EVE Search - DPS graphs: BS vs. BC

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

DPS graphs: BS vs. BC

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.01 20:37:00 - [1] Edited by: maralt on 01/12/2008 20:37:34 Originally by: Kadoes Khan I'm not really seeing a definitive problem with these numbers(and colorful graphs), blasters are highest damage and close range, lasers take over at mid range and missiles are constant throughout to a long range. The only thing that concerns me is how terribly projectiles are doing. Looks to me that the DMG/RANGE ratio's are way off between races, amaar needs adjusting and balancing or the other races need a little love.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.02 10:55:00 - [2] Edited by: maralt on 02/12/2008 10:59:32 Looking at the graph it seems to me that its not the max range of lasers that is the problem its the overall effective range. A lot of ppl are screaming about amaar being mid range dmg dealers and the like but the graph shows the amaar ships dishing out almost the same dmg as blasters at the sweet spot and then good/effective dmg for over 40km and virtually into web range. While blasters hit for a very small margin more DMG in its sweet spot but have a huge drop in DMG and effective range of about overall 15km. If amaar are the "mid range" dmg dealers ppl seem to claim they should have lines on the graph of similar shape and range coverage to blasters but at a longer range, so their "effective range" only covers the "mid range area" just like blasters "effective range" only cover the "close range area".
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.02 15:42:00 - [3] Edited by: maralt on 02/12/2008 15:46:11 Originally by: Hugh Ruka 1. small gang where tackle is provided by other ships At closer range a tackled and webbed ship will be easier to hit by all the races so the supposed advantage blasters get against pulse is negligible, but at longer ranges the pulse still own the target but the blasters cannot hit that far so are useless. Originally by: Hugh Ruka 2. solo flying A solo pilot for the most part knows his ships capabilities and unless he attacks a ship with a very funky fit will know what he can beat and what he cannot and will engage or not with that in mind. Originally by: Hugh Ruka 3. small gang on gate where drones are almost unusable This also depends on the gang setup and ships available but a high range to dmg ratios like that of lasers if of much greater benefit than that of blasters that have only slightly more dmg but absurdly shorter range
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.02 17:53:00 - [4] Edited by: maralt on 02/12/2008 17:54:15 Originally by: Hugh Ruka 1. you still have time to target The time to target is unimportant if the target is outside weapon range. (or am i missing the point of the initial question?). Originally by: Hugh Ruka 2. which of the boats has more options solo ? this is the main point All races have quite good solo ships available to them and other ships that suck at solo ganking. In all honesty i feel that a ship with the ability to solo gank is more of a unique setup as far as its bonuses and slots are concerned more than its weapon system. And even then it has to be specific in its target choice.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.02 20:16:00 - [5] Originally by: God's Secret Blasters have the exact same range they had before the patch, blaster boats will still fit MWD's long after you've all quit the game, and they will allways be able to control range, a thing that Amarr ship don't do.. Just because your fitting style does not include a MWD does not mean it cannot be fitted on amaar ships, and with the reduction in speed and the web nerf controlling range is secondary to having a huge effective range. The graphs show lasers are way overpowered compared to all other weapon systems including missiles and no matter how many feeble excuses you bleat out or how much you try to deflect the argument it will remain the truh until changes are made.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.02 21:02:00 - [6] Edited by: maralt on 02/12/2008 21:05:20 Goumindong You must have spent hours going into great detail on nano and other so called "overpowered" stuff in eve but as soon as its amaar that is quite obviously overpowered compared to the other races you come out with some of the weakest excuses i have ever seen on this forum. You consider yourself a game fixer and balancer but this thread has shown you for what your are, a nerf hound with a bias for his own race. All other weapon systems need a buff or lasers need a nerf its that simple and your twinky excuses are doing you more harm than that simple and obvious truth.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 09:02:00 - [7] Edited by: maralt on 03/12/2008 09:05:37 Range, Blaster (Null), AC (Barrage), Lasers (Scorch) 20KM..........430..........400..........450 30KM..........180..........300..........550 40KM..........50..........200..........600 50KM..........30..........130..........480 Massively higher over a huge window.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 11:05:00 - [8] Originally by: Rivqua Originally by: maralt THIS Range, Blaster (Null), AC (Barrage), Lasers (Scorch) 20KM..........430..........400..........450 30KM..........180..........300..........550 40KM..........50...........200..........600 50KM..........30...........130..........480 Massively higher over a huge window. Ok, mm, right, yes. I fly Minmatar, Amarr and Gallente, on different chars, all around 20m SP. Lets see, Amarr has a huge advantage at 25+KM. Of all my pvp (and I am pretty sure others) 85% is below 15km, 10% is 15km-28km and 5% is above 30km. I am personally totally fine that Amarr has a domination in a field where 5% of most solo and small gang pvp happens. I am also totally fine with the fact that my astarte and mega rule in the 10-25km range, as thats where most of my pew pew happens. I also like the fact I can use different ships for different goals and by that outmanuver enemies who just look at a small part of the combat envelope. /Riv I will post the figures for amaar at 10km+ if you like maybe you can spin a tale about those as well........
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 19:09:00 - [9] Originally by: Goumindong Also, align buttons while handy, do not protect you when you're tackled. A BS sitting 30km off a gate is a big flashing neon sign that says "kill me" You need to learn how to fly as a good gang always aligns together and towards the same object/direction. Originally by: Goumindong QR, relatively, hit Amarr hardest. Not to say a lot of it wasn't justified, but it certainly hit the hardest. BULL** it hit everybody hard and amaar the least. Originally by:** Goumindong 1. Locus rigs no longer stack[a nerf I am personally responsible for]. This cut the ability of pulse pilots to reach unbelievably extended ranges So instead of being extraordinarily overpowered they are just VERY overpowered. Originally by: Goumindong 2. Other weapon types can now actually damage enemies. Well gosh, but that still does not stop lasers from being imbalanced. Originally by: Goumindong 3. Web nerf brings up the primary weakness of lasers as relevant again. The web nerf effects everybody, and lasers have less weaknesses than any other gunnery system and those they do have the others have as well as others. Amaar is overpowered or the other systems are underpowered its obvious and simple, you know it and so does everybody else so instead of making up stupid and pathetically weak arguments just accept the fact and find a compromise.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 19:19:00 - [10] Edited by: maralt on 03/12/2008 19:22:20 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt yadda yadda yadda Do you have an argument or are you going to spew some more unsupported declarations like anyone cares? OH OH easy their EMO boy i know amaar are your favorite toy but lets face it you have spent a lot of time on here crying for nerfs and "balance" and now the wheel has turned and its your turn to face the music i suggest you show a little better composure.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 19:20:00 - [11] Edited by: maralt on 03/12/2008 19:24:35 Originally by: maralt Originally by: Goumindong If you reduce the ranges that ships engage at, then tracking is even more important That is why the lesser tracking of lasers unimportant as they hit for further so need less even when comparably disrupted. Originally by: Goumindong You're only good as long as you can fire. WRONG, your only as good as long as you can hit and having a HUGE effective range compared to a small one is a huge and imbalanced benefit. Originally by: Goumindong The problem is that you're comparing short range high DPS weapons systems with medium range high DPS weapons systems. So your ok with amaar getting a tracking nerf so they can only hit for dmg at say 35km-45km instead of having the almost best of all the ranges between 10km-50+km?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 19:29:00 - [12] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt So your ok with amaar getting a tracking nerf so they can only hit for dmg at say 35km-45km instead of having the almost best of all the ranges between 10km-50+km?. What makes you think that? Well you "claim" amaar are mid range dmg dealers with pulse, so if blasters are close range and they cannot hit at mid range then pulse being mid range should not hit close......
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 19:31:00 - [13] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt Edited by: maralt on 03/12/2008 19:22:20 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt yadda yadda yadda Do you have an argument or are you going to spew some more unsupported declarations like anyone cares? OH OH easy their EMO boy i know amaar are your favorite toy but lets face it you have spent a lot of time on here crying for nerfs and "balance" and now the wheel has turned and its your turn to face the music i suggest you show a little better composure. I'll take that as a "no" Actualy considering how EMO you are getting id say your not taking anything well atm. Im actually getting deja vu from all the nano threads you posted in although the reasoning the pro nano ppl gave were considerably more persuasive than your giving over this obvious imbalance. And most took it with considerably more grace.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 19:38:00 - [14] Edited by: maralt on 03/12/2008 19:40:48 Originally by: Rivqua Originally by: maralt Amaar is overpowered or the other systems are underpowered its obvious and simple, you know it and so does everybody else so instead of making up stupid and pathetically weak arguments just accept the fact and find a compromise. Where does this come from? They are STRONG, or, maybe, they are "doing their job well". Its about comparative abilities. Id have no problem with amaar doing full dmg at mid range BUT with the same effective range/dmg ratio that blasters get. But outclassing or equaling every other weapon system from 10-50km is just a joke and not even close to balanced.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 19:46:00 - [15] Originally by: Rivqua On the other hand, they DONT hit close, as it is, their tracking is downright sucky, and being the erm "medium range race" the second they try to outrange and sit at 45km, one single, unbonused tracking disruptor will bring them down to 22km optimal, at which point you either fly into your optimal, point them and pwn them, or, you leave. I SUGGEST YOU CHECK THIS. Originally by: Rivqua That's the thing, the more specialized a platform is, the easier it is to crush it by means of countermeasures. A 40+km sweet spot is not specialized, especially when everybody else has around 20km and some even less.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 19:56:00 - [16] Edited by: maralt on 03/12/2008 19:56:51 Originally by: The Djego Originally by: Goumindong I am not sure you played much during the nano age, so i'll give you the benefit of the doubt. This is the amount of damage that blaster ships did, during the entire nano age to non-stupid pilots. 0 Blasters were worthless. They were worthless to attack with and worthless as defensive modules. The most common fit on the Deimos used railguns for goodness sake. The only thing that blaster BS were good for was sitting on gates and killing stupid people that jumped through[excepting speed fit ships] I feel like a compleet moron now, that I wasted my time to write about the diffrence in Low Sec and 0.0 PVP. You didn¦t read it at all. Since there are no diffrences in your Opinion between both worlds. And don¦t write about what Blaster BS where good for(you didn¦t fly them ffs), if I would be like this I never spend 2 years in maxing them out. All past arguments are not relevant to him now that amaar is overpowered and he needs to defend it bud.........
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.03 20:33:00 - [17] Originally by: God's Secret I'm am so so sorry for my missconduct and ignorance.. i now see THE TRUTH and i have to admit Lazors are so so overpowered.. Nerf Nerf Nerf it has to be done.. So what do you enlightened gentlemen propose!!!? I say cut the range by 98% and the tracking by 97% and them doube the fitting requirements.. what do you Speakers of THE TRUTH think? ps. thank you for reporting me you brave brave and smart man.. and dear moderators.. thank you for an unparallel service to the comunity and your unique and unequivocal inpartiality.. Cheers Have you considered that maybe a boost to other systems maybe in order instead of a nerf to amaar, i know its hard through your EMO rage at your overpowered system being singled out but its gonna happen so i suggest you be more positive and productive instead of negative and sarcastic.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 10:27:00 - [18] Edited by: maralt on 04/12/2008 10:44:34 Originally by: Goumindong Except that no, they don't operate "just fine" in the short range. This thread is full of graphs showing just how deficient they are underneath web range. http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm63/Secluse/battleship8.jpg http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm63/Secluse/battleship6.jpg http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm63/Secluse/Battleshipturrets5.jpg CARE TO SHOW IN WHAT GRAPH WE SEE AMAAR MISSING UNDER 10KM MUCH WORSE THAN EVERYBODY ELSE? Originally by: Goumindong 1. Its not about KM's 2. Amarr are actually much less likely to get a lot of KMs despite being very high on many of them(sometimes due to shield misrepresentation). This is because the chance of getting a KM is how much DPS you're doing when the ship explodes, not the amount you deal over the entire spectrum. HE IS TALKING ABOUT KILOMETERS LOST TO A TRACKING DISRUPTOR, NOT KILL MAILS LOST TO DMG. Originally by: Goumindong 1. This god damned thread is about solo/small gang scenarios where you may not always have a web but your own. A small gang without a web/tackle ship is a poorly setup gang and will lose to almost all other setups, unless its a amaar BS gang that is engaged at 10-50km that is then it will win..........
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 11:46:00 - [19] Originally by: Rivqua Quote: A small gang without a web/tackle ship is a poorly setup gang and will lose to almost all other setups and solo BS pvp is non existent unless your using eft or playing 1 v 1 on the test server. Yeah, all the vids made under "My Eve" with solo vs many and solo vs solo are imaginary. Indeed. /Riv I would love to see those solo BS vs many and solo BS vs solo....can you please link me the ones that are after this last patch.......
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 11:54:00 - [20] Edited by: maralt on 04/12/2008 11:55:23 Originally by: Rivqua Will get back to you when some are released after QR, people are still posting stuff to clear out their fraps folders etc I'll update this post =) /Riv Care to share the ship and fit all these solo BS pilots are flying while we are waiting, and where they are flying cos i have never seen any?.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 12:38:00 - [21] Edited by: maralt on 04/12/2008 12:39:18 Originally by: SecHaul I dunno if you have done one already but how does this graph look if the target ship has a single web on it as it is a little naive to think a gang would have no tacklers or web fitted ships with it. PS: nice work btw.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 13:47:00 - [22] Originally by: God's Secret 0 content, 0 proof, a LOT of posturing and insulting and a great deal of empty words. You wish to keep amaar BS and lasers overpowered and that is understandable from a amaar perspective at least but i would suggest that instead of dismissing the huge amount of data and clear evidence shown here and trying to deflect the discussion to a round of "no you". You could at least try to show and give some actual and factual reports instead of calling ppl clueless when its obvious the only one without a clue how to deal with these clear and well documented facts is you.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 17:58:00 - [23] Edited by: maralt on 04/12/2008 17:59:02 Its a rather simple equation tbh, any weapon system that so massively out performs every other similar system in a 8-50km range while also having the ability unless poorly fitted and solo to be almost equally effective at the 2-8km range is absurdly over powered and needs nerfing or the others need some sort of a boost. If pulse are supposed to be great at mid range then they should suck at close range as badly as blasters do at mid range, but they do not, in fact they out perform every other system at every range apart from a almost insignificantly small window that is only really viable and available in ultra rare and exceedingly specific scenarios.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 18:04:00 - [24] Edited by: maralt on 04/12/2008 18:05:58 Originally by: Marn Prestoc I have no idea what people are arguing about tbh, is this meant to be a continuation of the "blasters suck" topic and has turned into a nerf lasers topic? p.s. new version of Naughty Boy's spreadsheet with lots of fixes and features like multiple webs. Eve Forum Topic. I thought it was a thread about comparative BS weapon systems set against their supposed favorite target that has highlighted a MAJOR imbalance that requires a nerf to lasers or a boost to other systems to fix.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 18:46:00 - [25] Edited by: maralt on 04/12/2008 18:49:24 Originally by: Endless Subversion Additionally, the argument that pulses > blasters because they have a wider spectrum of dmg and comparable dmg close ignores things like realistic ship fittings, ship agility/mass and speed and cap. While you do have a bit of a point most of those things like "realistic fittings", "agility", "speed" and "cap" are only really significant in highly specific scenarios. While having a weapon system that is highly effective at close to mid range when ALL the others are not is a universal benefit to every scenario.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 20:06:00 - [26] Edited by: maralt on 04/12/2008 20:17:40 Originally by: Captator Having read most of the thread, and in accordance with my own views (ofc ) perhaps giving gallente 0-15km superiority, minmatar 15-25km superiority (smaller window due to them being able to deliberately close (amarr) or kite (gallente) to optimise their effective dps advantage), and amarr 25+km superiority might be nice. I would go for: Gallente 5-20 (as nobody hits at 0 or even close) mini 20-35 (middle of the road between races) amaar 35-50 (full mid range superiority) With a total reduction for gallente in hitting at 35-50 and a high reduction at 20-35. A high reduction for mini at 5-20 and 35-50. A total reduction for amarr at hitting at 0-20 and a high reduction at 20-35.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.04 20:50:00 - [27] Edited by: maralt on 04/12/2008 20:56:29 Originally by: Captator How would you extrapolate these relationships down to medium ships? Id really need to see more graphs for the ships and extrapolate new ranges and dmg profiles relative to the existing ship ranges and dmg profiles for medium ships and maybe small but like you say if they are ok then nothing may be needed. Originally by: Captator Also, what changes do you suggest making to effect those results? Remember, going by racial style, minmatar should be best at dealing with moving targets in optimal, and due to range constraints Changes in tracking and the other gun modifiers and even ammo could take care of most issues as range effects tracking and as such the longer the range the less tracking you need. So by reducing the tracking of the longer ranged systems (lasers) you reduce their ability to hit at the closer ranges. Mini would need to be set by using its tracking, optimal and fall off to set it to its pre set abilities. Setting the maximum range of blasters to its pre decided effective ranges you would need to adjust optimum and fall off and maybe also adjusting the ammo dmg would be necessary sort them out. Im offering this as a rough idea but it would certainly be more "BALANCED" than things are at present.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 10:31:00 - [28] Originally by: Goumindong They would be medium range, thanks for not reading the thread. And what is medium range?, around 40-50km when you look art the other weapon systems but the problem is that lasers are better at 10-50km and that is broken no matter how much you try to claim otherwise.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 11:34:00 - [29] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 11:45:49 Originally by: Goumindong At 4km, according to the graphs in this thread an Ion mega does roughly twice as much damage as an Abaddon. Guns only. This isn't even a Hyperion[2 webs, much better effective tracking, more guns = same normalized gun DPS for 1 heat sink on it vs the mega]. At 3km its roughly 400%. 50km available sweet spot > 2-4km available sweet spot no matter how you try to spin it. Originally by: Goumindong The range advantage that Amarr have with pulse lasers is more or less non-existent in the situations we are talking about. It exists at all ranges apart from the tiny window at uber close range your just ignoring the other ranges cos it shows how overpowered lasers are. Originally by: Goumindong C: Not looking at the other benefits that ships provide. Seriously, speed, agility, ability to rep, drone bay, utility med slots, utility high slots... These things count. They aren't as valuable when you're only concerned about doing DPS. But if you're only concerned about dealing DPS, you're not flying in the situations we have decided to talk about. Mega is 4% faster than the amarr ships so LOL at speed advantage. Relative agility is insignificant when comparing BS sized ships. If you wanna fit a rep fit a rep that is your business. 4 mid slots on the mega how many do all but one of the amaar ships have? Originally by: Goumindong I mean, we seriously had one guy in here saying that all you had to do was sit 30km off a gate.. Sit 30km off a gate and do what? Hope the other side doesn't have a Rifter? Hope that the other side doesn't know how to use the "warp to gang member at x" command? So the only ppl using tactics are those flying against amaars overpowered laser ships?, YOU HAVE TOTAL RANGE/DPS SUPERIORITY, THAT IS A MASSIVE ADVANTAGE WITHOUT USING YOUR OWN TACTICS LET ALONE WITH THEM. Originally by: Goumindong But these options are ignored[tracking is worse of course, but in a gang, with tacklers that is much less important right?] because railguns are not "short range weapons". Yet, Scorch fit pulse lasers are at 45+10km? So you would be willing to have pulse lasers tracking adjusted to close to 425 rail levels?, so you hit at your med range but track for crap closer just like you rail fitted mega does?. That is actually "balanced" considering blasters cannot reach long ranges. Originally by: Goumindong we don't need BS that are better in some areas and worse in others? Actually we do but the only BS and weapon system that breaks that mold is amaar as you hit hard at short and long, so fine we will FIX your system to hit and its full med range hard but much worse at close range.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 11:39:00 - [30] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 11:46:48 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt Really like what?.... fast tacklers?... BS are slow moving dmg platforms (maybe with a nuet and RR fitted) their ship speed and tracking along with other things make them so, and even more so after this latest nerf to speed among other things. See, the problem here is that you want to always fly in a gang. Yes, if you're always flying in a decent sized gang with clearly defined roles then Amarr BS are likely the best. If you're not, then the picture changes. You want to define battleships as only being DPS platforms. They are not. At least, people who see different tools to do different jobs will see it that way. When all you've got is a hammer and all that... How about you post a list of all these other "roles" and "tools" you see BS fitting, please include fittings along with scenarios against what they would be facing and where they would be facing them, id love to see them. That is if they are are and worth a damn and you are not just reaching for anything and grasping air like a drowning man.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 12:45:00 - [31] Originally by: Goumindong poor justifications for a overpowered weapon system. Fixed. Originally by: Goumindong No, if they were tracking at railgun levels they would have to be solidly long range weapons. Like Beams. Maybe you're missing the distinction between long range, short range, and medium range. No im not your being vague about it, if you wanna get technical med rage is over 100km and long is over at least 170km but your playing with words to justify your overpowered system. As far as close range weapon systems are concerned we have blasters, pulse and AC. Blasters are the close range, close range system. AC are the mid range, close range system. Pulse are the long range, close range system. The issue is that pulse outclass ALL the others at every range apart from a tiny window and all your protestations are poor excuses just reinforce it, your worse than those who defended nano.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 13:04:00 - [32] Originally by: Goumindong Max Range Sniping, EHP Sniping Apart from the rokh and the mini ships who are at the extremes id say a BS sniper is a BS sniper tbh. Originally by: Goumindong Anti-Anti-support Totally dependent on the type of engagement but having a ship that can use its close range weapons from just under 10km to 50km is a big advantage. Originally by: Goumindong Remote Rep Again id give the advantage to the gang with the best dmg to range ratio....oh look who that is... Originally by: Goumindong Solo/Small gang In BS?, ok but in small gang having a BS dmg dealer that does not need to burn into uber close range of the ships your tacklers have locked down to hit with its guns is a monster advantage to the time spent in the engagement among other things.....who has the best range/dmg ratio again???..... Originally by: Goumindong Primary middle gang DPS Range/dmg ratio ftw in this setup as well tbh. Originally by: Goumindong Siege Engine So what system hits hardest or can even reach the tower from the edge of a pos bubble?...blasters, ac or pulse...pulse ftw again. Originally by: Goumindong Smartbomber drag and drop them to the top slot of any BS Originally by: Goumindong Bait Is bait.......
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 13:13:00 - [33] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 13:20:16 Originally by: Goumindong Why is "middle range" at 100km? For a close range BS it is not for a sniper it is, this is the problem with your idea of pulse being a med range system as it is in fact a close range system with the longest relative range and that does not make it a med range system. Long range med range and close range can only really be defined by the ships and weapon systems per class, as close range for a beam fitted BS is around 50km but that is almost the extreme long range for a pulse fitted BS. Originally by: Goumindong Why are AC's "middle ranged close range weapons systems". Because blasters are the closest and pulse are the longest so AC can sit nicely in the middle. Originally by: Goumindong if "long range, close range" overlaps with the "close range, long range" then what does that make it? Not as bad as amaar pulse that overlap and out dmg at every range apart from a tiny niche at uber close range. Plus the option to fit long range weapons with close range ammo is available to all gunnery races. Originally by: Goumindong The blaster window is not tiny as a percentage of the fights that happen. Yes it is and its getting smaller as that percentage because of the amaar overpowered system.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 14:14:00 - [34] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 14:16:55 Apart from the rokh and the mini ships who are at the extremes id say a BS sniper is a BS sniper tbh. Originally by: Goumindong You would be wrong. Very much so. WOW so much detail....... Originally by: Goumindong And again you would be wrong. Because there are many things important to a remote rep gang, including cap, and the ability to project reps. The ability to project reps is static among BS due to their being no bonused RR BS, although amaar do have the advantage of not needing to move into range to shoot the hostile gang because of breater range and this would effect cap as the hostile gang would need to burn their MWD'S to get close enough to even hit and that could also effect their ability to RR each other due to in gang range issues. Originally by: Goumindong Unless your enemies are not stupid and shoot the tackler first. And/or get close enough to negate tracking on the laser ship. [Both preferably are good] If they shoot the tackler first the amaar ship still has the advantage over the blaster ship as it can not only hit while they are killing the tackler but also as they approach, but the blaster ship can only sit and watch his tackler die. Originally by: Goumindong Why is "middle range" at 100km? In the general game and ignoring relative weapon systems max range is at 249km minimum range is obviously 0km so 100km or around their is obviously mid range, but as i say you must ignore relative weapon systems and use a generalization of available range in general.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 14:53:00 - [35] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 14:53:37 Originally by: Goumindong Incorrect. The ability to project reps is set at your drone bay size and utility high slot size. Ships with low drone bays do poorly unless they have a higher number of high slots they can use for repair units. No the ability to project reps has nothing to do with drones or drone bays, and while the domi is great for fitting RR on its is a poor platform for dmg as a simple smart bomber can reduce its dmg potential to 0 and also the travel time for drones especially large drones is a joke. Originally by: Goumindong The blaster ship has a 27km range, why isn't it shooting? It has drones, why isn't it using them? Maybe its outside 27km (although at 27km he is still out damaged by the amaar ship and needs to fit ammo that has a tracking nerf), and even closing to around 10km or so he is still out dmg'd by the amaar ship, maybe he is using his drones but they are still moving towards the ships..... Originally by: Goumindong It has webs, why is it sitting 20km away from the action? Why should the action start at web range?, this the the thing with only a tiny window of effective range the chances of a engagement happening out side that effective range are much higher than an engagement happening inside it. Originally by: Goumindong The amarr ship does have the advantage that it does more DPS while they kill the tackler, if they're don't have the ability to attack the tackler while closing distance on the Amarr BS. But it has to kill the targets before the tackler dies. Or its dead in the water. The fact is that it has the opportunity to do so while the blaster ship does not, while having only a tiny window of vulnerability that is not much larger than the megas compared to its effective range. Originally by: Goumindong So "mid range" is just "half of max range" rather than "between the two common engagement ranges". Why use that definition of medium range instead of the more logical "between the two common engagement ranges"? Defining Med range is dependent on the perspective of the observer and the type of system they are referring to. In eve in general med range would be between min and max available range 0-249, but when you are discussing a class of weapon system you must define it to be relative to the system. For example blasters being short range ac being med range and pulse being long range comparatively.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 15:39:00 - [36] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 15:50:16 Originally by: Goumindong No, you've just never flown with an RR gang before. I have been in more RR gangs than you have done total pvp and flying a domi RR gang with a extra RR drone or two compared to a gang of ships with 1 or 2 less drones per ship but massive more dmg is not even up for debate. Originally by: Goumindong 1. Drones are not that slow. Remember, they have infinite agility ;) They are considerably slower than instant dmg especially when shooting at a relatively thin tackler.. Originally by: Goumindong 2. Unlikely. What is the target doing 27km away? Did it jump into you and then somehow end up 12km outside of the normal jump in window? Is it bait? Considering the scenario was small gang with a tackler only a very poor amaar BS pilot would approach instead of burning away and keeping range from a gang fight that had blaster ships in it. Originally by: Goumindong 3. Null on a mega tracks 30% better than MF on an Abaddon. I will refer you to the a fore mentioned graphs in this thread, kthxbye. Originally by: Goumindong You're asking the wrong question. Why should the action start outside of 20km? Because? I can think of several reasons but the main ones being the graphs you see plastered all over this thread. Originally by: Goumindong 1. AC's are not medium range, they are variable range. They are "better than pulse up close, better than blasters far away" On balance they are not even close to being a variable range weapon the crown for that goes to pulse and you know it. Originally by: Goumindong we know what the ranges for short range weapons are [5+10 to 45+10] then why is medium range not somewhere in the middle of those two ranges? Did you miss this?.. Gallente 5-20 (as nobody hits at 0 or even close, but still close range superiority) mini 20-35 (superiority between close and long ranges) amaar 35-50 (long range superiority) A total reduction for gallente in hitting at 35-50 due to range and a high reduction at 20-35. A high reduction for mini at 5-20 and 35-50 using a combo of tracking and ammo. A total reduction for amarr at hitting at 0-20 and a high reduction at 20-35 using tracking. Ok so it may need a little refining due to the 5-55km (as i used 5-50km) adjustment in weapons ranges but its certainly more balanced than things are now with amarr owning the 10-55km ranges vs all others.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 15:53:00 - [37] Originally by: Goumindong WWWAAAAAAAAAA If your not gonna post details or coherent facts i suggest you stick to this and go away.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 15:58:00 - [38] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt If your not gonna post details or coherent facts i suggest you stick to this and go away. Did you threaten to overrule him? [/paxman] ZE NERF BAT COMETH...SUCK IT UP.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 16:03:00 - [39] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt still doesn't get it Are you going to give me a straight answer to the questions or are you going to keep avoiding the question and points whenever possible? I have given you plenty but you snip, ignore or make broad, empty, naive and unsubstantiated replies. But go ahead ask a few if you wanna il be happy to answer or point out how stupid the question is for you.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 16:10:00 - [40] Originally by: Goumindong Alright. Lets start with How does posting your ideal of what you want blasters to be have anything do with what the currently defined "middle range" is based on current ranges of short and long range weaponry? I did not post my ideal of what blasters should be. I suggest you rephrase the question.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 16:23:00 - [41] I see a post with a way to balance each weapons dmg within its available ranges, and while blasters are mentioned so are all the other gunnery systems. Are you sure you posted the correct snip?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 16:39:00 - [42] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt I see a post with a way to balance each weapons dmg within its available ranges, and while blasters are mentioned so are all the other gunnery systems. Are you sure you posted the correct snip?. Yes, you were replying to as post about defining the "middle range". I have no idea where you are getting this "ideal blaster" line from?, you even say above i was replying to a discussion about comparative range and it is obvious i included all gunnery systems and gave them top dmg RELATIVE TO THEIR RANGES. Lasers hit for full at the long range while blasters hit for full at the closest with AC in the middle. How difficult is that to understand?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 17:39:00 - [43] Originally by: SecHaul To conclude: No matter if it's in their sweet spot or not, Amarr have windows of operating the best, even when it's the 'worst case scenario' except for lol Amarr hardened fits. The fact that you see that as balanced is scary, and rather biased. He does not see them as balanced he sees them as what he flies............
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 17:48:00 - [44] Originally by: Goumindong How does posting your ideal of what you want blasters to be have anything do with what the currently defined "middle range" is based on current ranges of short and long range weaponry? Your question has no relevance as i have clearly pointed out the intent and reasoning behind my original post and the dmg/range ratios involved. Now if you have difficulty understanding them i suggest you ask me to explain if not move on to another question, although i suggest you phrase it clearly as we would not want another misunderstanding...
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 17:56:00 - [45] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 17:57:20 Originally by: Goumindong What caused you to think that the question was irrelevant to the discussion? You wandered off course into la la land and it really put a crimp on getting a common definition we could all work with. Clarify "wandering off into lala land" cos it was you decided that a post about comparative ranges vs dmg in regard to all the close range systems was "all about blasters". Now if your assumption and deliberately blinkered view is not "wandering off into lala land" then what is?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 18:07:00 - [46] Originally by: Goumindong Within the context of the entire spectrum. Short range is roughly web range. Medium range is above that to about 50-60km. Long range is above that. Within the context of short range pvp there is no "middle range". There are only two distinct ranges. Utter rubbish designed to try and justify a massively overpowered weapon system. In regard to short range weapon systems: Blasters are close range. AC are mid range. Pulse lasers are long range.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 18:14:00 - [47] So your saying that blasters do NOT have the closest range of all short range weapon systems?. So your saying that AC do NOT have the medium range of all short range weapon systems?. So your saying that pulse lasers do NOT have the longest range of all short range weapon systems?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 18:33:00 - [48] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 18:33:32 Originally by: SecHaul Originally by: maralt Blasters are close range. AC are mid range. Pulse lasers are long range. Maralt, I know you and I want similar things, however the above is not one of them. Blasters are close range, lasers are medium to long range. I agree with Goum that AC's are dependent on which you fight - if fighting blasters, you fight at range in falloff, if fighting lasers, you get in as close as possible. I do not believe the answer for turrets is to have 3 windows as you suggest. You could probably create 3 ranges, however you would have to have transversal involved, because optimal is 100% DPS in the absence of transversal, it is not possible to create 3 windows. I do understand but the simple fact is that a system that can hit for high dmg at ranges all others cannot even begin to reach while also having the ability to out dmg the other systems in and around what is supposed to be their niche is utterly overpowered. The ability for AC to fight in both windows but be less effective in both extremes is a good compromise as the "middle guy" of short range weapon systems.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 18:54:00 - [49] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 18:54:52 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt So your saying that AC do NOT have the medium range of all short range weapon systems?. Yes Are you saying that they do? Seriously? Seriously? Are they as effective at close range as blasters?......Can they hit out as far as lasers?....... No to both kinda puts them in the middle doesn't it?. Interesting that you cut the rest of the post though..................inconvenient truth perhaps?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 19:06:00 - [50] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 19:08:28 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: SecHaul And a Torp Raven with 2 BCU does 844 DPS Well, there's your problem. My raven, with which I decided to leave 2 low slots inexplicably unfit... Originally by: maralt Are AC as effective at close range as blasters?......Can AC hit out as far as lasers?....... No to both kinda puts them in the middle doesn't it?. No, not really Actually you do have a point as we both know amaar outclasses them at long and short ranges apart from a tiny close range window at the moment. Still as soon as amaar are fixed it will put them in the middle. PS: You do not ask honest and direct questions, when you do you will get a honest and direct answer until then you will reap what you sow.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 19:20:00 - [51] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 19:21:07 Originally by: SecHaul very nice factual and detailed report but too long to snip or quote Nice job bud, like most ppl faced with inconvenient facts and truths gourm has a tenancy to pretend that he has won the argument hoping that ppl will not read or check the facts. Excellent job and shutting that crap down and stunningly accurate details in your reports.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 19:38:00 - [52] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 19:40:04 Originally by: Goumindong Look, it all comes down to a few things you refuse to answer. In these small gang fights, where do the fights typically start at? At what ranges do the fights typically start at? Is it under 20km? is it over 20km? From 20km-60km amaar have the best dmg and under 20km amaar have the best dmg.......unless its under 5km and over 2km and then they do not have best just ok dmg. Unless its a specific ship type fitted a certain way and then they just hit quite well out to 14km and above that they start owning all again. Broken much.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 19:48:00 - [53] Originally by: Goumindong Lets start with "At what range do these fights typically start" At the range the side that takes the initiative decides of course.....i know your more theory than practice but that really is a stupid question.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 19:55:00 - [54] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 19:49:28 Originally by: Goumindong Lets start with "At what range do these fights typically start" At the range the side that takes the initiative decides of course.....i know your more theory than practice but that really is a stupid question with only one obvious answer that any real pvper would know. And what ranges are those, typically? Let me be clear here. I know the answer. The question is rhetorical. Which means i am asking the question to make a point. Read the PS: on post 216 and try again.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 20:02:00 - [55] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 20:02:57 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: SecHaul Originally by: Goumindong Look, it all comes down to a few things you refuse to answer. In these small gang fights, where do the fights typically start at? At what ranges do the fights typically start at? Is it under 20km? is it over 20km? I have answered this before, you just didn't read it. I believe engagements start between 15 to 20 km on average. Unless that target is a heavily armor tanked battleship, Amarr will have that battleship in it's window for a greater period of time than all other battleships. What? 15-20km and you believe that unless its a heavily armor tanked battleship the laser ship will have it in its window for the greatest period of time? Seriously? Seriously? Do we have to go over the agility numbers again? Do we have to go over the DPS numbers again? Do we have to go over the tracking again? Inertia to get under guns? Drones for supplimentary DPS? The possibility of more webs, repping, utility[nos/neut]? Seriously? You are sitting here and not trolling me and think that if the fight starts at 15-20km the Amarr BS is going to have the target in its window for a longer amount of time? This isn't some sort of sick joke being played on me? Here you go again all theory and eft but 0 or little combat experience.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 20:27:00 - [56] Originally by: Goumindong Wait, so now you want blasters to be better than pulse lasers up close YUP, AND THEY SHOULD BE BETTER.....A LOT BETTER. Originally by: Goumindong and for rails to be better at range? Nope but then gallente ships do not have a spare hold where they can refit rails in space to achieve overall range superiority. While pulse are a single weapon system that does have range/dmg ratio superiority over all other systems. Originally by: Goumindong Why don't we just delete lasers? No need they just need fixing and balancing.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 20:31:00 - [57] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 20:31:21 Originally by: Goumindong Goum, if the Rapier has 2 webs, and the target is 40-50km off with Rails, an Abaddon does more DPS. Let me say this again, the Abaddon does more DPS than a Mega with rails at that distance. I.E. it has a larger window. Why would I want to be in a Mega in that situation and not a pulse Abaddon? Not only that but try hitting a quad webbed ship at 5-14km with 425 rails let alone dual webbed......pulse do ok though....
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 20:47:00 - [58] Here is the thing where his eft figures fail, in a mega gang vs abaddon gang the megas will need to approach the primary to hit it, and in doing so will proly melt the abaddon as soon as they get into range. What eft nor gourm does not factor in is that while they are doing this the rest of the amaar ships will be aligning and burning away as fast as they can with virtually 0 transversal and hitting at a monster dps against the primary mega that also melts. Now the megas have finished off the first ship and they go for the rest that are now well out of range (of the megas at least) but still pouring out monster dps and melting through the megas, giving chase reduces transversal for the abaddons who say "yum" but the megas still are out of range and continue to be so for a looooooong time as the amaar ships are up to full speed. Bye bye megas. The thing is that even if the fight starts at 5km the amaar ships still push out monster dps and may lose a ship but the megas still need to stay close to every primary so the result always ends the same way, the amarr burn off while hitting for virtually the same dps while the megas maybe get a kill or two but after that they are chasing ships that hit as hard as they do but are immune due to range.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 21:01:00 - [59] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 21:06:56 Originally by: SecHaul Originally by: maralt Here is the thing where his eft figures fail, in a mega gang vs abaddon gang the megas will need to approach the primary to hit it, and in doing so will proly melt the abaddon as soon as they get into range. What eft nor gourm does not factor in is that while they are doing this the rest of the amaar ships will be aligning and burning away as fast as they can with virtually 0 transversal and hitting at a monster dps against the primary mega that also melts. Now the megas have finished off the first ship and they go for the rest that are now well out of range (of the megas at least) but still pouring out monster dps and melting through the megas, giving chase reduces transversal for the abaddons who say "yum" but the megas still are out of range and continue to be so for a looooooong time as the amaar ships are up to full speed. Bye bye megas. The thing is that even if the fight starts at 5km the amaar ships still push out monster dps and may lose a ship but the megas still need to stay close to every primary so the result always ends the same way, the amarr burn off while hitting for virtually the same dps while the megas maybe get a kill or two but after that they are chasing ships that hit as hard as they do but are immune due to range. If the megas have rails the pulse ships close to 15km or so and own the lot of them without hardly a scratch. Earlier on we spoke about the engagement sphere. Goum believes that this sphere is 8 to 15 km big, but I attempted to outline that in order for a Mega to keep targets within it's window, it needs to close range. While it closes range on one ship, it is probably opening range on secondary, and tertiary, etc. I.E. I agree with you, the Mega has to continually move to get ships into it's windows, reducing it's ability to keep max DPS at all times. While the Abaddon sits anywhere from 5km to 65km and simply cycles targets. In fact by aligning out and burning away they reduce transversal increasing dmg for themselves while reducing it due to range for the megas. In fact in non-RR situations its actually preferable for amarr BS to burn off in different directions against certain ship classes if you think about it. That is why i posted what i did on post 230.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 21:10:00 - [60] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 21:11:44 Did you include drone travel time to target over those ranges or did you just add the amount of dmg they do?. Never mind it would be virtually imposable to add to a graph unless you included a time frame for the engagement and total dmg done over that time.....

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 21:37:00 - [61] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 21:38:19 Originally by: SecHaul Originally by: Marn Prestoc Originally by: SecHaul ... Try using version 30 where the drones arn't bugged. And are you meant to have 2 damage mods and 2 damage rigs on the mega? Thank you, I knew there was a reason I didn't include them at first. Downloaded the latest. And no, I didn't intend the Mega to have damage rigs, removed and graph updated in original post. And by the way, thank you for all the updates, I hugely appreciate your efforts. How would the curves on the graph look and start from for a hyperion and a mega with T2 425mm rails bud?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.05 21:56:00 - [62] Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 22:07:07 Thanks. Actually i was thinking that maybe reducing the tracking of pulse to a point where they were less effective at close range but still fully effective at relatively med-longer ranges. Imagine pulse with the tracking of say rails or around that amount but with the same dmg and range modifier they have now, they would be less effective at close range but still highly effective at their longer ranges. Just a thought...i dunno if you can program that in or add how things would be if they were hit with a tracking disruptor with tracking scripts in to simulate it but i think a adjustment to tracking could balance them if fine tuned enough. Obviously they would still have be able to hit a target ship at close range that was webbed or had low transversal so would in certain circumstances still be better than most other BS but it could be a step in the right direction at least... The hyperion with t1 ammo has a interesting up curve don't you think?.......max dmg at 40km with a steady curve up from lower range.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.06 09:33:00 - [63] Edited by: maralt on 06/12/2008 09:36:03 Originally by: Goumindong Actually i was referring to the Raven with that comment. The Maelstrom does not need a 30km window where it does more DPS than any other battleship. It has a window where it does enough DPS compared to other battleships to be very very competent. If that makes it very very competent then the fact that the abaddon does more or very very close to the same amount of dmg at every range apart from a tiny and insignificantly small window = way way way overpowered. Originally by: Goumindong So, what you're saying is that the most common pvp tank in the game will be in another "window" for a greater amount of time? Still wondering why you keep saying there is a problem Because the abaddon is not only AS effective if not more in that window it also has 30-50km of effective window ALL the other ships do NOT have. Play all the word games you wish but the systems are not balanced and a boost pill or nerf bat cometh or both........
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.06 19:01:00 - [64] Theirs lots of tank fits in eve the only thing that gives a proper grading on dmg iS raw dps, let ppl work things out from that or we will be adjusting dmg every time the FOTM favors shield tankers instead of Armour tankers and visa versa.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.06 20:26:00 - [65] Quote: 3. The impact of drones are included on the graph. 126 DPS in ogres is a lot, but an increase in several hundred DPS due to weapon systems is also a lot. Originally by: Goumindong What "Several hundred dps increase due to weapons systems"? How in the world do you swing that? RANGE/DPS RATIO......YOU KNOW THE THING YOUR TRYING TO DEFLECT THE ARGUMENT AWAY FROM AS IT PROVES WITHOUT A DOUBT HOW OVERPOWERED AMAAR ARE COMPARED TO EVERY OTHER SYSTEM IN THE GAME.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 10:49:00 - [66] Originally by: Goumindong It has been clearly shown how amarr are overpowered compared to other races so i will continue to try and deflect the issue by asking irrelevant (and rather foolish and ignorant as shown below) questions.... Fixed Originally by: Goumindong What is the opportunity cost of bringing a tackler? There is no cost for bringing tacklers, in fact because of the inherent lock time and top speed of battleships it is highly recommended that in all situations you have tacklers in a gang (even if its just a type of dic/hic), this applies especially in a BS gang against BS gang where dropping a bubble can spell the end of several ships due to their slow speed and inability to burn out of it quickly. As well as a BS gang vs a smaller ship gang or mixed gang where your BS have no chance in burning around and tackling on their own or having the relative ship or lock speed compared to the smaller target to tackle it or keep it tackled if they land close. While the fact that amarr BS can tear through ships at absurdly long ranges with pulse as well as virtually matching the dmg at short ranges of ships that cannot even hit at half their range is of total benefit and completely overpowered. ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 12:33:00 - [67] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt There is no cost for bringing tacklers Incorrect. Try again. Opportunity cost is "What you have to give up in order to attain that thing". What do you have to give up in order to bring a tackler? AAAHHH i understand.....ok then, not having a tackler in a small gang of pure BS severely limits your available targets to almost 0. While having a tackler allows you to kill virtually any type of ship or gang in the game (relative to size of course). So the cost of NOT having a tackler is a massively and utterly limited target availability. While having a tackler allows you to be effective against a huge array of ship sizes and classes. So you GAIN by having a tackler. While you lose available targets by not having one. This of course is basic knowledge if your a actual player and pvper in eve and understand combat dynamics, im sure their are paper tigers out their that think that having a small pure BS only gang with no tacklers is a good idea as they only measure DPS on EFT, instead of knowing how pvp actually works.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 12:41:00 - [68] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt So you GAIN by having a tackler. While you lose available targets by not having one. You may gain in the end. But you have still not accurately accounted for the costs of bringing a tackler. A tackler is a benefit in pvp (one that lets you catch and kill stuff) not a detriment but by all means enlighten us if you think it is not.....
