blasters is severely truncated compared to that of large blasters, and the increase in tracking of medium blasters doesn't compensate for the loss of optimal and hence the increased relative transverse velocity of a *webbed* target.
The issue here isn't about not hitting frigs or AFs or inties with your BS sized guns. It's about not being able to effectively hit targets of the same size, or maybe one class smaller, *at all*, once they attain a tight orbit around your ship. No, 'limiting transversal velocity' isn't an answer to this problem. Most blaster ships simply don't have the agility to out fly an opposing ship due to speed and agility limitations imposed by armor plates and rigs.
And which ships don't use plates and armor rigs these days?
On BS level: Raven, Rokh, Mealstrom, Scorpion...any other?
Two out of those 4 are among the least agile ships in game (Rokh and Meal), Scorpion is going to be far away in most cases anyway, so that leaves the Raven...which is usually shield rigged and/or shield extended, so it improves your tracking (bigger signature).
Quote:
Further more, blasters do *not* do enough damage relative to all other weapons. The concept is for blaster ships to do massive amounts of damage once they're in range, and hopefully they'll still be alive after burning up almost all their cap and using up almost all their armor to get into range and actually start fighting.
Right now most other weapon systems can achieve as good or better performance over a much wider range of distances than blasters can, particularly when factoring in comparable tanks for PVP fit ships.
Like compared to autocannons?
So maybe it's not a problem of blasters not doing enough damage, but lasers doing too much?
Quote:
Improve blasters.
Only if you buff large projectiles first (and buff them a lot).
|
doctorstupid2
The Accursed
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 04:51:00 -
[11]
mother****ing signed
Abusive | Deadspace | Deadspace2 |
doctorstupid2
The Accursed
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 04:54:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Zibu 81
Null has only got 25% tracking penalty, and it also gives you extra falloff, so you now have 2.5 times longer optimal range over AM, plus 30% more falloff. I'd say it's a fair trade.
Also every other turret race uses long range ammo, sacrificing damage and tracking.
Using null (-20.3% DPS) leaves blasters with still lesser optimal range than lasers (multifrequency) or torps, and doing significantly less damage with an extra tracking penalty (if the range and damage were the same I would concede the megathron's tracking bonus outweighs that)
I do agree autocannons need work, at the BARE minimum projectile ammo needs to be brought inline with lasers and hybrids.
Abusive | Deadspace | Deadspace2 |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 04:59:00 -
[13]
This isn't a thread focused on projectiles. If you want one, go start your own instead of trolling mine.
That being said, my ACs work great. And they don't use massive amounts (the equivalent of having several neutralizers pointed at your ship) cap like my blasters do.
And my ACs have plenty of falloff to be workable far past where my blasters can hit. I should know, I use the same guns.
I also corrected my tracking penalty figure for Null. I was thinking of Void when I typed it.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Zibu 81
ANZAC ALLIANCE
Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 05:26:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
This isn't a thread focused on projectiles. If you want one, go start your own instead of trolling mine.
That being said, my ACs work great. And they don't use massive amounts (the equivalent of having several neutralizers pointed at your ship) cap like my blasters do.
And my ACs have plenty of falloff to be workable far past where my blasters can hit. I should know, I use the same guns.
I also corrected my tracking penalty figure for Null. I was thinking of Void when I typed it.
You were saying that blaster aren't good enough compared to other weapons systems, which I countered with examples of projectiles.
Also full rack of Neutrons using AM uses less cap than a single T1 large neut pointed at you,
And when using Null you also have quite a lot of optimal and falloff to work in.
Torps also require a TP to get full potential, or at least a MWD running on the target, which after the nano nerf isn't required so much, and their damage is severely reduced by target staying at speed.
So that leaves us with lasers being too good, not blasters being too bad.
|
TheNewEclipse
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 05:37:00 -
[15]
ccp makes me cry with all the damn nerfs to anything thats anygood.
|
Stymphal
The Accursed
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 05:53:00 -
[16]
Signed! I did tons of testing on sisi pre patch and found all of this to be true. I recently sold off all of my blaster ships. I tried to use them after patch, but the one and only instance where they actually performed well was when several corp mates had the target webbed. Even in my Deimos I was unable to trap cruisers. The pilot simply put me on orbit and almost all my damage was negated. T2 ammo for blasters hasn't been viable solution for a LONG time. Especially since LP Stores came into being. When a blaster ship commits to a target it is putting itself in danger cuz it is within web, scram, etc range. It is a very narrow operating envelope. Right now it is impossible to achieve the damage blasters are known for. The only easy fix I can see to this is adding a role bonus to webs for ships that are designed to be used as blaster boats.
|
Isil Rahsen
IsilZheHa Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.11.26 11:59:00 -
[17]
/signed
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 10:16:00 -
[18]
Little to no results so far with this issue. I've had dozens of players contact me in game about it. Where are you guys? I guess nobody pays attention to this section of the forums. 
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 11:01:00 -
[19]
bellum stop whining about blasters
Quote:
It's not a good idea to place a Exotic Dancers in a Giant Secure Container. The Exotic Dancers will not survive intact, if transported in such a container.
|
Irida Mershkov
El Bastardos
EVESpace
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 11:06:00 -
[20]
Signed. Bit obvious on why.
|
AndzX11
House of Tempers
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 12:14:00 -
[21]
Might as well.
Who was it that said you should not be in such short range and use blasters...which BS fight doesn't happen nose to nose? Yada, yda, AC's suck etc...they have twice the tracking and tempest(shield buffer+3gyros in lows) can output the same damage as mega, the only difference being that it can hit things and doesn't even need a web to do it.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 00:27:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Kalintos Tyl
bellum stop whining about blasters
I will continue to point out the deficiencies in the game design until it is rectified, or until CCP explains to me that they simply intend for blasters to be ineffective at short range, at which point I will stop.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Pliauga
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 09:16:00 -
[23]
I have to agree with the OP, at least until a dev from game design comes in and gives a lecture of CCPs' vision for blasters and how they stand among other close range weapons.
----------
DRONE love rulez!! 'mkay?!
. |
Another Forum'Alt
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 11:13:00 -
[24]
|
nightrain914
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 13:44:00 -
[25]
I'd like to see blasters get some lovin' |
Sir SmellyFart
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 13:50:00 -
[26]
Word
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 13:57:00 -
[27]
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/8889/dpstj5.jpg
true dps graph
red tempest
blue aramagedon
light blue megathrone
green raven
One thing that needs loving are autocanons not that blasters.....
using standard pvp fits
Quote:
It's not a good idea to place a Exotic Dancers in a Giant Secure Container. The Exotic Dancers will not survive intact, if transported in such a container.
|
Aoa Lux
Tama Defense Network
|
Posted - 2008.12.01 15:19:00 -
[28]
Buff blasters plz.
|
Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 15:30:00 -
[29]
one from me ...
--- SIG ---
CSM: your support is needed ! |
FunzzeR
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 18:27:00 -
[30]
supported
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |