| 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
|
eliminator2
Gallente
Young Enterprise
Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 19:46:00 -
[31]
gunna support they need fixing blasters are the wtfpwnege gun like a shotgun at close range in realife but CCP care about carbear weapons more etc missiles since they have been boosted -_-
|
eliminator2
Young Enterprise
Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 19:49:00 -
[32]
forgot to support
hate man flu and 5 days 9 hour shifts >_<
|
Maximum KILLDEATHRATIO
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 20:45:00 -
[33]
Signed, blasters got boned.
___________________
Yes I'm bitter. (the taste you can see!)
|
Miyamoto Shigesuke
Jugis Modo Utopia
Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 20:53:00 -
[34]
Posting in support.
|
Poast Warrior
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.12.04 23:58:00 -
[35]
Supported.
|
Haakelen
Cassandra's Light
Caeruleum Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.05 00:12:00 -
[36]
Blasters require delicate balancing, and that hasn't been done yet. I won't pretend I know how to do it, but it should be.
|
Sgt Napalm
Synergy Evolved
Strength in Numbers.
|
Posted - 2008.12.05 00:27:00 -
[37]
Run for CSM please.
|
Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
|
Posted - 2008.12.05 01:29:00 -
[38]
Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav!
Also Known As |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.07 18:41:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Sgt Napalm
Run for CSM please.
I'll be running for CSM next time, assuming I can ever get my passport sorted...
The blaster issue is still an issue that needs to be addressed. Switching to lasers isn't 'addressing' the issue.
I've continued to experiment, test and adapt my play style to the changes, and it's boiling down to just stopping the use of blasters on anything other than a Kronos. That concept isn't workable for me and most other players.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Cpt Jagermeister
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 01:36:00 -
[40]
You sac range for dmg. Blasters need some looking at. Increase tracking,dmg, range, whatever it just doesn't seem worth it atm. They seem to have lost their niche post qr.
|
Arcon Telf
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 07:38:00 -
[41]
I agree with the OP 100%.
|
Ivena Amethyst
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 11:32:00 -
[42]
supoart
--------
Is that an Itty V in your pocket or ar you just happy to see me? |
Astria Tiphareth
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 14:18:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
I guess nobody pays attention to this section of the forums.
Must confess I stopped looking after a while 
___
My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...
Environmental Effects
|
Deus Teragrammaton
|
Posted - 2008.12.08 20:40:00 -
[44]
Large blasters need a buff? Blasterthron's are some of the most dangerous pvp builds in Eve, you guys are nuts.
Minmatar have it way worse with Autocannons then blaster boats, yet we make due. OMG, fit a tracking computer with a targetting script.
|
Pokedswen
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 09:47:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Pokedswen on 09/12/2008 09:48:22
Signed, blasters got boned !
|
William Amato
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 10:39:00 -
[46]
/signed. id like to hit targets other then stationary.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 18:26:00 -
[47]
Supported. Improve tracking and/or sig resolution.
...
|
Major Reach
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.11 14:24:00 -
[48]
Signed.
|
Nisstyree
|
Posted - 2008.12.11 14:25:00 -
[49]
Signed and approved
|
Rame cris
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 02:24:00 -
[50]
hmmm, not surprised to see so many Gallente in here...
when you get a nurf like the one handed to missiles then i'll hear and understand your QQ
|
Shianeer Salvan
Jugis Modo Utopia
Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 10:50:00 -
[51]
/signed
|
Solomon XI
Hoist The Colors.
Pirate Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 10:55:00 -
[52]
I've found myself using my drone-boats more since QR because blasters have become practically useless.
Iskhur, Dominix, and even the broken Ishtar. =/
I'll sign this in hopes that this CSM might actually do something. I miss flying my Deimos and I really miss flying my Astarte but they are not viable presently with the web nerf, the new warp scrambler, and the blaster issues.
***
--/signed & full heartily supported.
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 11:00:00 -
[53]
Originally by: William Amato
/signed. id like to hit targets other then stationary.
They track better than every other battleship gun.
--
249km locking? |
Hassan'i Sabbah
Caldari
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.12.12 11:44:00 -
[54]
Signed
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.14 14:47:00 -
[55]
Originally by: James Lyrus
Originally by: William Amato
/signed. id like to hit targets other then stationary.
They track better than every other battleship gun.
Lasers have 5x the effective optimal range of blasters. What's your point? Blasters don't have 5x the tracking of lasers.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
SSgt Sniper
MAIDS
|
Posted - 2008.12.14 15:03:00 -
[56]
poasting to support a boost of ALL TECH II AMMO including the blaster ammo.
Why is using my tech I base better CCP? WHY?
I believe an ammo boost would solve most of folks complaints with blaster atm as well as the ACs.
-------
CEO of Maids. No I didn't pick the name. I've grown rather fond of it though.Poor PR in progress!
|
Haakelen
Gallente
Cassandra's Light
Caeruleum Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.14 20:37:00 -
[57]
Originally by: SSgt Sniper
poasting to support a boost of ALL TECH II AMMO including the blaster ammo.
Why is using my tech I base better CCP? WHY?
I believe an ammo boost would solve most of folks complaints with blaster atm as well as the ACs.
Short-range, high damage T2 ammo has almost no reason to exist at the moment. It should definitely get boosted. Faction ammo should not be better than T2.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.16 06:04:00 -
[58]
Don't forget the click the 'show support' box people...
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2008.12.17 03:49:00 -
[59]
I, too, would like to see an improvement in the utility of blaster boats. Sometimes I can get away with warping in, bookmarking something, then warping out and then warping back in on top of the target. Other times I have to "slowboat" on afterburners with overdrives to get to my target, who usually has about a minute or two (60km at 400m/s) to shoot me with their long-range weapons and sentry drones.
So for now it's sitting back, or getting on the afterburner and running away, and finding a quiet spot from which I can snipe with railguns and sentry drones.
Perhaps if the Hyperion had a reduction to minimum warp distance to eg: 50km, we could have a solution to the problem of closing with the target?
|
Vexara
Mentat Assassins
|
Posted - 2008.12.17 21:46:00 -
[60]
6 months of training on my blaster pvp account wasted.. yep supported.
|
Ron Bacardi
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 02:26:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Ron Bacardi on 18/12/2008 02:26:37
Supported. There is no upside to using blasters and many downsides compared to other weapon systems.
Edit: Page 3 Snipa
|
Jennifer Drama
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 02:27:00 -
[62]
Supported.
|
Vupri
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 04:34:00 -
[63]
Support
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 15:11:00 -
[64]
mhm neutron blasters maelstrom gets better performance that ac mael, mhm buff balsters you say ?
|
Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
|
Posted - 2008.12.18 20:47:00 -
[65]
k
|
Sar Ferredj
Universal Mining Inc
Forged Dominion
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 10:48:00 -
[66]
Well, just shorter to say game mechanic is borked . . .
How happy are those who trained hard for gunnery, just to see their T1 drones doing more dps than their T2 blasters (even within optimal). . .
Anyway, should I give a try to CCP idea to fit small blasters on my BS ?
Please, give us back mechanic, If nanos is the only reason to rebalance game, just focus on nanos & their fits . . . not on the whole thing
|
Doctor Mahbuse
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 11:05:00 -
[67]
Adapt or die, very simple. Blaster were overpowered before the speedchange, and they still are.
Now it's even harder to keep that blaster ships at range by throwing webs on them, since the web got nerfed.
Only those who don't know how to fly blaster ships whine on forums. I'm a blaster pilot since '05 and i say blasters are fine, stop whining about stuff you can't fly.
If blasters are to complicated for you, use missiles or something.
|
The Djego
merovinger inc
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 12:49:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Doctor Mahbuse
Adapt or die, very simple. Blaster were overpowered before the speedchange, and they still are.
So you still play in 2005? If Blasters where overpowered the last 2 years(that where dominated by Nano Fittings for a reason) I have to suck hard when hitting structure in my unballanced Mega(with maxed Skills) while killing a Gedon that only got T1 Heavy Drones. Serious if you only know what happens if you bash some noobs out of her ships fine but on simlar Skill levels it evens out quite good. If anything Blaster actual lack DPS since the HP Boost and Rigs to realy play a superior close range slugger that break Tanks instead of wearing them down.
Originally by: Doctor Mahbuse
Now it's even harder to keep that blaster ships at range by throwing webs on them, since the web got nerfed.
It is also harder to maintain a short range to your target while beeing able to hit it well, gess what the Blaster DPS drops faster than the DPS of other Weapon Systems by not fighting in Optimal and Blaster ships win or loose fights with the DPS in most cases.
Also what kind of ship is hurt the most by a Scrambler, while targets reducing her Damage by sliping out of range?
Originally by: Doctor Mahbuse
Only those who don't know how to fly blaster ships whine on forums. I'm a blaster pilot since '05 and i say blasters are fine, stop whining about stuff you can't fly.
If blasters are to complicated for you, use missiles or something.
Standard prase used by Alts that have no reputation or any KMs to show, while the oposite is stated by people that actualy can show quite some kills in Blaster BS pre and after QR. 
Back to topic:
On the Thread, well signed Bellum, but I preaty much doubt anything will happen during the next 12 Month to Blasters or Webs if ever.
----
Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Amantus
Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
|
Sar Ferredj
Universal Mining Inc
Forged Dominion
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 12:58:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Doctor Mahbuse
Adapt or die, very simple. Blaster were overpowered before the speedchange, and they still are.
Now it's even harder to keep that blaster ships at range by throwing webs on them, since the web got nerfed.
Only those who don't know how to fly blaster ships whine on forums. I'm a blaster pilot since '05 and i say blasters are fine, stop whining about stuff you can't fly.
If blasters are to complicated for you, use missiles or something.
Did you ever used a blastership ?
DId you ever played Eve ?
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 14:20:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Doctor Mahbuse
Adapt or die, very simple. Blaster were overpowered before the speedchange, and they still are.
Now it's even harder to keep that blaster ships at range by throwing webs on them, since the web got nerfed.
Only those who don't know how to fly blaster ships whine on forums. I'm a blaster pilot since '05 and i say blasters are fine, stop whining about stuff you can't fly.
If blasters are to complicated for you, use missiles or something.
Killboard? Evidence? Or are you just trolling?
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Doctor Mahbuse
|
Posted - 2008.12.19 19:11:00 -
[71]
Omg what kind of proof and numbers do you want ?
You claim that blasters are bad, so you have the burden of proof. So far i only saw some made-up numbers, faked problems and made-up imbalances from the whine squad, who emphasizes the downsides of the change and conceal the advantages. Lobbyism at it's best.
Seriously, grow up and stop whining like a baby.
Blasters are fine.
If you think they are broken, simply use something else and leave them to people who actually adapt and know how to use them with success.
|
Maximum KILLDEATHRATIO
Minmatar
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.12.20 03:54:00 -
[72]
Lookit that dumbass, lllllookit it.
___________________
Yes I'm bitter. (the taste you can see!)
|
NeoVictus
|
Posted - 2008.12.20 10:00:00 -
[73]
|
Sar Ferredj
Universal Mining Inc
Forged Dominion
|
Posted - 2008.12.20 19:53:00 -
[74]
Personnaly I have no problems regarding my fittings . . . but it is not the case for corpmates . . .
I having the feeling these changes (blasters/MWD/scram/web) have been made to satisfy carebears/noobs that were fainting as they weere facing a Mega MWDing to them or a nanos-gang waiting for them at gates . . .
blasters have tracking issues, SB are borked, blasterboats lost their role as they can't web anymore their prey & have to rely (& pray for) tackling BS . . .
Eve is less & less funny for small groups/fleets . . . only number seem to matter now . . .
|
Marlona Sky
Astroglide X
|
Posted - 2008.12.20 20:56:00 -
[75]
Is CCP currently looking at doing something with T2 ammo as no one uses any in 95% of all situations?
|
Sharkk
Stinkys Clam Shack
|
Posted - 2008.12.20 21:49:00 -
[76]
Support this
if a blaster boat is able to close to its optimal
it should be able to (in most cases) bring its full DPS to bear
not go miss miss miss
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.12.23 08:15:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Doctor Mahbuse
Omg what kind of proof and numbers do you want ?
You claim that blasters are bad, so you have the burden of proof. So far i only saw some made-up numbers, faked problems and made-up imbalances from the whine squad, who emphasizes the downsides of the change and conceal the advantages. Lobbyism at it's best.
Seriously, grow up and stop whining like a baby.
Blasters are fine.
If you think they are broken, simply use something else and leave them to people who actually adapt and know how to use them with success.
I've already demonstrated plenty of proof. You're just trolling my thread. GTFO or support your argument. The burden of proof for your opinions is on you.
Personally, I don't think you know a thing about blasters and/or their use, and are talking out your ass, just like everyone else.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
The Djego
Minmatar
merovinger inc
|
Posted - 2009.02.01 03:12:00 -
[78]
Bump, still no real response. |
Sar Ferredj
Orion Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.01 09:27:00 -
[79]
Whines will shut off as we will get used to this nerf . . .
No whines == no problems . . .
Nice CCP to ignore your customers (yes, I pay a monthly fee to bring my money into a company that used to bring fun to me)
Now is a good time to wonder about revamping the whole thingy : the current tournament results are far beyonf my expectations regarding blasterboats
|
Dariah Stardweller
|
Posted - 2009.02.01 12:06:00 -
[80]
|
barvo
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.01 22:32:00 -
[81]
Supported |
Milo Caman
Asteri Rising
Asteri Ethnos
|
Posted - 2009.02.01 23:01:00 -
[82]
/signed |
Pattern Clarc
|
Posted - 2009.02.01 23:34:00 -
[83]
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/8889/dpstj5.jpg Please visit your user settings to enable images. |
Armitage RU
|
Posted - 2009.02.02 11:21:00 -
[84]
How to solve tracking problem..?
— CHANGE T2 ammo bonuses to compensate web nerf:
- Void, Hail, Conflagraition +75% tracking (instead -50%)
- Null, Barrage, Scorch +50% tracking (instead -25%)
Now T2 close ammo worse then Faction.
|
Sar Ferredj
Orion Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.02 12:35:00 -
[85]
NO ! !
What leaded us to this situation ?
Carebears whines about nanos.
I escaped nanos many times & know that the best anti nano thingy is a Domi fitted with heavy Neut/Nos & sentries, which is a easy setup to bring into a gang.
How to solve this issue to noobs as CCP said it was a violation of ingame physic ?
My solution :
Your ship has max speed, If you go above this max speed you take structural damages and agility/tracking/range drop seriously.
In order words : you can run but then you'll be blind & harmless.
|
Neesa Corrinne
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2009.02.02 13:22:00 -
[86]
Edited by: Neesa Corrinne on 02/02/2009 13:21:46
I support this thread heavily. Between web nerf, agility and T2 blaster ammo, it's very hard to make a good blaster boat.
On the other hand I find that flying the drone boats still works just fine, so for anyone who is specced into gallente only, I suggest getting into an Ishtar, Domi, Myrmidon..ect until these issues are resolved.
---------------------------------
|
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy
Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.02 16:26:00 -
[87]
Edited by: NightmareX on 02/02/2009 16:37:13
Not that i'm against this.
But can you explain to me how i managed to hit a Deimos good in my Navy Mega with Caldari Navy Antimatter L on my Neutron's II when i had him webbed while he was orbiting me at 2.5 km?.
I was standing still though. And this was on sisi. And no, it's not any different from sisi to TQ when it's about the tracking and webbers.
I don't directly see any issues with Large Blasters as they are now. Maybe it's just me though heh.
I'm almost maxed in skills for Blasters from Small to Large, and i have Gallente Frig, Cruiser and Battleship at level 5.
But one thing is for sure though, if the tracking on Blasters are getting boosted, then for sure they should boost the tracking on the Autocannons to.
Check out my new flash web page 'Alpha Strike' |
Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2009.02.02 20:37:00 -
[88]
Originally by: NightmareX
Edited by: NightmareX on 02/02/2009 16:39:45
Not that i'm against this.
But can you explain to me how i managed to hit a Deimos good in my Navy Mega with Caldari Navy Antimatter L on my Neutron's II when i had him webbed while he was orbiting me at 2.5 km?.
I was standing still though. And this was on sisi. And no, it's not any different from sisi to TQ when it's about the tracking and webbers.
I don't see any issues with Large Blasters as they are now. Maybe it's just me though heh.
I'm almost maxed in skills for Blasters from Small to Large, and i have Gallente Frig, Cruiser and Battleship at level 5.
But one thing is for sure though, if the tracking on Blasters are getting boosted, then for sure they should boost the tracking on the Autocannons to.
and how were your shots connecting ? just hitting and reliable putting damage on a target are 2 different things. btw doesn't the navy mega have +1 mid from standard mega ? 2 webs change the situation a bit. |
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy
Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.02 20:40:00 -
[89]
Edited by: NightmareX on 02/02/2009 20:40:57
Originally by: Hugh Ruka
Originally by: NightmareX
Edited by: NightmareX on 02/02/2009 16:39:45
Not that i'm against this.
But can you explain to me how i managed to hit a Deimos good in my Navy Mega with Caldari Navy Antimatter L on my Neutron's II when i had him webbed while he was orbiting me at 2.5 km?.
I was standing still though. And this was on sisi. And no, it's not any different from sisi to TQ when it's about the tracking and webbers.
I don't see any issues with Large Blasters as they are now. Maybe it's just me though heh.
I'm almost maxed in skills for Blasters from Small to Large, and i have Gallente Frig, Cruiser and Battleship at level 5.
But one thing is for sure though, if the tracking on Blasters are getting boosted, then for sure they should boost the tracking on the Autocannons to.
and how were your shots connecting ? just hitting and reliable putting damage on a target are 2 different things. btw doesn't the navy mega have +1 mid from standard mega ? 2 webs change the situation a bit.
A Navy Mega have one extra low slot, not an extra mid slot. The Vindicator have 5 mid slots. So i was then only using one Gallente Navy Webber.
And yeh, i was hitting the Deimos pretty good most of the times. |
Armi RU
|
Posted - 2009.02.05 12:06:00 -
[90]
UP |
Sar Ferredj
Orion Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 10:34:00 -
[91]
Just to remind CCP that blasters need some love . . .
Even more as Web/Scram have been rebalanced . . .
(as I said previously : no complaints mean no problem)
|
Ephemeron
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 18:17:00 -
[92]
Or just give Megathrons bonus to Mega Pulse lasers and we are good. Who needs blasters?
|
JadeMako
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 19:13:00 -
[93]
Edited by: JadeMako on 12/02/2009 19:13:05
Same situation as many others, only using drone boats now and feel many sp's are wasted on blasters.
|
Trebor Notlimah
Lone Star EVE Group
Veni Vidi Vici
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:18:00 -
[94]
While not as big of a deal as people were making it out to be pre-patch -- it is a significant issue with the gallente race.
|
shuckstar
Gallente
Hauling hogs
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 21:48:00 -
[95]
Not supported, blasters still fine imo, My astarte popped a player frig orbiting me, even when beeing tracking disrupted.