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 12:56:00 - [69] Edited by: maralt on 07/12/2008 13:03:56 Quote: As for the Raven, I'm simply using what EFT provides. Not using any screwy setups, and a simple best named TP. Originally by: Zao Jin Lie. My Torp Raven with Javelin gets 523 DPS, and I have far from max skills with Torps. Tell it to the EFT ppl, or maybe you can troll the thread for spelling mistakes as well........
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 12:58:00 - [70] Edited by: maralt on 07/12/2008 13:02:46 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt So you GAIN by having a tackler. While you lose available targets by not having one. You may gain in the end. But you have still not accurately accounted for the costs of bringing a tackler. A tackler is a benefit in pvp (one that lets you catch and kill stuff) not a detriment but by all means enlighten us if you think it is not..... I never said it was a detriment. I asked what you had to give up in order to get one. You give up a crapply, stupidly and rather useless squad of ships (frig to BC fodder), for one that is worth using and competent at fighting. Now do you have a statement to make?.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 13:18:00 - [71] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt You give up a crapply, stupidly and rather useless squad of ships (and any thing from frig to BC fodder), for one that is worth using and competent at fighting most numerically similar gang setups. Now do you have a statement to make?. I was unaware that Abaddons were "crapply, stupidly and rather useless ships" Aren't you saying they are overpowered? You really are grasping for straws aren't you?, wow i mean every absurd little argument you try to start is blown out of the water by actual facts and total truth and look what you have been reduced to.....a feeble troll playing sad little word games. Take a day off have a rest and then come back tomorrow and with a clear and relaxed mind read over your posts and im pretty sure you will be rather embarrassed at what you have done here, especially considering how knowledgeable about not only the game, but life and how sad little manipulators like you operate most of the ppl are who read here. Do yourself a favor and walk away before you embarrass your self any further.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 14:03:00 - [72] Edited by: maralt on 07/12/2008 14:09:17 Originally by: Goumindong Wait, so the Abaddon is both bad and overpowered at the same time? I am not playing word games here. All BS are poor at solo pvp, and yes you are playing word games. Originally by: Goumindong The cost of flying a ship is not flying any other ship you could fly. Exactly, i knew that you knew that...everybody knew that.......but as per usual you were playing WORD GAMES instead of just pointing it out. Mainly because EVERYBODY knows that a solo BS or a small gang of BS, ANY BS are useless and a waste of time to fly as a effective pvp unit unless they have tackler/ers with them. Originally by: Goumindong The point I was making, mainly for SecHaul because he is less of a troll than you are, is that as gang sizes get smaller, the choices that you have to make regarding what you bring has a progressively larger impact. You were not making a point you were playing pointless word games instead of making a clear statement, proly cos the statement was stupid and had no relevance to actual combat or pvp. You want small gang scenario's?.....fine: A gang of two BS...ANY BS has considerably less available targets (AND IS CONSIDERABLY LESS EFFECTIVE) than a 2 man gang that has a tackler and a BS (ESPECIALLY IF THAT BS IS AMARR) due to its massive available (and unbalanced) range/dps ratio.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 14:40:00 - [73] Edited by: maralt on 07/12/2008 14:45:44 Originally by: Goumindong Not word games. Simply making a point. To make a point you need to state the point not hide behind childish and juvenile "rhetorical" questions you think are "clever" but everybody else sees as rather pathetic and naive. Sorry, Geddon/Rapier would easily win over Hyperion/rapier unless the Hyperions start well inside web range. Why would the Abaddon be firing on the hyperion instead of killing the opposing tackler while his own tackler held it down?, all the time laughing at the impotent hyperion that can hit nothing cos its has no range... Maybe if you whine to ccp you can ask then to make all fights start at 3-5km giving your scenarios a slight point at least.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 16:28:00 - [74] Edited by: maralt on 07/12/2008 16:33:15 Nice graph again SecHaul, a fine example of be careful what you wish for and be even more careful what you try to troll about. OMG Look at those dmg curves and range/dmg ratio the amarr boats are getting no wonder the ppl flying them are so EMO about them getting balanced (and why im training them atm).
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 18:00:00 - [75] Edited by: maralt on 07/12/2008 18:01:13 Originally by: Marn Prestoc Your suffering from what I was talking about, add lots of variables into one graph and you get everyone asking for something to change to be "more realistic". This is why raw DPS/RANGE ratios are the only true measure and what to base balance around. And by that measure at the moment in EVE amarr are clearly overpowered compared to every other race.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.07 19:10:00 - [76] Originally by: SecHaul So I will continue to use his scenario to avoid his consistent whining and inability to create his own graphs. You have been a lot more considerate than i would have been considering the sheer amount of irrelevant crap gourm has tried to post on here tbh, oh and i myself do not know where to even start about how to do those amazing graphs but i would love to learn.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.08 11:12:00 - [77] Edited by: maralt on 08/12/2008 11:12:38 Originally by: Goumindong In terms of raw tank, damage, and utility, the Hyperions could kill the Geddon and totally ignore the Rapier so long as the fight started under around 25km. Fight starts at 20km the rapier webs the Hyperions as the geddon burns out of range, geddon stays out of range and chews through both hyperions slowly but inevitably. Not only that but again you ignore the fact that a twin BS setup is useless and pointless against most of the ships in eve as it does not have the tackle time to deal with smaller ships, and no fitting a SB would not help very much at all as smaller ships would burn out of web range and be gone long before they were locked. Originally by: Goumindong This is not true. To convince someone, you need to get them thinking along the correct path. With you I am wasting my time, as you refuse to think. Really so you spent all those posts avoiding saying 2 BS -1 BS = 1 less BS cos you thought ppl did not understand such a hard math problem?. NO...the problem was that you tried to ignore that 2 BS = crap gang that could catch virtually nothing while being frig to BC gang fodder. but 2 BS -1 BS + 1 TACKLER = a considerably more effective gang setup. You had no point just a stubborn and pathetic troll. Originally by: Goumindong And where do fights typically start again? At the range the side that takes the initiative decides.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.08 12:19:00 - [78] Edited by: maralt on 08/12/2008 12:23:43 Originally by: Goumindong No, because: A: That is not what I was saying B: Because how you get to the conclusion is important. No its your way of avoiding making a statement and trying to look clever while avoiding the fact that the conclusion was pointless cos the idea of two BS flying around without a tackler is stupid considering how eve is. And if the base conclusion has no real time use then how you get their is pointless unless you are trying to cloud another issue with irrelevance, like the FACT amarr are overpowered. Quote: Here we go again with stupid questions (oops that's right you think they are educational value and have "hidden" or "deeper" At the range the side that takes the initiative decides. Originally by: Goumindong This is untrue. The side that takes the initiative does not always decide the engagement range. I think you will find that they do, as THEY choose the warpin range on the other gang or how far to sit off the gate for jumpins.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.08 12:41:00 - [79] Edited by: maralt on 08/12/2008 12:43:38 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt I think you will find that they do, as THEY choose the warpin range on the other gang or how far to sit off the gate for jumpins. Typically the side that jumps in has "the initiative". Unless you are saying that "initiative" is determined by who has the explicit advantage at the beginning of the fight... The side that jumps in has no choice at what range it lands off the gate, while the ppl on the other side can be setup at what ever range they prefer. The initiative in combat could be warping in on another gang at your perfect optimal and outside theirs or by having a position/range on the other side of a gate that puts you at the advantage if another gang jumps in to you. And in all but a insignificantly small window amarr hit close to the same dmg, more than it gets hit back, or just hits way out of range of the other side and that = overpowered.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.08 14:36:00 - [80] The tracking of a hyperion, a slightly better max range and rather lower dmg.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.08 14:55:00 - [81] Originally by: Hugh Ruka very funny ... the more the longer thread grows ... good that Bellum does not care about this much anymore ... That is cos the longer the thread goes on the closer he is to finishing training amarr (like the rest of us).
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.08 16:05:00 - [82] Edited by: maralt on 08/12/2008 16:11:51 Originally by: maralt The side that jumps in has no choice at what range it lands off the gate, while the ppl on the other side can be setup at what ever range they prefer. Originally by: Goumindong And that is not what "the initiative" means. The one who has "the initiative" is the person who is acting. You can be taking the initiative by being on the other side of a gate and getting into a position that you can hit but the jumpers cannot hit you (the equivalent in eve of taking the high ground and digging in for want of a better explanation). Originally by: Goumindong If someone jumps into you and attempts to kill you, they have the initiative. But they do not control where the fight starts. Wrong, i suggest you read what i wrote above, setting up a camp or trap if you prefer is still taking the initiative as you are forcing the other gang to jump into your prepared position if they want to engage you.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.08 16:22:00 - [83] Edited by: maralt on 08/12/2008 16:25:23 Originally by: Goumindong more pointless trolling about a irrelevant point and definition Yea yea yea your right in a certain position they could fly 50 jumps or however many it is to come at you from another gate...... The choice of combat range is decided by those who take the initiative either by taking up position around a station undocking port against docked ships, by sitting the other side of a gate at a preferred range against chasing or ships on the other side, or by warping in at the preferred range. How you define "initiative is irrelevant to these point as well as the fact that the ships with a effective 5km-60+km range that can match and utterly out perform all others at every range apart from a insignificantly small one = overpowered.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.09 10:54:00 - [84] Originally by: Goumindong I resent your allegations that I am somehow "biased" towards the ships I fly You are, everybody on here knows it and can bet that if blasters had the effective range and dmg ratio of lasers, while lasers were stuck with being only effective at their longest range and could not hit in close you would be spamming the forums with thread after thread just like you do with non-amarr issues.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.09 14:43:00 - [85] Edited by: maralt on 09/12/2008 14:45:26 Originally by: Goumindong I am ignoring everything that does not suit me and my overpowered race How about this then: Fix pulse so they hit for max dmg at 45-60km with a reduction/falloff in dmg down to 30km and under 30km they miss totally. After all blasters hit for max at 3-15km (actually less than that so a range/ammo/dmg buff maybe needed) with the same fall off reduction from 15-30km as the above pulse would have from 45-30km and a inability to hit over 30km just like pulse cannot hit under 30km. NOW how would you feel if pulse had the opposite but the same relative short comings that blasters have as i have shown above????.. Pulse are broken and ze "balance" bat cometh.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.09 14:58:00 - [86] Edited by: maralt on 09/12/2008 15:04:24 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt You are, everybody on here knows it and can bet that if lasers were stuck with being only effective at their longest range and could not hit in close you would be spamming the forums with thread after thread just like you do with non-amarr issues. What if lasers could hit well at optimal but hit for nothing inside 30km (just like blasters cannot hit outside 30km), especially if along with that blasters could hit harder than lasers from 30-50km and only hit slightly less at 50-60km?. I AM GONNA ignore the facts and hope ppl are deaf blind and stupid...... 14km Optimal range of Mega Pulse Laser w/ AN MF L 15km. Wait, what were you saying? I WAS SAYING THIS ANYBODY CAN SEE HOW OVERPOWERED AMARR ARE COMPARED TO EVERY OTHER RACE.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.09 15:55:00 - [87] Edited by: maralt on 09/12/2008 15:57:06 Originally by: maralt NOW how would you feel if pulse had the opposite but the same relative short comings that blasters have as i have shown above????.. Originally by: Goumindong If the warp in range was 60km Warpin range is what you choose it to be and with 5-60km of effective range to choose from and in 45-55km of it pulse outclass and out range or both all other systems, pulse are overpowered.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.09 16:05:00 - [88] Edited by: maralt on 09/12/2008 16:05:55 Originally by: SecHaul Originally by: Goumindong I just got through explaining to you what that tackler costs you... Goum, you are assuming that all pilots can fly all ships, and therefore there is opportunity cost. You are also assuming that all pilots want to fly, and have all ships available to fly, at all times, such that there is opportunity cost. Ignore him he is setting scenarios that are ultra rare or non existent and imposable that he hopes will make pulse look less overpowering, unfortunately he is failing miserably. Communicating with him like he is just a little ignorant is wrong because he knows exactly what he is ignoring and exactly what he is doing, he is avoiding and trying to cloud the issue with irrelevant data hoping you will bite all to deflect you from the truth and the real issue. And just doing that in itself shows how much he actually knows how overpowered pulse are compared to other the systems.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.09 17:23:00 - [89] Originally by: Goumindong More irrelevant, deliberately misinterpreted and misleading posting Battleships are worthless tacklers and you would lose a LOT of opportunities to kill things by using them as such instead of having proper tacklers in your gang. And amarr pulse BS + tackle gang > torp or AC or blaster BS (or a mix of each) + tackle gang.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.09 17:50:00 - [90] Edited by: maralt on 09/12/2008 17:56:30 Originally by: Goumindong No, i am simply quick to dismiss people who complain that their ship does not fit the role that they want it to rather than the role that it is designed for. Your quick to dismiss amarr being balanced with other races and even quicker to ignore that it is overpowered. Your quick to assign it a role that just happens to coincide with that overpowerdness. Your even quicker to ignore that amarr close to equal or out class every other ship at those other races ships supposed "roll'd" ranges, along with the fact that amarr can also hit hard at ranges the other races cannot begin to reach. Your quick to tell other races that they should need two weapon systems to even begin to compete with amarrs single system. IN OTHER WORDS YOUR TOTALLY BIASED.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.10 09:47:00 - [91] Edited by: maralt on 10/12/2008 09:49:12 Interesting that amarr pulse are so overpowered that the only suggestions to come even close to matching them is to dock and refit rails or blasters depending on the situation. SO 1 WEAPON SYSTEM THAT IS OVERALL AS GOOD IF NOT BETTER AND MORE EFFECTIVE/VERSATILE THAN TWO IS APPARENTLY NOT OVERPOWERED..... Or that just because ships die to other ships that things are ok (strange how the same individuals dismissed that argument during their nano jihad) or that webs at 90% were considered ineffective on rapiers and fast ships pre nerf but now they are 60% suddenly they are considered great when fitted to BS.......... That ppl who fly amarr consider this balanced and also consider that fixing this obvious overpowered system or buffing others to be more effective to be breaking the game. And especially that just because a very limited few ships have the ability to fit a web or two that ppl think solo BS pvp is thriving or that it makes the slightest difference at to the fact that a single weapon system can virtually match all the others dmg at their available ranges while also hitting out way past anything any other system can reach. ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.10 11:20:00 - [92] Edited by: maralt on 10/12/2008 11:22:37 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt Interesting that amarr pulse are so overpowered that the only suggestions to come even close to matching them is to dock and refit rails or blasters depending on the situation. SO 1 WEAPON SYSTEM THAT IS OVERALL AS GOOD IF NOT BETTER AND MORE EFFECTIVE/VERSATILE THAN TWO IS APPARENTLY NOT OVERPOWERED... Pulse lasers are not more effecctive/versatile than railguns. They are more effective within a small window, and that is all. Very much like the blaster/pulse relationship. Rails are a totally different weapon system thats equivalent system is beams and beams > rails in all situations. And most ppl i know do not have time or the ability to refit their blasters for rails mid combat......while pulse are a single system with a rather fast reload.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.10 15:11:00 - [93] Edited by: maralt on 10/12/2008 15:13:45 Originally by: Goumindong Pulse lasers are much more similar to rails than blasters. More of your crap to try and justify the overpoweredness of pulse. Weapon systems are grouped like this: Pulse, blasters, AC, torps. Beams, rails, arties, cruise. Originally by: Goumindong The problem here is not with the weapon, its with the idea that you should be best in small gangs and medium/large gangs as well, especially without refitting. Finally you admit it. And once we balance pulse and or fix AC, TORPS, BLASTERS pulse will no longer be the best choice for every scenario.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.10 15:21:00 - [94] Originally by: Goumindong Are you going to claim that the Geddon can both be aligned to get out, and also at the perfect right range to hold a point and not have any problems as you claim it has no problem doing? As to this its rather easy to switch between alignment points to hold a range from a target. As to the rest of the argument i actually find it rather pointless due to the fact that a gang with 2 BS ANY BS is rather pointless and not only very limited in its target availability but also the fact that it is also fodder to a vast array of ships.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.11 11:07:00 - [95] Originally by: SecHaul I cannot fathom why you continue to say 'blasters boats are better after QR'. They are not better, they are significantly worse. 1) If there are webs, this weakness is negated. I.E. when in a gang with tacklers. 2) Amarr can still operate outside of web range without any nerf, i.e. a huge portion of the window that they perform DPS has not been impacted. The fact that you cannot see this is very scary. He knows, he has always known, but he also knows that in small-med gangs BS fly with tacklers. He knows that having a effective range of 5-60km is way more powerful than any other system. He knows that solo BS is dead not just due to the web nerfs but because solo BS have a insignificantly small target selection. HE DOES UNDERSTAND HE JUST DOES NOT CARE COS HE IS AMARR AND HE LIKES HAVING THE NEW I-WIN SHIPS IN EVE.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.11 14:56:00 - [96] Edited by: maralt on 11/12/2008 15:06:07 Originally by: Marn Prestoc Theoretical battles on the forum are pointless there's way to many variables Exactly, the only thing that matters is overall the performance and effectiveness of the said system/ship compared to its peers in the game. Originally by: Marn Prestoc I still haven't heard anything except "look at the range and damage!" for a reason lasers are overpowered. What about cap use? what about fitting cost to the ship? hence what about the ships used, big slow and heavy, limited mids... Hybrid ships also suffer from cap issues and in gang combat such issues can be solved with a single module. Fitting costs are comparatively irrelevant between each races BS. Only one amarr BS has less mids than the mega. All BS are slow and cumbersome, the slight differences between them is irrelevant unless you are constantly in a BF area fighting 1 v 1 battles on sissi. BS are large slow heavy dmg platforms designed to the the gangs dmg dealer/ers and for one race to hit virtually as hard as all the others at the others supposed "preferred range" while also having the ability to hit hard WAY WAY outside the range of all the others is totally imbalanced. ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.11 17:28:00 - [97] Edited by: maralt on 11/12/2008 17:32:07 Your math is fine but your thinking that it has a application in eve is not unfortunately. Amaar BS are just as effective in low sec gate camping as any other race if not more due to their range bonuses and the 1 v 1 BS fights where agility may help one BS get close to another only really happen on sissi. BS are just not agile enough or quick enough to be effective solo ships/tacklers as every other conventional class of ship is smaller, more agile and faster. They are DMG platforms (apart from the scorp obviously) and trying to use them or expecting that a extra mid slots makes them versatile is totally over reaching. If eve was flooded or even regularly filled with 2 man or solo BS gangs roaming around taking out other ships you would have a point but as a individual ship they are ALL poor, they are ALL of a size and ability that only lends itself to being part of a team of ships that make up for what ALL of them lack.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.11 19:41:00 - [98] Edited by: maralt on 11/12/2008 19:47:10 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer im amarr skilled and while i will preach long and hard all about the falcon being overpowered compared to other recons il defend pulse BS even though they out class all other BS with similar fitting types........ Fixed. Unless your gonna tell us all about your uber fast tackle BS or your 2 man roaming BS gang that catches and kills all manner of ships you come across.....
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.11 20:46:00 - [99] Edited by: maralt on 11/12/2008 20:51:16 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer What does this have to do with anything? The graphs and arguments of the op are total bogus. Proof or stfu, im looking forwards to seeing your "non bogus" graphs. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Also, congrats on joining the group of players totally disregarding everything except dps and range when discussing balancing. Under most circumstances i would not consider using pure and only range/dps ratios as a guide for balance, but considering that the BS in question are all about range/dps ratios it seems rather relevant to do so. But like i say if you wanna post your links to all the solo BS work or 2 BS roaming gangs you charge around 0.0 killing ships of all classes left right and center in, please go ahead........... Or is it just easier to drop out words like "cap", "agility" and "tactics" while hoping the more naive ppl will think you know wtf your talking about. The slowest, least maneuverable, slowest locking conventional ships in the game and your using solo and 2 BS gang examples to try and justify amarrs total overpoweredness. NON existent pvp scenarios to try and justify a non existent balance. And in the same breath you try to pitch that using range/dps ratios are not valid for this type of combat ship????......range/dps ratios are the ONLY valid stats to measure these BS by.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 11:06:00 - [100] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 11:13:22 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer 1. Proof? The first reply to this thread pretty much shreded its whole credibility. So you have no proof and you to cover it up and try to justify not posting it by attacking my previous posting?...what will you use next spelling mistakes or bad punctuation?. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer 2. Words like cap, agility, versitility and slot distribution should be a part of any discussion. I know it is hard to grasp something outside dps/range/tank but there are other factors. You might not see that but that is the reason people like you are (thank god) not working with balancing this game. The sheer limits BS have because of their size and speed compared to every other conventional ship class in the game makes a lot of those words like "agility" mostly irrelevant to BS. Although the "versatility" trophy has to be given to the BS that can hit virtually as hard or harder than blasters at blaster range while also having double or triple the available range past what blasters can hit....... As far as slot distribution goes all amarr BS apart from one have the same slot lay out as a mega. Hybrids also need to fit some sort of cap module if they wanna continuous fire/mwd/rep...ect ect. Battle Ships (apart from the scorp) are defined by their dps/range/tank it is what they do, they are too slow locking, moving and accelerating to be defined by anything else and trying to act like they all have different "roles" is the weakest argument anybody could come up with.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 11:36:00 - [101] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 11:47:50 Originally by: Goumindong Then why not fly a hyperion? Because it makes no huge or earth shattering difference if you have 4 mids or 5 as BS are not fast tacklers or utility mid slot ships they are slow moving/locking dmg platforms that require support in gang to be effective against other classes of ships. Originally by: maralt The sheer limits BS have because of their size and speed compared to every other conventional ship class in the game makes a lot of those words like "agility" mostly irrelevant to BS. Originally by: Goumindong Why was it not irrelevant pre QR? BS agility in was just as relatively irrelevant pre QR as it is now.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 12:01:00 - [102] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 12:03:51 Originally by: Goumindong Wait a second. So previously you were saying that Blasterships sucked because in these low sec gate camping situations ships would get under their guns and kill them and they wouldn't have a way to stop it. Did i?, are you sure i said that?.....although a single BS ANY BS is a rather dis-functional ship to be camping a gate solo with tbh......or do you disagree? Although small ships getting under the tracking of BS ANY BS does mean and point out quite clearly that BS need support and needing support kinda makes preaching about agility or a single extra mid slot rather redundant........ Originally by: Goumindong But now you're saying that the ships with less tracking, less speed, less agility, less utility, and less meds are "just as effective" at that? Insignificantly less speed, tracking, agility, utility, meds........considering the circumstances.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 12:19:00 - [103] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer If you lose to a BC in a BS if both are set to fight each other you just suck. It was a guide to measure the relative effectiveness of each systems dmg/range ratio against a standardized target. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Instead of admitting their choice of race was wrong for what they intended to do in combat they blame the ships. So by that measure nothing should ever be adjusted or balanced because that is how they were when you chose them and that is how they should stay?. Your arguments are naive and pathetic....
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 12:32:00 - [104] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 12:36:24 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Do you even know the agility difference of a tempest vs an abaddon? It's huge. And rather irrelevant unless your on sissi camping a BF area looking for a 1 v 1 BS fight. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Do you know the importance of not using cap in smaller scale combat? It can be huge. It is also irrelevant unless your back in that BF area on sissi as a single module can sort cap issues if your in a gang. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Do you know the power of active tanks in smaller engagements? Can we discuss something other than your experiences on sissi pls as i am talking about regularly used TQ ships and fits not dream 1 v 1 BF area sissi fits. Active tanks are ok in low sec for gate camping as well i suppose but amarr pulse BS are hardly at a disadvantage in those situations compared to the other races. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Do you grasp the versatility of huge drone bays? I was not really discussing the domi tbh. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Do you understand the importance of utility high slots? Are you saying that amarr tier 1 and 2 BS do not have any?. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Do you get the awesomeness of having room for another web/TD in your mid? Back to sissi BF areas again are you?. Or are you camping a low sec gate in a BS solo?. Seems to me that your trying to make it look like a extra mid and the ability to fit a extra web on a BS makes a world of difference to a BS and the types combat it engages in on TQ and that shows how naive you are or how much you wanna keep your overpowered weapon system.....
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 13:54:00 - [105] Originally by: Goumindong Heavy Neut = Insignificant Amarr BS cannot fit heavy nuets?. Originally by: Goumindong 600 DPS tank = Insignificant In BF 1, 2 OR 3 it works ok, in BS gang combat on TQ i suggest you fit plates tbh. Originally by: Goumindong 20-40% more speed = insignificant Relative to the speed of every other class of ship in eve yes. Originally by: Goumindong 30% tracking = insignificant 30% better tracking is nothing or if you prefer look at the graphs 2km of greater effective range compared to 60km......
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 14:04:00 - [106] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 14:07:14 Originally by: Marn Prestoc Agility+Speed: Of course itÆs relevant. You need it to travel quickly, possibly to get to your initial tackler. While amarr BS do not need to move into range cos they have 5-60km of effective range..... Originally by: Marn Prestoc You need it to run away when local spikes with hostiles. Running away in a BS?...i suggest you warp bud cos unless the hostiles are flying capitals your gonna get caught if you just try to burn away..... Originally by: Marn Prestoc You need it to get through bubbles in 0.0. You need it to get back to gates quickly. So you think the difference in time between similarly fitted BS burning back to a gate is really significant?... Originally by: Marn Prestoc Tools for the job, I canÆt say on forums what IÆd say if you brought a lardarse ship like that when you know chances are you will get outnumbered so have to control the engagement. You mean a lardarse BS? ANY BS...your right they are not even close to being nimble or maneuverable enough to be effective in that scenario ANY OF THEM..kinda makes comparing relative agility between BS pointless.....
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 14:32:00 - [107] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 14:38:20 Originally by: Goumindong They also never need to crash gates, bump anything, MWD away from anything either right? As i said even if they did the slightly less speed they have is relatively insignificant between BS. Originally by: Goumindong It depends on how far away the gate is and how long you can survive the incoming DPS. Or, if their tacklers are dead... Considering that with a effective 60km range you can sit on the gate more easily than any other BS, and yea yea if the other tacklers are dead and blah blah yada yada.....the only measure is the base measure as any perfect but unrealistic scenario can be set by a paper tiger to suit that individuals intent. Originally by: Goumindong We just showed you it is. No you have shown a bit of insignificant math that means nothing in the sort of combat short range BS partake and are effective in......
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 14:47:00 - [108] Originally by: Goumindong No you have shown a bit of insignificant math that means nothing in the sort of combat short range BS partake and are effective in...... It is not insignificant. Its actually pretty damned significant. Is there any reason you think it so? Because if i jump into a gate camp in a BS im gonna be dead unless the camp is manned by real morons, in stupid ships, fitted by idiots who are half asleep,... and no extra couple of seconds travel time either way are gonna make any difference what so ever. If however i am jumping into a camp with a bunch of buddies to bust it we are gonna start firing as soon as we break cloak and so the extra few seconds are also irrelevant. I am not disputing your math (at least not this bit) but its real time applications and benifit are irrelevant.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 15:02:00 - [109] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 15:05:47 Originally by: maralt Because if i jump into a gate camp in a BS im gonna be dead unless the camp is manned by real morons, in stupid ships, fitted by idiots who are half asleep,... and no extra couple of seconds travel time either way are gonna make any difference what so ever. Originally by: Goumindong It depends on how many of them there are. Why snip the part out that i have re-added and then reply with summat the part you snipped pretty much covered???....bad trolling imho. Originally by: maralt If however i am jumping into a camp with a bunch of buddies to bust it we are gonna start firing as soon as we break cloak and so the extra few seconds are also irrelevant. Originally by: Goumindong It depends on how many of them there are. Enough to at least make a fight of it and proly enough so we would win or what would be the point of jumping in to break a camp if you did not have enough ships to break it with?????.... Those were both stupid and pointless replies you just gave tbh...
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 15:45:00 - [110] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 15:57:23 Originally by: Goumindong I am emphasizing that your complaint has nothing to do with the quality of the ships and everything to do with what you want to do in Eve. No your not, you making unrealistic scenarios and assigning imposable roles to try and give justification to a overpowered system. Originally by: Goumindong You want to play in gangs and so the gang ships are better for you. Good for you. We are talking about specific turret battleships and these battleships are gang ships because they lack the maneuverability, lock speed, available dmg vs the variety of ships in eve, and basic ship speed to be effective solo ships. Even in smallish gangs they need smaller support along with them or are vulnerable too as well as useless at tackling ships smaller or even the same size in some casses. Originally by: Goumindong I want to play in gangs and that is why I chose and continue to choose Amarr. But you wanted to play in gangs and choose Gallente. And that is where the problem lies. So by that measure nothing should ever be balanced or changed or should have been balanced or changed EVER in eve cos you knew how they worked when you chose them?????.. Stop posting ffs you have supported every non-amarr nerf (and supported every amaar buff) going, so where was your "but you chose your ship live with it" pitch for those then??????????.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 17:45:00 - [111] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 17:45:58 Originally by: Chi Quan this is significance / insignificance Actually id say that the fact the amarr ship virtually matches or out damages the blasters at 5-10km while utterly out damaging them at 10km-30km and having no blaster dmg to compare with at all at 30km-60km is very relevant tbh. So while the pretty pink circle is very relevant, if your amarr the green circle is a big YAY as well......and that = overpowered.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.12 17:56:00 - [112] Edited by: maralt on 12/12/2008 17:56:59 Originally by: Chi Quan :) it depends on the wording: the difference at close range is insignificant comparing weapon systems. and the lasers are standing out like a martian on venus in the pink circle. True although its for both our reasons/ranges and general overpoweredness of pulse that im training lasers as we speak, 3 hours to small pulse specialization lvl4.......
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.13 22:07:00 - [113] Edited by: maralt on 13/12/2008 22:10:06 Originally by: Jalif People all seem to talk about amarr & gallente. That the one is nerfed & the other one is overpowered. While the real problem that I see that minmatar completely SUCK. All 3 short range BS gunnery systems need balancing tbh, either that or just train amarr as it out classes and virtually matches all systems at all their ranges while also being able to hit at ranges outside ALL the others.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.14 12:45:00 - [114] Originally by: Jalif Uhm... no? Im not going to train for another race just because its FOTM. Fine by me bud train what you like its up to you, but as we both observe blasters and AC are way underpowered while lasers are overpowered. ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.14 13:08:00 - [115] Originally by: Jalif Originally by: maralt Originally by: Jalif Uhm... no? Im not going to train for another race just because its FOTM. Fine by me bud train what you like its up to you, but as we both observe blasters and AC are way underpowered while lasers are overpowered. ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH. Well, if this was true? why is there no CCP? Uhmm? Maybe were are missing something? Did you miss the last few years of nano?. CCP move at their own speed on balance issues tbh, and it is rather relatively slower than our own space time continuum.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.14 18:15:00 - [116] Originally by: Chi Quan and what on earth do eanms have to do with missing tracking on blasters? Nothing, its just yet another deflection from the issue of balance between close range BS weapons.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.15 11:34:00 - [117] Originally by: Goumindong They also have a high amount of utility slots and high agility and speed to be most efficient in close range. A insignificantly greater agility and speed compared to the other BS considering that BS are the largest, slowest and least agile conventional ships. For some reason amarr skilled players seem to want us to believe that cos the hyperion has a extra mid slot that blaster BS should be zipping around solo like interceptors catching and killing any ship they come across without any support...... Lasers are way overpowered as far as short range BS weapons are concerned due to the fact that the BS themselves are not maneuverable nor do they have other necessarily attributes like lock speed ...ect ect to be effective without support.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.15 13:08:00 - [118] Edited by: maralt on 15/12/2008 13:16:19 Originally by: Goumindong Rails, Beams, and Artillery have an even better "range/dps" ratio. Does that make them overpowered? They have range/dps ratios relative to each other although im sure a case could be made that arties need a little love compared to beams and rails. Pulse on the other hand at least match and in most cases outclass AC and Blasters at every range while also having available ranges outside all others, and as such make the short range BS weapon systems in real need of balancing.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.15 17:09:00 - [119] Edited by: maralt on 15/12/2008 17:17:16 Originally by: Goumindong If you define the strength of a ship as its ability to perform in a gang via range/DPS/EHP numbers then long range weapons win out every time. We are balancing short range BS weapon systems, you are trying to confuse the issue. Long range systems are not under the microscope at the moment, if you want to discuss them start another thread. Originally by: Goumindong You are taking middle gang ships and comparing them to small and solo ships. No we are talking about BS short range weapon systems and you are trying to assign roles to the BS they fit on to try and defend your overpowered system. But the fact is those roles are utterly bogus cos BS are not interceptors or HAC's they are the biggest and slowest conventional ships in the game, they are DPS platforms and pulse are way overpowered compared to ALL other comparative systems. Originally by: Goumindong When it suits you, you declare Amarr the best because their short range weapons perform more like long range weapons. No we are not saying anything when it suits us we are pointing out that amarr have a overpowered system because it matches and out classes all others at their ranges while also having 0 contenders at ranges the others cannot reach. NANO was more balanced pre nerf with other tanks that BS pulse lasers are with AC and Blasters.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.15 18:06:00 - [120] Edited by: maralt on 15/12/2008 18:17:15 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer At every range? Amarr virtually match all from from 5km onwards, outclass all other systems after 10-14km, while having no contenders at longer ranges at all. Did you think that just because the thread had moved on a little that the graphs posted would be ignored?. Its you who should learn wtf your talking about.....oh look your amarr....... Oh and with a effective range of 5-60km the web nerf is hardly a problem now is it...is that really the best you can come up with?......mr amarr.....

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.15 20:14:00 - [121] Edited by: maralt on 15/12/2008 20:14:44 Originally by: Goumindong So you're saying railguns are overpowered? Because it "matches and out classes all others at their ranges while also having 0 contends at ranges the others cannot reach" when you ignore Artillery and Beams. Why would you ignore arties and beams they are part of the long range gunnery systems in eve?. Long range gunnery systems = Arties, rails, beams. Now apart from arties needing a bit of love these systems are reasonably balanced with each other. Short range gunnery systems = Ac, blasters, pulse. These systems are way out of balance as lasers are way overpowered.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.15 20:22:00 - [122] Edited by: maralt on 15/12/2008 20:23:01 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt Why would you ignore arties and beams they are part of the long range gunnery systems in eve?. I don't know, why are you ignoring artillery, rails and beams when they're part of the gang DPS gunnery systems in eve? I am not in fact id encourage sechaul to make a graph comparing beams, arties and rails so we can see if they as imbalanced as pulse, AC and blasters are..... I seem to remember beams being more effective than rails tbh, but i will wait for the graphs.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.15 20:32:00 - [123] Edited by: maralt on 15/12/2008 20:33:47 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt I am not in fact id encourage sechaul to make a graph comparing beams, arties and rails so we can see if they as imbalanced as pulse, AC and blasters are..... I seem to remember beams being more effective than rails tbh, but i will wait for the graphs. Why aren't pulses on this new hypothetical graph? Because they are a short range system as well you know. PS: While we are waiting please go on more about how pulse are great at 45+km (rail range apparently) while they can also match and out dmg blasters at 5-15km.....a better argument for pulse being overpowered i have yet to see.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.15 21:53:00 - [124] Edited by: maralt on 15/12/2008 21:54:12 Originally by: Goumindong This is an arbitrary distinction created by you, in order to compare weapons against their purposes. Nope its a accepted fact, your the one giving out stupid and unfeasible roles to BS in a rather feeble and utterly transparant attempt to justify your overpowered weapon system. Originally by: Goumindong See, now you're just making **** up. Maybe you should check those graphs you tried so hard and failed so miserably to discredit.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 10:48:00 - [125] Edited by: maralt on 16/12/2008 10:51:58 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Uhm. Let's see: Small pulses operate up to 13km generally. Compare it with small rails that can operate up to 50km where no other small turrets reach. You'll now say "But the pulses have more dps and tracking", well blasters have more dps and tracking compared to pulses. No i would say beams are the system to balance rails with, but then you know that already your just trying to involve long range systems to try and hide the overpoweredness of pulse compared to its peers (AC and Blasters).
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 11:16:00 - [126] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer "Rails on the other hand at least match and in most cases outclass arties and beams at every range while also having available ranges outside all others, and as such make the short range weapon systems in real need of balancing. " I think you will find that the available range and dps of beams and rails are quite balanced although arties need a bit of love tbh. You should really stop posting and let ppl who are less EMO about things try and manipulate the figures, it wont work but at least it would stop you looking like a fool.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 12:39:00 - [127] Edited by: maralt on 16/12/2008 12:46:32 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer These threads and the whiners in them are here for two reasons: 1. To overpower their race. 2. Whining because they suck and need to blame something. Highly amusing comment considering how often your name appears in nerf threads all over the forum... But i suppose the nerfs you support (non amarr i notice) are all non whine, proper balancing threads....blah blah.... Personally to balance things out i would put tracking on pulse to around the same as 425mm rail guns for starters.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 15:16:00 - [128] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Originally by: maralt Personally to balance things out i would put tracking on pulse to around the same as 425mm rail guns at least for starters. Could you humor us by revealing the "math" and data for justifying 425mm rails to have around the same tracking as pulses? Actually i said reducing the tracking on pulse to be closer to the tracking on 425mm rails not increasing rails tracking to be like pulse. You really should read more carefully, i know its hard when you have all that emo rage swirling around cos this is about balancing your overpowered system but take deep breaths and im sure you can manage it.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 16:26:00 - [129] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt Personally to balance things out i would put tracking on pulse to around the same as 425mm rail guns at least for starters. Which is reasonable as soon as pulse ships start shooting at 190+30km. Shorter range = Better tracking So now these gang rail megas you two clowns preached about need to fit tracking comps to be effective?. Strange how you seemed to think the tracking is ok for rails at closer range when you were trying to compare them to pulse........................ You really are biased and a very poor troll to have walked right into that one.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 16:40:00 - [130] Originally by: Lyria Skydancer 1. You do know that saying: It was perfectly clear your either a fool or a troll, hmm actually both tbh. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer 2. Actually a gang of rail eagle can pretty much bbq people just like a gang of pulses. You just have no clue because you're living in eft and on sisi. 1. We are discussing BS sized weapons, and especially the overpowered pulse not medium sized. Another crappy attempt to go off topic..... 2. I have several thousand kills in all forms of pvp and need no instruction from you or anybody else on what i am talking about.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 16:42:00 - [131] Originally by: Goumindong blah blah i posted my crap before i thought about what i had already tried to spin to avoid my overpowered pulse getting balanced. Fixed.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 17:17:00 - [132] Edited by: maralt on 16/12/2008 17:21:59 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Show me how many are solo kills. Where your skill actually matters. You think it takes skill to get solo kills?. Here is a clue pal, solo pvp is not much more than simple math. I can jump in a solo gank ship and pretty much know exactly what i can and cannot beat as i travel around so the only skill involved is target choice. Now and again i may come across a ship with a funky fit but eve ship fits are so standardized nowadays its rare you come across summat that can surprise me. If your rep was built on solo kills it is worth next to nothing.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 18:47:00 - [133] Edited by: maralt on 16/12/2008 18:55:16 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Solo kills, Where your skill actually matters. Anybody who knows pvp in eve is now laughing at you. Unless you are gonna try pitching that you were referring to target selection when you said skill...... Do you not think you have made a big enough fool of yourself in this thread already?. PULSE ARE OP AND ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 18:55:00 - [134] Edited by: maralt on 16/12/2008 18:57:02 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer So you are a better pilot in fleets yes? Small- med gang vs gang combat is my preferred form of pvp, as that is where team work and actual skill are involved. Solo is just a matter of correct target selection....noob. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer You still have nothing to show, you're still trolling and talking absolute non sense. Oh the irony. This from the person who derailed the thread trying to tell ppl that solo pvp is "Where your skill actually matters"...irony indeed.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.16 19:56:00 - [135] Edited by: maralt on 16/12/2008 19:57:08 Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Wait, so fleet and solo combat are not as much skill as small/med gang combat? Correct, that is why it is referred to as BLOBBING. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Solo combat is just a matter of correct target selection and small gang combat is not? Two out of two, i think your actually learning. Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Fleet warfare is missing what element that makes it less skilled then your precious small gang combat? RR? EW? Tackle? Mobility? Fleet pvp or "blobbing" requires considerably less skill from each individual pilot within the blob and certainly less on a team work level. Would you like to start another thread about it muppet or do you think that by ranting on about it here you will get the thread locked?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.17 09:51:00 - [136] Originally by: Gamesguy Quote: Correct, that is why fleets are referred to as blobs and fleet warfare is referred to as BLOBBING and solo is just a matter of target selection. Gang pvp in which you are not the FC take far less skill than solo pvp. This is true whether its a 10 man gang or a 300 man gang. The gang pvp that i took and take part in rarely had what you would call a FC, we worked as a team communicating with each other and giving out relevant intel on what was occurring in the battle. From target selection to scout or scan duty everybody had a voice as long as it was relevant intel and could re assign a primary target or ewar if needed. Ppl communicated if they had been called primary so any logistic could be assigned to them along with them giving any intel about tacklers or problem ships that needed dealing with. I ran a few small gangs like this while i was with tri to great success and while i was aware of a few FC's who had a dictator like attitude to leading a gang i found that sort of attitude counter productive when fighting outnumbered, and even more so now nano is gone.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.17 16:23:00 - [137] Originally by: Jalif Originally by: maralt But back on topic ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH. How about making amarr heavy (comeone, they have to carry all that gold) So less agility, speed for them but still have good firepower. And yeah, and the balance... /me looks at BS sized AC's & Arties Arties and AC need love but i think reducing the tracking on pulse to around rail gun level would allow them to still be effective at their longer ranges but also be less effective at closer ranges unless the target had considerably lower transversal. It would certainly be a start to balancing out the syastems.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.17 20:41:00 - [138] Edited by: maralt on 17/12/2008 20:45:35 Gourmindong tried to palm off the overpoweredness of pulse with several poor excuses in this thread. My personal favorite was comparing them to rails and pointing out that rails get 30+30km with AM and as such were a virtual match for pulse that get 45+10km. But then later when the suggestion was made that pulse should be balanced with rails as far as tracking is concerned a major EMO foot stomping fit was soon posted by the DONG himself claiming that the tracking was insufficient for such purposes...... The hippocracy as well as a obvious bias within a few posts was excellent to see and i especially enjoyed reading the twinky excuses he tried to make to cover it. ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.17 21:59:00 - [139] Originally by: Pohbis Originally by: Captator Originally by: Pohbis Edited by: Pohbis on 17/12/2008 18:40:09 TL;DR Blasters still rule at short range. Amarr is overpowered. Missiles suck more than ever. Was wondering where all Bellums blaster-whines went. I see someone shut him up wih facts and colorful graphs. Thanks SecHaul. those graphs if you looked at them were supporting bellum's point. Yeah, his did. From EFT, which DPS tool is FUBAR. The rest didn't. Proof or stfu, i look forwards to seeing your graphs.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.17 23:01:00 - [140] Edited by: maralt on 17/12/2008 23:03:52 Edited by: maralt on 17/12/2008 23:03:07 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt But then later when the suggestion was made that pulse should be balanced with rails as far as tracking is concerned a major EMO foot stomping fit was soon posted by the DONG himself claiming that the tracking was insufficient for such purposes Actually i said that since rails had a much longer total effective range the tracking on pulses needed to be better than the tracking on rails. And yet you used them in a comparison to pulse and pulses effective ranges like they were a valid option to use in the same scenarios pulse are effective. You even quoted available ranges of 45+10km for pulse and 30+30km for AM rails AS IF THEY WERE VALID CHOICES AT THOSE RANGES. Tbh i do not see why you have a problem with a tracking reduction on pulse as at their longer ranges it will be irrelevant cos the need for tracking at range is less (as you pointed out), and at shorter ranges your gang members (as you keep bleating out that amarr are gang ships) will have the target webbed and slowed so the transversal will still be low enough for you to hit it. In fact amarr should have utterly awful tracking up close and need support to slow the targets so they can hit things at close range so they fit this "GANG SHIP ROLE" you seem to want to use to justify their overpoweredness.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.17 23:21:00 - [141] Edited by: maralt on 17/12/2008 23:26:20 Originally by: Goumindong They are valid choices at those ranges. At those ranges tracking matters much less. Only if you are operating at those max ranges, for rails at the 60km your ok, at the 40 your okish but inside 30-40km you start missing while pulse do not so the comparison of rails and pulse is not valid. Originally by: Goumindong They really are terrible in close range, and the web nerf has made that come out extensively. Rubbish...pulse do almost as well as blasters at very close range (5-10km) and at close range (10-20km) they out class them utterly.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.18 00:03:00 - [142] Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 00:03:08 Originally by: Goumindong Rail ships hit from around 30-190km depending on fits. Beam ships hit from around 30-190km depending on fits. (in fact 218km optimal in a apoc with rather nice tracking and dmg with tac 2s and aurora) This is why beams are relatively balanced with rails and that pulse are a utterly different system and not even close to being a viable candidate for comparison to rails. Originally by: Goumindong Pulse ships hit from around 5km to 60+km depending on fit. With a large tracking nerf to pulse they will be considerably more balanced and while still effective at long ranges, but at closer ranges as long as they have tacklers with them they will also be ok, and that should not be a issue as im told they are "GANG" ships.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.18 00:51:00 - [143] Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 00:55:42 Originally by: Goumindong You want to ignore the middle gang options that exist in order to declare pulse lasers imbalanced. I am not ignoring anything im pointing out that pulse are way overpowered as they are almost as effective as blasters at the closest ranges blaster get, while also outclassing them inside 20km and utterly out ranging them at 30km+. Now you may think that making up "gang styles" and "roles" will deflect or justify this overpoweredness but it does not and will not. Originally by: Goumindong you just are ignoring how weapons overlap with each other. And if i could switch from blasters to rails in space as fast as pulse can swap crystals you would have a point. In fact its because pulse overlap and outclass blasters and AC in DMG/RANGE ratios at virtually every available range while having 30+km extra range on top of them that is the problem.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.18 09:14:00 - [144] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: maralt while also outclassing them inside 20km Blasters gain just as much advantage over lasers under 10km as lasers do over blasters till about 30km. Wrong lasers gain not only more inside 10km but the window of effect is also much narrower as nobody hits to 0km only to around 3km. As well as the fact that lasers do not just hit up to 30km they hit up to over 60km.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.18 10:56:00 - [145] Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 10:57:59 Originally by: Goumindong 1. Yes, much easier for fast high agility ships with extra med slots. Their are no fast high agility BS they are all slow and have poor maneuverability compared to every other conventional class in eve. Originally by: Goumindong 2. Blasters advantage starts around 14km or so depending on target transversal. Disagree all you want, the facts say otherwise. Under perfect circumstances and against certain types of tanks blasters are slightly better at 8-14km, but in most cases lasers equal or out perform blasters at those ranges, while having another 45km+ on top of that to be very effective in.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.18 14:03:00 - [146] Originally by: Goumindong Other than the Tempest, Hyperion, Dominix, and Megathron Just because these BS are marginally faster and more agile than the other BS does not make them interceptors or cruisers, they are still slow ass BS. Even BC are pretty poor as far as agility and speed go for matching alignment against smaller ships let alone BS.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.18 16:48:00 - [147] Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 16:51:28 Originally by: Goumindong You do not need to be as agile as a cruiser or interceptor in order to partake in solo and small gang combat. As far as BS are concerned you do not need to be fast or agile at all, as small gang combat with BS relies on tacklers to be effective. Originally by: Goumindong At 27km, Neutron blasters with Null hit for 39.5% of their dps. The 0 DPS point on Neutron blasters hits at around 45km, though the DPS before then is very low. It is not "very low" it is utterly insignificant. Originally by: Goumindong You will also notice that the existence of a single web makes space 2.4 times more difficult to move through. This means that the area from 14-30km is a 16km effective range while the range from 0-10 is 24km effective. 1. The 0-10km AVAILABLE range you claim is actually around 4km-10km for turret BS and that is 6 x 2.4 = 14.4. 2. Not only that but the web in question increases the hit rate and abilities as a percentage of pulse as much as it does blasters. So once again pulse get the very best of both worlds in blaster ranges as well as 30km or range all to themselves.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.18 19:08:00 - [148] Originally by: Christari Zuborov I really don't see ccp lowering tracking on pulse lasers when they've just boosted them. Considering the rather large nerf and adjustment virtually every ship and a lot of modules have taken in this last patch id say there will be a lot of balancing to be done due to the effects, and previous adjustments are less important and hardly a reason to keep a broken and overpowered system the way it is.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.18 23:13:00 - [149] Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 23:16:50 Originally by: Goumindong About as significant as the DPS that lasers do under 10km when blasters are still doing considerable DPS. Considering the ship has transversal the lasers are doing great DMG down to 4km in this graph, even unwebbed lasers do good dmg down to 5km. Originally by: Goumindong Actually its more like 1-10km for blasters. Its virtually almost 0-10 for every turret BS with low or 0 transversal.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.19 12:45:00 - [150] Originally by: Goumindong At 27km, Neutron blasters with Null hit for 39.5% of their dps. The 0 DPS point on Neutron blasters hits at around 45km, though the DPS before then is very low. Originally by: maralt It is not just "very low" it is utterly insignificant. Originally by: Goumindong About as significant as the DPS that lasers do under 10km when blasters are still doing considerable DPS.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.19 12:54:00 - [151] Originally by: Goumindong Void We were discussing your claim that lasers do insignificant (by insignificant i mean blaster over 30km amounts) under 10km not void or ammo types. And the graph clearly shows lasers doing significant dmg at 4km+.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.19 13:02:00 - [152] Edited by: maralt on 19/12/2008 13:06:37 Originally by: Goumindong You've got the wrong ammo in the guns you nutter. OK MORONDONG PAY ATTENTION. WHAT PART OF "THIS DISCUSSION/GRAPH IS ABOUT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LASERS UNDER 10KM" DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT COMPARING LASERS WITH BLASTERS UNDER 10KM SO VOID AND ANTIMATTER ARE PERFECT FOR THOSE COMPARISONS. THE GRAPH CLEARLY SHOWS LASERS DOING RELATIVELY GREAT DMG DOWN TO 3-4KM.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.19 13:33:00 - [153] Edited by: maralt on 19/12/2008 13:44:53 Edited by: maralt on 19/12/2008 13:40:03 Originally by: Goumindong "relatively good" has to have something relate to. The graph clearly shows that lasers are relatively VERY good at 3-10km "COMPARED" (or "RELATING TO" if you prefer) BLASTERS OVER THE SAME RANGE. BRB with a graph that has 10-30km and 30-60+km comparisons......... Hey look the purple blaster line is out dmg'd by the yellow and red lines and closely flowed by the blue line until 15-16km where is is way overtaken by the blue line..... and after 30km.................. ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.19 13:50:00 - [154] Originally by: Goumindong Relative to blasters at 3-10km, lasers do poorly. That is why the lines for the lasers are far below the lines for the blasters. Do you think ppl are gonna believe such a pathetic lie with the evidence right in front of them.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.19 14:31:00 - [155] Edited by: maralt on 19/12/2008 14:35:44 Originally by: Goumindong Alright lets look at this graph. At about 3km, the Armageddon, the best of the laser ships is doing 600 DPS. The Hyperion is doing about 1100. @9-10km it out damages the hyperion while doing over 1000dps from around 5km....that is 4km of 1000dps inside 10km and 1km at 1100DPS. It does 900-1000+dps from 10km-20km while the hyperion does 800ish. It does 1000-850dps from 20km-30km while the hyperion does 700-400. It does 850-700dps from 30-40 while the hyperion 400-300. It does 700-600+ from 40-50km while the hyperion does 200+ (most likely drones) Its does 600+-400 from 50-60km while the hyperion still does 200+ (most likely drones) NOW IF YOU WANNA PICK OUT INDIVIDUAL RANGES AND DAMAGES AND COMPARE THEM THAT IS FINE BUT IT DOES NOT SHOW THE TRUTH OF HOW OVERPOWERED PULSE ARE COMPARED TO BLASTERS. THE ABOVE FIGURES DO.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.19 15:22:00 - [156] Edited by: maralt on 19/12/2008 15:26:54 Originally by: Goumindong Did we or did we not just get through explaining that the ranges within web range were effectively harder to move through? So your saying the 1km of 1100dps laser get is actually around 3km and the 4km of 1000dps is actually around 10km?. And lets not get started on overheating shall we considering your dmg at 10-13km..
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.19 21:41:00 - [157] Edited by: maralt on 19/12/2008 21:44:28 Originally by: Marn Prestoc The scale is also better for the ranges they are currently discussing. We are discussing pulse so the ranges are not ok cos they do not come close to covering the available ranges for the system in question.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 09:51:00 - [158] Originally by: Marn Prestoc Is that your whole reply to Goums post? "you didn't show 15km where the lasers are in falloff so i'm discounting everything you say"??? That is not what i said unless you would like to show me where i did as i was replying to your comment on the ranges try not to be such a emotard. Originally by: Marn Prestoc Do you really think you have to show absolutely everything in a single diagram to do a analysis? Considering the topic is the dmg/range ratios of short range weapon systems i think that the total ranges of both systems are 100% relevant.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 10:24:00 - [159] So from 0-5km the geddon does 0-300 the hype does 0-430. (+130) From 5-10km the geddon does 300-400km the hype does 430-390. (+130/-10) From 10-15km the geddon does 300-360 the hype does 250--300. (-50/-60) from 15-20 the geddon does 360-350 the hype does 300-270. (-60/-80) from 20-25 the geddon does 300-280 the hype does 270-200. (-30/-80) from 25-30 the geddon does 350-350 the hype does 200-160. (-150/-190) from 30-35 the geddon does 325-330 the hype does 160-130. (-165/-200) from 35-40 the geddon does 340+ the hype has drones doing 100ish. (-240+) From 40-60+ we can assume the geddon does 300+ and the hype 100 (-200+)
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 10:32:00 - [160] Edited by: maralt on 20/12/2008 10:38:38 Now taking into account that the tests were done using webs but also that the target ships had perfect transversal relative to their speed (and that doing the same is utterly possible in actual combat) the system with tracking issues would suffer less in real combat and actually hit more/harder and considerably closer than shown. But even ignoring that real time and actual combat relevant data, pulse lasers are still highly effective inside web range (even more so if you include overheat + gourmindongs 2.4 x range multiplier for webs) into the equation. NOW WHAT DOES ALL THOSE FIGURES IN THE POST ABOVE AND THIS ONE MEAN?..... ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 11:36:00 - [161] Originally by: Deva Blackfire The figures above mean you dont play on TQ and have no clue. You can screw numbers as much as you want and in the end of the day hype will kill all geddons in 1v1 (unless hype has crap fit). Hell even in 2v2 they can still win with overheat for a bit. Personally i think that anybody who thinks BS and their weapons systems should be balanced around 1 v 1 BS situations, while in the same breath preaches about realistic TQ situations needs to stop and take a breath. 1 v 1 BS or even solo BS situations are like rocking horse crap on TQ, (ie: ultra rare) and as such are not the thing that a entire class of ships and their weapon systems should be balanced around.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 12:50:00 - [162] Originally by: Marn Prestoc Wow your back to insulting people cos your arguements so weak, shame. Il tell you what you stop putting words into my mouth and claiming i have said things i most certainly have not Originally by: Marn Prestoc Is that your whole reply to Goums post? "you didn't show 15km where the lasers are in falloff so i'm discounting everything you say"??? and i will stop insulting you for doing so... Deal?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 13:32:00 - [163] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Ok ill make it short: typical engagement range is 24km (disruptor range). Do blasters cover (ie: have an advantage) in around 50% of this range? The engagement range of 1 v 1 is 0-24km the engagement range of gang combat can be much greater for the dmg dealers as the tacklers and dictors are the only ships that need to close to inside 24km. Originally by: Deva Blackfire also how the hell geddon does more damage in 5-10km range rather than 10-15km? It is not my graph its gourmindongs although the dropoff inside 10km for the hype is due to the range of its ammo, this is also a issue that effects its ratio when you over heat webs as the lasers get a bonus 3km x 2.4 (7.2km "real space" according to gourm) where they hit for max dmg while the hype is into dmg fall off due to its range limitations.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 13:58:00 - [164] Edited by: maralt on 20/12/2008 15:02:00 Originally by: Marn Prestoc So while you talk about piloting to reduce transversal hence make tracking a minor issue, the Hyperion will do it better from being quicker and lighter . 5m/s quicker with the same inertia modifier and under 5% less mass before plates are hardly things that are gonna make me throw away my taranis pal or give either ship any real time significant or even noticeable advantage at reducing transversal against smaller orbiting ships. Originally by: Marn Prestoc Overheating helps lasers in web range in that comparison more? What are you talking about? The Hyperion rely's more on its turrets than its drone's, plus doesn't get reduced as much by resistances. So please show us this maths that the Geddon will benifit more from overheating in web range. I was talking about overheating the web not the weapons as the increase of over heating guns is relative. Over heating the web gives it a +3.33km range and using gourm web range modifier (3.33x2.4 = 8km) where the geddon would be hitting for max dmg but the hype would be severely reduced due to the falloff it already suffers from inside 10km let alone outside due to the range constraints of its ammo. And if you include the 1km inside 10km (shown on gourms graph) as well it is 4.33 x 2.4 and that is almost 10.5km of max dmg for the lasers (from 13.3 to 9km) while the hype is doing rather less due to range issues. Originally by: Marn Prestoc 75% of the range is covered with only the falloff of lasers missing. I think that does come close. So if i had ignored or cut out 25% falloff of some of the systems you would have ignored it and accepted the data as accurate?. Originally by: Marn Prestoc Sounded to me like you were dismissing the post because of "they do not come close" to what you want. If you consider that your acting like 5m/s (less than 5%) base speed and less than 5% mass along with equal agility modifiers make a huge difference with negating transversal is important. Id say the 25% (and a total of 30+km out of 60 available km) range where a single race can hit for more or the same dmg as a sniper BS while the others guns cannot even reach is considerably more important.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 16:02:00 - [165] Edited by: maralt on 20/12/2008 16:05:35 Originally by: Marn Prestoc Sure go look at base values while we're comparing fitted ships here. A Geddon with either a MWD or web can control range as well as a Hyperion that will always have MWD + web if not double web? No. If your talking about controlling range in a 1 v 1 BS vs BS situation then i would never argue as the hyperion would have a distinct advantage when the starting range is close and the ships are stationary at the start of the engagment. But in all honesty i could not ever say that those situations are even close to being even slightly regular in eve or even solo BS much tbh, while i regularly see gangs of supported BS and gangs of just BS. Originally by: Marn Prestoc More important than...? Having extra mids, ability to fully tackle, no fitting issues, quicker and lighter which makes MWD'ing more effective even before the option of overloading the MWD... As i said in 1 v 1 BS engagements yes those things you list would give the one with them the advantage as long as the starting range was reasonably close and the ships are stationary at the start of the engagment. But in gang combat those advantages are utterly negated by either support ships or if it is a pure BS gang by fitting each BS with specific and differing mid slot modules that compliment the gangs abilities. So while the hyperion's all need to close on the primary target to get the benefits from their ammo and extra mid slots the geddons can actually all sit out in differing positions and ranges (even burning away in differing directions) hitting for considerable dmg on any of the Hyperion's while the hyperion's need to chase after and close on each and every ship they choose to attack. Originally by: Marn Prestoc No one is disputing the damage output of lasers at 40km+, hence we don't have to keep including it into every graph that figures are being taken from. I cannot and will never agree that in a thread about comparing weapon systems ignoring 25% of the available range of one system especially when the 25% in question is way way outside the range the other system can reach is "not important enough to include".
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 21:23:00 - [166] Edited by: maralt on 20/12/2008 21:34:30 Originally by: Deva Blackfire Welcome to my trap: why you dont whine that rails outdamage blasters at distances: 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 ... Because rails are not short range systems like pulse, ac and blasters. And rails do not almost match and exceed the dmg of blasters against tackled ships at 0-20km range. While pulse do match the dmg of blasters and even exceed them in parts of that 0-20km range while also out damaging them from around 10-30km and out ranging them utterly at 30km-60km+. Originally by: Deva Blackfire I was asking why lasers deal more damage at 5-10 than at 10-15 (according to info i quoted) wheras they should (and they do) deal exactly SAME damage at those distances. If as you say they deal the same dmg at those ranges (IL not argue as it was gourmindongs graph i used) then the pulse really need dealing with as they get another 45km of more dmg 30km of that 45km unchallenged as blasters cannot reach past 30km and lasers reach to 60+. PS: Your so called trap couldn't catch the clap in a cheap brothel.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 22:00:00 - [167] Edited by: maralt on 20/12/2008 22:08:12 Originally by: Goumindong This distinction is only in your head. The range that pulse operates in, while not long ranges, is certainly not short ranges. Originally by: maralt While pulse do match the dmg of blasters and even exceed them in parts of that 0-20km range Originally by: Goumindong And what is the problem with pulse ships matching the damage of blasters or even exceeding them in parts of the 0-20km range? Both of these in the same post, let me guess its been your xmas party and you drank or smoked a little to much?..... Are you going to RE-"define" short range as 3-4km now?, another pathetic attempt to justify a overpowered system with a "distinction" that actually only happens in your head pal..
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.20 22:24:00 - [168] Edited by: maralt on 20/12/2008 22:26:45 Originally by: Goumindong what in the world are you on about? Those statements made by me are in no way contradictory. So in one quote you say lasers do not operate in short range and in the next you say they actually out perform/match blasters or close to it (depending on how close 15-20/10-15/5-10, even 0-5 depending on tackle) in short range and you do not consider those statements contradictory?. Stop posting or sober up.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.21 09:34:00 - [169] Originally by: Deva Blackfire Neither are pulses. Welcome to MID range (like in medium: between LONG and SHORT). If it is a "MID" range system it should not almost match and out damage blasters at almost all close ranges and it does. And just because 1 of the laser ships has minor troubles fitting a MWD/point/web/injector is no justification either as only the MWD and injector are the really "must have" modules in gang combat for that sort of combat as the tackling can be done by other ships. Giving the pulse the tracking of around 425mm rails will still make them FULLY effective at their MID ranges while also making them more reliant on tackle/support (as gourm insists they are gang ships this is not a problem) at close ranges if they want to match or out dmg blasters as they do now......
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.21 18:28:00 - [170] Edited by: maralt on 21/12/2008 18:45:24 Originally by: Deva Blackfire So what exactly stops you from tackling hostiles and then using covops to warp straight onto them? You wanted gang warfare yet you still ignore other gang warfare styles of play. its not only "damage+tacklers" its also covops for warpins/warpouts, ewar etc. You always bring "lasers + tacklers" to the table - i bring "blasters+warpins". Problem solved for you. Bring what you like but a mixed gang with its BS dmg dealers able to hit almost as hard in close from 0-15km as every other BS, as well as out damaging all others out from 15-30km, while also hitting 30-60km where other cannot even reach is considerably better for combat than any other BS with similar support. Originally by: Deva Blackfire So maybe next time look how good active tanks i can mount on my laser ships. And you will see that amarr passive tank 90% of the time due to... fitting issues (and passives being better for most of the time anyways). Also you have that nice RCU module, why not fit it? RCU are gallente only?..i had no idea....i wonder how many i would need to use to be able to fit lasers, mwd, ect ect on a mega or hyperion.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.22 08:45:00 - [171] Originally by: Goumindong I could just as well claim that lasers need to hit as well as blasters from 0-10km They do, and in considerably more situations and circumstances than blasters hit for the same as lasers from 15-60+ Originally by: Goumindong Because "its just not fair that blaster ships are the solo/small gang ships". Blaster ships are not better small gang ships laser ships are. And solo pvp in BS is rare enough and the target selection so small that both races have almost the same amount of available ships they can kill solo.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.22 08:50:00 - [172] Originally by: Goumindong If you're flying solo/small gang you want blasters or ACs. Wrong, for small gang you want lasers and for solo all races have a BS that has a available selection of solo targets they can kill. Originally by: Goumindong If you're flying in a medium gang you want pulse lasers, beam lasers, railguns, or artillery. WRONG, you want pulse...unless its a med sized sniper gang then beams and rails are the best of the gunnery races. Originally by: Goumindong They have too low tracking to effectively deal DPS to these targets and not enough secondary benefits to be effective. Balls, the tracking on pulse is fine in fact it needs reducing considerably as a start to balancing short range weapon systems.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.22 21:01:00 - [173] Edited by: maralt on 22/12/2008 21:06:01 Originally by: Goumindong By that estimation, blasters hit almost as well as lasers do from 15-30km and the vast majority of these fights occur under 20km. Therefore blasters are overpowered... If blasters also had the option of hitting out to 60+km like pulse do, or if pulse range was reduced to 30km MAX like blasters are so the range dmg ratios were the same/BALANCED but reversed you would have a argument, instead of a pathetically weak troll. Originally by: Goumindong 1. No, for small gangs you want BS that can contribute when tacklers are no longer on the field. You want to be fast, agile, and have good tracking. Most amarr BS can fit a point and web as far as i am aware so tackling is not a issue. Battleships are neither fast, agile or have particularly good tracking NONE OF THEM, some do have those attributes better than others but its insignificant relative to other BS and the available targets BS have.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.22 21:59:00 - [174] Edited by: maralt on 22/12/2008 22:05:46 Originally by: Goumindong That is not the case. They typically start close and stay close. Fights start typically close because most fighting is close range fitted ganking against a solo ship or a small number of ships you can melt without a loss. While most skilled pvpers will concur that range is a great tank now nano is gone and will try to use it to their advantage as much as possible in more equal and skilled gang vs gang combat. And as such pulse are overpowered as they close to match and out damage blasters at short range while also having 30km that no other system can reach. Originally by: Goumindong There are five things in there that are pretty essential to soloing. And i would not choose any BS in the game to fit them on and fly solo.....
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.22 23:01:00 - [175] Originally by: Goumindong . No, most TACKLING occurs under 24km........ Fixed. Originally by: Goumindong But we get it, you don't want to fly solo or small gang ships. You get nothing. I like flying in small gang combat in fact it my favorite type of pvp, and i also do a little solo work if a feel like it although not much due to the amount of time wasted looking for targets but i never solo in a BS.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.22 23:21:00 - [176] Originally by: Goumindong And when your tackler or their tackler dies? Losing ships is part of eve pal, and most BS can comfortably fit a point including amarr. Originally by: Goumindong So what you're saying is that you trained a solo/small gang BS yet never intend to fly BS in solo and small gangs. Did i just not say i fly in small gang pvp and that its my favorite type of combat in eve?...are you blind or just stupid?. Solo BS pvp is virtually non existent due to the fact that BS suck at it ALL BS, some may have slot layouts that make them look like they could do well but that is it they LOOK like they could do well as the reality is that they have a p155 poor available target selection and even the fastest and most maneuverable are not even close to being fast and maneuverable to be useful as anything other than supported dmg dealers.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.23 00:20:00 - [177] Originally by: Goumindong Which means they are within 24km or closing to that distance... Which means they need webs to slow their targets down in order to hit them, neuts to shut off modules etc etc etc. All the things that Amarr is bad at that you consistently ignore. Amarr need approaching ships webbed just as much as any other BS...IN OTHER WORDS NOT MUCH UNTIL UNDER 5KM, and tacklers can slow those that do need dealing with. Originally by: Goumindong Before the web changes there was no blaster outcry. The web changes have universally made blasters more valuable than pulses. Yet when the web changes hit you complain that blasters are broken? Hello do you play eve?, blasters highest dmg is within web range so the web nerf effected them more than anybody, not only that but the ability to keep anything smaller than a slow ass BS within the blasters highest dmg range is also gimped to hell. The fact is that this nerf has forced all BS to need support ships to be effective and as such the dmg/range constraints on all the other BS apart from amarr especially blaster ships has gimped them the most. While amarr are sitting pretty by being able to hit almost as hard as blasters under 10km while hitting harder from 10-30km and also being able to hit from 30-60+km a range and dmg ratio no other system can come close to matching.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.23 09:35:00 - [178] Edited by: maralt on 23/12/2008 09:41:44 Originally by: Goumindong Uhh no. Pulse lasers need approaching ships webbed much more than anyone else since they have the worst tracking. Range negates tracking as you well know so stop acting like amarr having lower tracking makes a damn bit of difference. Originally by: Goumindong Blaster battleships have the highest tracking and the best ability to fit multiple webs. Which means the web changes affected them the least. So you think that the race that need webs the most to hold ships in range were least effected by the changes?. Shut up and stop posting. Originally by: Goumindong Do you see the tracking of lasers at 11km on those graphs? I see them out damaging blasters and doing 1000-1100dps under 11km that is what i see, the damage drops of on the "perfect transversal" graphs as they get closer but from 9km-13km they out damage blasters while close to matching them upto 5km. And as i said that is with a "constant and perfect" transversal a actual impossibility in eve, so in reality lasers get a big boost in close range tracking/dmg not shown on the graphs.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 09:52:00 - [179] Originally by: Goumindong MWD deactivation and Afterburners increase transversal and create tracking issues. Not enough to be significant considering BS's available targets along with the marginal difference in tracking between races. Originally by: Goumindong I see that inertia means that even if you web a target at 13km, they're going to slide much closer in to you[MWD's yo]. Which can only be negated by being fast and agile [which armarr are not]. Negated by being fast and agile?...like BS are not....cos the insignificantly small amount of agility amarr lose compared to others is nothing, stop acting like gallente BS are interceptors ffs it makes you look like a total tard.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 12:21:00 - [180] Originally by: Kepakh Blaster boats are the only battleships that can track cruisers at close range. What else you need to discuss? Sorry bud but that is wrong.

maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 19:39:00 - [181] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 19:41:33 Originally by: Goumindong . Every difference is "marginal" and the tracking difference between pulse and blasters considering that one of the ships gets two webs and one of the ships gets a tracking bonus is positively huge You can hardly add the megas and the Hyperions bonuses together now can you, poor attempt to even try tbh. The difference is actually rather small when you consider the available targets BS have and the how much transversal those targets can actually realistically generate due to speed constraints against even a single web fitted ship. Originally by: Goumindong .You're going to have ships on top of you and they're going to mess you up. And that applies to all gunnery BS if they are stupid enough to run around solo, hence the need for support and the fact that said support removes the need to fit multiple webs....... Originally by: Goumindong I am sorry, why is 15km "close range"? Available range in eve = 249km. Now 15km is in around the first 5% of the available range in eve so if that cannot be considered "close" wtf can?.
maralt Minmatar The seers of truth	Posted - 2008.12.24 21:04:00 - [182] Edited by: maralt on 24/12/2008 21:08:38 Originally by: Goumindong The graphs in this thread show blaster battleships doing roughly 2-3 times as much DPS against battlecruiesrs in web range... I suppose you would call that "marginal" From 2-5km blasters do ok against lasers as long as the transversal is at not above or below a certain level, but from 5-13km your kidding yourself cos in fact they show lasers almost matching blasters up to 9km and out damaging blasters just under 10km and upwards(a little fact you try hard to dismiss). Originally by: Goumindong Except for the high tracking, high agility BS with more webs. Then it doesn't apply to you. Wrong it applies to them as well, and their are no high agility BS, only BS with slightly better agility than the others but they are all so low the little extra is irrelavant. Originally by: Goumindong Then again, if we are considering that(and using your logic) then pulse ships are woefully underpowered because Rokhs outrange them by 5 times. That is more than pulse out range blasters! Wrong, my logic is fine as rokhs do not close to match or out dmg pulse at close range, while pulse do exactly that to blasters in close. Oh and a rokh with tracking comps hits at 249km, pulse on a amarr BS with tracking comps does not have 5x less range... not even close

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.