|
Xenalee
|
Posted - 2009.02.12 22:10:00 -
[96]
Not supported. Do we really need CSM agendas dealing with balancing minute? Let them deal wwith issues directly impacting CCP and Playerbase interaction. Balancing the game should not be their role. Deal with things that can make the game better for everyone imo.
|
Soeniss Delazur
Pilots Of Honour
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2009.02.13 10:44:00 -
[97]
Stop looking at EFT and start flying blaster ships to understand the issue.
|
Bad Borris
tr0pa de elite
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 12:05:00 -
[98]
|
TimGascoigne
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.02.14 17:23:00 -
[99]
Edited by: TimGascoigne on 14/02/2009 17:23:42
If you want to look for a gimp system try projectils till then count your blessings.
edit: btw Not supported
|
Kaidelong Einfachs
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 20:37:00 -
[100]
Edited by: Kaidelong Einfachs on 16/02/2009 20:40:11
Edited by: Kaidelong Einfachs on 16/02/2009 20:37:23
If I get in this close I really want to do my on paper DPS somehow, tracking would help that. Signed.
And yeah large autocannons in particular lost out too. Again, I think right now amarr is the way to go. Ishtar is cool though.
|
Ephemeron
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.02.16 20:57:00 -
[101]
There aren't enough significant differences between the 3 close run guns. They all have nearly same damage output - with a single damage mod making one better than the rest. Ship damage bonuses overshadow the default differences. Then what it really comes down to is the type of ship you fly - strengths and weaknesses, plus tracking, optimal range, and falloff.
All of those factors make pure damage differences insignificant.
The only significant differences in close range weapons we have are between missiles and guns.
In my opinion, we should have more pronounced differences between the three gun types. Of course there'll be plenty of people crying over balance - the type of people who think that balance is achieved by homogenizing everything, erasing as many differences as possible. It's a boring type of balance and people calling for that shouldn't be taken seriously.
Ideally, blasters should be kings of damage for short range - they should be hard to operate, as reflected by range and tracking, but they should be undeniably most damaging weapons. To create a noticeable difference in damage, blaster damage output would need to be increased about 20% - which is roughly a free damage mod.
With that, everybody would clearly see that blasters are most damaging weapons. Then would come the arguments of balance. People would cry blasters are too powerful. And maybe their concerns would have some valid points. But the way to balance would not be to nerf the damage output, it would be to look into optimal range, falloff range, and tracking stats.
Similarly, autocannons should be kings of falloff and tracking. Make their tracking undeniably more powerful than all other guns - a clear cut advantage from other weapon types. Then there may be more imbalance objections, but the way to address those would be to look into damage output.
The pulse laser strength is in the best optimal range of all short range guns. They can provide a nice medium of damage and tracking between blasters and autocannons, while having clearly pronounced advantage of optimal range.
That's how we should balance things - respect diversity, make the game more edgy
|
Kaidelong Einfachs
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 01:52:00 -
[102]
I would like to see a compelling reason to sacrifice tank for more gank on a blaster boat and to use neutrons and some more in optimal and tracking so that they're more effective once they're in range. Only working at extremely short ranges is supposed to be the downside of using blasters. With the exception of large blasters it's pretty unlikely you'll be within optimal, though.
I don't terribly mind the idea of sacrificing a lot of tank to gain enormous damage output that will beat another more balanced ship one on one, and be easily taken out if it can't get in range or is up against multiple ships. I think that'd be very gallente-like. Right now it seems it's hard to beat a Geddon bs-to-bs regardless of what you are in.
|
Breed Love
FinFleet
KenZoku
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 03:29:00 -
[103]
signed,.
-----
Originally by: Zhulik
I thought Premium graphics were supposed to fix that bug where people were trying to salvage Minmatar ships.
|
Junmar
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 14:19:00 -
[104]
Yep. Never understood why the info page on Blasters was along the lines of how amazingly powerful they are supposed to be. They seem useless to me.
|
Mithrantir Ob'lontra
Ixion Defence Systems
Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.02.17 16:54:00 -
[105]
There is a problem with blasters. Not as big as some people make it out to be, but there is still a significant problem.
CCP should look into this.
-------
Nobody can be exactly like me. Even I have trouble doing it. |
darkmancer
|
Posted - 2009.02.18 22:06:00 -
[106]
Support
- Please try and make blasters useful on Caldari ships too
- Autocannons could do with a look at to but they don't seem to have as much trouble as blawsters at least IMO.
---------------------------------
There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong |
Poba
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 04:07:00 -
[107]
/signed
blasters need more range/tracking or the need big dps buff
~Welcome to the internet, where the men are men, the women are men, and the children are FBI agents~ |
Mass'a Whipcracka
Goodfellas.
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 04:10:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Ephemeron
There aren't enough significant differences between the 3 close run guns. They all have nearly same damage output - with a single damage mod making one better than the rest. Ship damage bonuses overshadow the default differences. Then what it really comes down to is the type of ship you fly - strengths and weaknesses, plus tracking, optimal range, and falloff.
All of those factors make pure damage differences insignificant.
The only significant differences in close range weapons we have are between missiles and guns.
In my opinion, we should have more pronounced differences between the three gun types. Of course there'll be plenty of people crying over balance - the type of people who think that balance is achieved by homogenizing everything, erasing as many differences as possible. It's a boring type of balance and people calling for that shouldn't be taken seriously.
Ideally, blasters should be kings of damage for short range - they should be hard to operate, as reflected by range and tracking, but they should be undeniably most damaging weapons. To create a noticeable difference in damage, blaster damage output would need to be increased about 20% - which is roughly a free damage mod.
With that, everybody would clearly see that blasters are most damaging weapons. Then would come the arguments of balance. People would cry blasters are too powerful. And maybe their concerns would have some valid points. But the way to balance would not be to nerf the damage output, it would be to look into optimal range, falloff range, and tracking stats.
Similarly, autocannons should be kings of falloff and tracking. Make their tracking undeniably more powerful than all other guns - a clear cut advantage from other weapon types. Then there may be more imbalance objections, but the way to address those would be to look into damage output.
The pulse laser strength is in the best optimal range of all short range guns. They can provide a nice medium of damage and tracking between blasters and autocannons, while having clearly pronounced advantage of optimal range.
That's how we should balance things - respect diversity, make the game more edgy
^^ this
|
Myrhial Arkenath
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2009.02.19 10:09:00 -
[109]
Agreed. Blasters could use a bit of love.
CEO | Diary of a pod pilot |
Kaidelong Einfachs
|
Posted - 2009.02.20 01:50:00 -
[110]
Edited by: Kaidelong Einfachs on 20/02/2009 01:54:46
Maybe raise the damage modifier boost on gallente ships so that the output DPS of the right size blaster turret is much higher?
Also why would you want the caldari to be good at using blasters? Blasters and drones make the gallente ships special to fly. If the caldari need boosting why not something else specific to them?
PS: on the three turret types, to put it simply, do you mean blasters melt stuff both close and webbed, autocannons have trouble missing things they're supposed to miss and that pulse lasers tend to hit things at range but can be out-tracked easily? That'd make sense to me.
|
Sar Ferredj
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.02.23 18:03:00 -
[111]
Edited by: Sar Ferredj on 23/02/2009 18:03:22
The upcoming Apocrypha expansion pack & its new AI will lead to massive changes : as drones will be more often targeted, Gallentaeans players will have to rely on blasters & railguns . . .
Which are just . . . messed ? ? ?
So it seems PvE will have sense only for Caldari/Amarr, even maybe Minnmatarr.
CCP do hate us.
|
Ephemeron
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.02.23 20:10:00 -
[112]
Ok, I posted on this subject before but I want to make a new point:
I have lots of PvP experience fighting in close range battleships and my weapons of choice are blasters, ACs, mega pulse
Given that, I can fight effectively using all of those weapons. I would not go as far as to say that "blasters are ineffective". However, it is clear to me that blasters do not offer any significant advantages over mega pulse. Autocannons are also rather so-so but at least they are easy to fit. Blasters have fitting problems especially with CPU - which would be ok if they really had some major advantages.
Right now, properly fit close range bs of different factions perform about same - with mega pulse having slight advantage with the superior optimal and easier fitting to support armor tank. Autocannons seem rather bland. I guess CCP would call it balance - all ships performing about same way. But what I want is greater variety. Blasters are supposed to be the most damaging weapons that are optimized for close range combat. That is simply not so when compared to performance of other weapons. Blasters have no clear advantages, they are just like other guns.
Yes, I see how this is balanced, but it is a boring form of balance. And frankly, mega pulse is still better - for pure tank and gank.
Why can't we have more clear cut differences between different fighting styles?
|
Tlar Sanqua
|
Posted - 2009.02.26 15:41:00 -
[113]
I would like CCP to look into the balancing of short ranged weapons in general with the QR changes.
|
Sable Schroedinger
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.02.26 16:08:00 -
[114]
Blasters are suffering heavily from an erosion of their role. They arenÆt useless, but their application is significantly more difficult and has even gone so far as requiring gang mates to be used to a greater degree.
Very rough calculations, but currently, out of all the guns at their optimal + falloff, blasters have the lowest speed requirement to outrun tracking û so in effective terms, they have the worst tracking available, and yes is it lower than arties. True that at those levels they are tracking better than other weapons, but it means their DPS is significantly lowered compared to its paper value.
Ship bonusÆ will make a clear impact into these figures (which may explain some of the experiences some people have had with some blaster boats), but unless weÆre starting to advocate that weapons only be useable (not better) on ships designed for them (much like ECM is now and other EW is fast heading), as in have a tracking bonus, I donÆt feel this should be factored in at this point.
Personally I find the scram and web changes to be the most significant aspects in the equation since scrams have put people off from using MWDs in many situations I have witnessed in favour of AB, so combined with lower web effectiveness much higher orbit speeds are frequent which are exaggerated at shorter ranges. It also means that once committed there is no option to disengage at all, unlike other weapon systems were there will be some, if not very much.
But in all, when you are faced with these additional problems for no significant bonus in damage, the logical call is to use a different weapon.
Lasers are tracking too well at this moment, so yes there is some mileage in lowering their tracking, but I still donÆt think this would address a core issue with blasters at the moment.
--------------------------------------------
SF Recruiting |
AKULA UrQuan
Druuge Crimson Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.02.26 18:18:00 -
[115]
/signed
Not because blasters need a boost directly. With the change to webs all turret weapons need their tracking stats looked at, and hopefully adjusted. |
Imertu Solientai
|
Posted - 2009.02.26 23:35:00 -
[116]
supported
|
Pis Isk
|
Posted - 2009.03.02 19:42:00 -
[117]
Edited by: Pis Isk on 02/03/2009 19:43:09
Being a Gallente purist I can say that my gunnery SP feels very wasted when my T2 Hammerheads both reach the target and do more effective DPS to it than an entire rack of T2 Ion blasters unless the ship is holding still or flying directly towards me. Gallente ships being rather slow and having the agility of a brick make catching ships of the same size difficult at times. With how many people fit scramblers now as well I'm starting to fit AFTERBURNERS on my PvP ships. having no MWD 7km out means my medium blasters aren't hitting anything. The current state of blasters sometimes makes me wish Gallente had a racial bonus to nos/neut rather than blasters. Blasters aren't dead or useless but have really fallen away from their true purpose.
Disclaimer: Blasters aren't completely broken. Shiney stuff still comes out of the other end when I fire them and they seem to distract the enemy enough so that he doesn't start popping my drones (my real dps).
/signed and supported
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |