| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
   |
Posted - 2009.01.08 22:42:00 -
[241]
 Originally by: Julie Thorne
Let's be fair: you lose 60.5% of your DPS at optimal+falloff and you shouldn't be fighting at that range. On the other hand if you make Amarr ships fight at let's say your optimal you have the advantage. The damage advantage as well because damage types do matter (just look at popular setups and check their EHP vs different weapons/ammo).
BTW I don't like your style but admire your passion :)
No, you shouldn't be fighting at that range against amarr, but considering ACs have the lower optimum of all weapons in the game, and also considering battleships are slow, and slower now after QR, you will be fighting at least at some fallout for a long time, while the opponent will track you just fine within his optimum. Check the tracking guide and see how near and how fast a battleship sized ship must be for mega pulses to start missing it significantly. The damage type matters, but nowhere near that much.
=====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Julie Thorne
14th Legion
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 22:49:00 -
[242]
Edited by: Julie Thorne on 08/01/2009 22:54:51
Edited by: Julie Thorne on 08/01/2009 22:54:40
Originally by: Murina
When you compare a 4.8km base optimal (AC) vs 24km base optimal (pulse) and factor that at -2km nobody hits anyway and also factor that the difference in dmg is actually rather non existant you get a idea how OP pulse are.
Lol. Read what I wrote. Again. Then check popular setups. And then damage types. Mael with 3 ambit extension rigs and barrage outdamages Abaddon (same number of damage mods) with scorch against popular armor tanked setups upto AT LEAST 29km, Yes, I know how falloff works. And yes, I did my math. And please don't troll me again before you do yours.
Edit: Ethno: you will be surprised how much damage types matter (though I'm pretty sure CCP doesn't balance ships based on "popular setups" or they are clverer than I thought) - and I said nothing about tracking in the post you're referring to.
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 23:04:00 -
[243]
Originally by: Julie Thorne
Edit: Etho: you will be surprised how much damage types matter (though I'm pretty sure CCP doesn't balance ships based on "popular setups" or they are clverer than I thought) - and I said nothing about tracking in the post you're referring to.
The common 2 EANM 2 + DC 2 setup, which is the worst case scenario for battleships, produces a difference of 16% in the EHP of a battleship against multifreq in comparison to Barrage. If you considering both battleships with most likely have thermal drones this diference goes to something around 5-10% (depending on the number of drones).
=====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Murina
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 23:08:00 -
[244]
Edited by: Murina on 08/01/2009 23:13:17
Originally by: Julie Thorne
Lol. Read what I wrote. Again. Then check popular setups. And then damage types. Mael with 3 ambit extension rigs and barrage outdamages Abaddon (same number of damage mods) with scorch against popular armor tanked setups upto AT LEAST 29km, Yes, I know how falloff works. And yes, I did my math. And please don't troll me again before you do yours.
I tend not just to load one type of ammo in my hold and as i am training lasers atm i can tell you that with super fast reload any amarr pilot who just fitted scorch (as youR scenario clearly says UPTO 29KM) is rather stupid tbh.
I do not troll, your idea that any amarr pilot would just fit/use scorch for all ranges UPTO 29km is just naive tbh.
|
Julie Thorne
14th Legion
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 23:28:00 -
[245]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
The common 2 EANM 2 + DC 2 setup, which is the worst case scenario for battleships, produces a difference of 16% in the EHP of a battleship against multifreq in comparison to Barrage. If you considering both battleships with most likely have thermal drones this diference goes to something around 5-10% (depending on the number of drones).
Lol. So basicly biggest guns on the biggest Amarr BS with the highest damage ammo possible (sort of :ANMF) and it only has 11% DPS advantage over a Mael with long range ammo against foes you are bound to fight? In MF optimal of course :)Nice. Though I wrote nothing about Multi (why do you want to compare a short range high damage ammo to a long range ammo? Don't tell me you're afraid of what you will find out if you level the playing field). Check scorch (EM ftw :)). And please read what I wrote.
BTW your 5-10% estimate with drones is totally wrong. I don't have time to prove it to you right now. Maybe tomorrow.
PS Can we talk about my suggestions? Please?
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 23:53:00 -
[246]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 08/01/2009 23:53:44
Originally by: Julie Thorne
Lol. So basicly biggest guns on the biggest Amarr BS with the highest damage ammo possible (sort of :ANMF) and it only has 11% DPS advantage over a Mael with long range ammo against foes you are bound to fight? In MF optimal of course :)Nice. Though I wrote nothing about Multi (why do you want to compare a short range high damage ammo to a long range ammo? Don't tell me you're afraid of what you will find out if you level the playing field). Check scorch (EM ftw :)). And please read what I wrote.
I don't know if you are aware of this but barrage has the same damage of EMP. If I get a short range ammo, Fusion, for example, I will end with less damage than Barrage at optimum, and a lot less falloff. So basically I am comparing the best possible ammo minmatar can use at this case against the best possible ammo amarr can use.
Oh, and and multifreq has the same optimum range as Barrage has of optimum + 2/3 falloff. So longer range is a very strange concept here. Scorch will be used from a distance where ACs do at most 40% of damage, so it will have a LOT more damage than any possible ammunition minmatar can use, no matter the damage type.
Oh and lets not forget that 800mm with barrage have LOWER tracking than Mega Pulses with MF. So as distance shortens you have to switch to fusion which makes your damage even lower.
Quote:
BTW your 5-10% estimate with drones is totally wrong. I don't have time to prove it to you right now. Maybe tomorrow.
The most common short range battleship Amarr use is the geddon, which has 125 m3 of drones. In a battleship with 125m3 of drone bay drones amount for roughly 30% of the battleship damage (25% if you spare 25 m3 for lights). Multifreq has 58.33% of EM damage and 41.67% of thermal damage. This means that in the end you will have around 59% of Thermal damage and 41% of EM damage.
Quote:
PS Can we talk about my suggestions? Please?
ok.
Quote:
I think atm short range guns with T1 and faction ammo are more or less balanced so nerfing pulse tracking or buffing everything else would be a bad idea but on the other hand I could support something like changing the tracking mod of scorch from 0.75 to 0.5 (though it's not as overpowered as most people think, it is imbalanced).
Modifying scorch tracking won't change much as it is used for longer ranges. It is ok for amarr battleships to outperform gallente and minmatar at longer ranges. This is Amar racial advantage and it grows with numbers making amarr better the more ships you have at each side.
On the other hand it is not ok that Amarr can evenly match and even outperform both gallente and minmatar at closer ranges. To make for their advanatages amarr battleships should be horrible in solo and bellow average in smaller gangs. That is certainly not the case and changing scorch won't do anything about it.
MP tracking must be lowered in general so multifreq will take the hit instead.
Quote:
I want to see TEs with 7.5% bonus to optimal and falloff and falloff scripts for TCs. The argument that extra falloff would boost AC damage and that's why TEs/TCs with falloff bonus would be overpowered is silly for 2 reasons: 1. most of the time you're better off with an extra gyro/shield extender/whatever and giving more fitting options is never a bad thing 2. atm pulse lasers can benefit from TCs either by increasing optimal if you need it (-> extra damage) or increasing tracking (-> extra damage). AC users can only increase tracking.
TEs and TCs should keep their current bonuses and have a falloff bonus proportional to the optimal bonus added. You don`t really need to add new scripts for TCs, just make the optimum script affect falloff in teh same manner, as is the case with tRacking Disruptors...
|
Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.01.08 23:59:00 -
[247]
Quote:
Large ACs don't have any major problems atm. Maels can easily fit 3 ambit extension rigs with 800mm ACs (45km falloff is nice) and Typhoons are not really about AC damage. And the Vargur is an awesome missionboat with autocannons (and falloff rigs) if you know how to use it. Only Tempests are stuck with the base range of ACs because when fitting one you need the rig slots for trimark rigs most of the time because otherwise your tank is just too weak - though the extra highs and mids are nice they probably make up for the short range, low DPS and weak tank :) I don't like this ship and want it redesigned. (I think it has less base armor HP than a Raven - now how silly is that?) Artillery optimal is enough IF the Tempest is redesgined (see later).
Maelstrom with ambit extensions is a fail fitting. You sacrifice an ungodly amount of tank for a bit more falloff. It is really bad, believe me.
Vargur is the worse Marauder by far, it is outperformed by all other three by a long margin, even against Angels. God, a Paladin does angel missions much faster than a Vargur even having most of its damage resisted.
About the Tempest, the ship is fine. The problems are ACs. See when ALL the ships that use ACs have a problem the problem is NOT the ships...
Quote:
Before QR there was one and only one Minmatar fleet BS setup that I considered good: it was a shield tanked 1200mm Mael (159km optimal, DD tanked upto lv5 except vs an Erebus, 20 rounds, nice tracking, same DPS vs popular armor tanked fleet BSs as an Apoc with 3 HS and 8x Tach). It needed very good skills but well we#re talking about a Minmatar ship :) Now I have 0 setups I like. So here's my suggestion: don't change Artilleries but add an optimal bonus to the Tempest, lose the ROF bonus, and add 2 more gun hardpoints (tbh I was never able to figure out a role for this ship - and probably that's my fault :)).
That will still make the tempest suck as an artillery boat, as it lacks fitting requirements to be a good Artillery boat, and will kill it as a short range ship.
Basically all your suggestions have to do with ships, which are not broken, and not with the weapon systems, which are. I can`t disagree with them more.
=====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Julie Thorne
14th Legion
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 00:22:00 -
[248]
Edited by: Julie Thorne on 09/01/2009 00:25:43
|
Murina
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 00:29:00 -
[249]
Edited by: Murina on 09/01/2009 00:34:03
Originally by: Julie Thorne
I could have compared every Minmatar and Amarr setup with every ammo type at every range but why should I have done that?
The 10 second reload every race apart from amarr get is one very good and large reason. And the fact that with faction MF lasers get a base of 12km of high dng (before skills).
|
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 00:38:00 -
[250]
Originally by: Murina
Edited by: Murina on 09/01/2009 00:34:03
Originally by: Julie Thorne
I could have compared every Minmatar and Amarr setup with every ammo type at every range but why should I have done that?
The 10 second reload every race apart from amarr get is one very good and large reason. And the fact that with faction MF lasers get a base of 12km of high dng (before skills).
No it's not. Why do you always try to make logical connections where none exists? This is often seen when people are trying to convince someone of something eventhough they have no arguments what so ever or are trying to spread doubt on the oppositions arguments when there is none to begin with.
|
Murina
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 00:41:00 -
[251]
Edited by: Murina on 09/01/2009 00:44:15
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Julie Thorne
I could have compared every Minmatar and Amarr setup with every ammo type at every range but why should I have done that?
The 10 second reload every race apart from amarr get is one very good and large reason. And the fact that with faction MF lasers get a base of 12km of high dmg (before skills).
No it's not. Why do you always try to make logical connections where none exists? This is often seen when people are trying to convince someone of something eventhough they have no arguments what so ever or are trying to spread doubt on the oppositions arguments when there is none to begin with.
Actually its a huge reason unless you are gonna try and convince ppl that they will always be fighting stationary targets that neither approach or burn off?.
Quoting stand alone stats that do not apply to realistic scenarios is misleading.
|
Ambrosious Martin
Dominus Imperium
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 01:41:00 -
[252]
Holy ****!!!!! 9 stupid pages of fail!
Im in aggreance that Arts need ALOT of love. AC's would benefit from the EMP ammo both standard and faction being UN-NERFED.
And I think that the tracking rads on large AC's need to be fixed since Minni are supposed to fight at range and speed. Its just what we do.
But the argument goes alot deeper than just the weapons, it goes all the way down to the ship slot layout, boni on the ships, sheild and armor values, split weapons with crap boni for those split weapons.
Other than that, if my Ac's were just like blasters, than I would hate minni. |
Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 01:54:00 -
[253]
Originally by: Julie Thorne
I have never ever written that Amarr pilots use Scorch at let's say 10 km... I compared 2 ships with long range ammo. To make point. I guess I did that. I could have compared every Minmatar and Amarr ship with every ammo type at every range - but why would I have done that? Why should I do all the work when Mr and Ms Whiner didn't dig deeper than base EHP, range and EFT DPS? I'm not saying that you're wrong about everything (Gallente and Minmatar lack competitive fleet BSs) but I'm pretty sure you miss major chunks of the picture - and thanks to that your efforts to convince CCP to buff projectiles are meaningless.
There are 8 pages of discussion about a lot of aspects of the picture in this thread. If you decided not to read them before posting it, it was your choice, so, please, don't complain about the lack of discussion of other aspects.
Now about the ammo type, it does not make sense to compare anything but the best ammo for each range. There is no sense in comparing scorch to barrage at less than 20 km, because no one will use scorch within this radius. Bellow this radius multifreq is the best Amarr ammo, and barrage is the best minmatar ammo until around 4 km, where it should be replaced by fusion.
Now to add insult to injury, fusion has less base damage than barrage because T1 minmatar ammunition has low damage. The end result is that you will be bellow multifreq damage, even considering resists, all the way.
If you want to compare scorch to barrage above 20 km, which is Multifreq's optimal + 1/2 falloff sure we can do it:
At 20 km barrage is at half falloff, and it has a damage reduction of 25%. The base damage of a 800mm loaded with barrage is 39.7 dps, so in this case with the 25% reduction it will be 30 dps rounding up.
At the same range scorch is well within its optimum, so it will have its full 44.2 dps.
Supposing both damages are applied in an 2 EANM II + DC II hardened battleship (worst case scenario for lasers), the MP with scorch will inflic, in armor after resits, an average of 11.68 dps, while the 800mm ACs with barrage will inflict 11.65 dps. Still less as you can see. And I am ignoring shield and hull, which are usually about 40% of an armor tanked battleship EHP and are much more vulnerable to scorch damage than armor.
Barrage loses, and this is the best possible situation for the Barrage. Beyond this range scorch gets better and better as Barrage loses its damage. Bellow this range Amarr will use multifreq and the difference will be much bigger.
=====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 01:59:00 -
[254]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 09/01/2009 02:01:16
Originally by: Ambrosious Martin
Holy ****!!!!! 9 stupid pages of fail!
Im in aggreance that Arts need ALOT of love. AC's would benefit from the EMP ammo both standard and faction being UN-NERFED.
And I think that the tracking rads on large AC's need to be fixed since Minni are supposed to fight at range and speed. Its just what we do.
But the argument goes alot deeper than just the weapons, it goes all the way down to the ship slot layout, boni on the ships, sheild and armor values, split weapons with crap boni for those split weapons.
Other than that, if my Ac's were just like blasters, than I would hate minni.
Obviouslly it goes much deeper than only AC. It has to do with the fact that minnie weapon systems are meant to be used by ships able to control range. It has to do with battleship's low speeds, which negate the normal minmatar strategies. It has to do with successive speed nerfs that aggravated the problem.
But at the end one of the most blatant problems is the fact that Mega Pulses outdamage ACs at any range and amarr battleships outtank minmatar battleships in most cases, with the exception of an active tanked maelstrom in very small gangs.
Low damage and low tank can be compensate on smaller ship classes by speed and alpha. In the case of Battleships they simply can't. And the problem escalates even more when you reach capitals. Minnie capitals are a joke.
=====
"If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron... |
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 02:34:00 -
[255]
Edited by: Shira Rayborn on 09/01/2009 02:34:37
Originally by: Murina
Quoting stand alone stats that do not apply to realistic scenarios is misleading.
Intresting that you say this of all people. You are the one that never looks at the big picture when discussing balancing. Ignoring cap use, fitting and mid slot gimpage on laser users in other threads and blindly looking at DeePeeEss charts and whining about rainge. |
Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 03:48:00 -
[256]
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
Intresting that you say this of all people. You are the one that never looks at the big picture when discussing balancing. Ignoring cap use, fitting and mid slot gimpage on laser users in other threads and blindly looking at DeePeeEss charts and whining about rainge.
Although it is not directed to me, I will answer to this.
Cap use: Amarr ships have naturally more cap, thus negating the "no cap" bonus from minmatar ships. If minmatar ships want to run an active tank they will have the same problems than amarr ship do.
Mid slot gimpage: It is bought at the cost of low slot ubberness. The Armageddon has 8 lows, for gods sake!
Fitting: Amarr ships have no more fitting problems than other races. That is a myth, perpetuated by repetition. |
Bashiri
Burning Sky Labs
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 04:30:00 -
[257]
OMG all i see is 2 guys on 6 pages of crap.
Please play the game .
BTW Art need some work AC are fine and stop eft whoring it's not cute. |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 05:33:00 -
[258]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
The Maelstrom has the advantage in the instant 0.
In the instant 5.26 The Megathron catchs up
In the instant 10.38 the maelstrom is ahead again
In the instant 15.78 the Mega is ahead again
Basically they keep switching positions each 5 seconds, with the advantage of the maelstrom diminushing until at 127 seconds it can't catch up anymore. during these 127 seconds each battleship has around 60 seconds of damage advantage. This is not really an advantage for either of them.
:roll: "they keep switching" as in. The megathron has a near zero advantage during those periods.
Originally by: Julie Thorne
Originally by: Goumindong
For instance if we take the 351 damage mega and compare to the 338 damage Mael
Oh come on, don't compare the Mael to the Mega (one of the weakest fleet BSs in the game - just think about how bad it must be if a Minmatar BS with terrible Artilleries is able to beat it :)). Compare it to the Apoc and let's see if it's worth undocking or not,
The efficient Megas and Apocs have 312 DPS. Their advantage does not lie there. So comparing DPS advantage of volley would be a bit foolish. |
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 05:44:00 -
[259]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
The common 2 EANM 2 + DC 2 setup, which is the worst case scenario for battleships, produces a difference of 16% in the EHP of a battleship against multifreq in comparison to Barrage. If you considering both battleships with most likely have thermal drones this diference goes to something around 5-10% (depending on the number of drones).
No, it really doesn't. Plus "lol falloff" on the MF at 29km.
Against a MEGATHRON the advantage is 19% from damage type(or about 16% going the other way). Against an Abaddon its 22%(or 18.1% the other way). Against a Phoon its 34.9%(or about 26% the other way) |
sandamar
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 06:07:00 -
[260]
G'day all,
Man this topic was funny. At first I thought that there might be some good input for projectile changes, then I saw that everything waas about saying laser is OP and need a nerf.
I won't bother trying to argue technical facts.
Someone said that the main problem was that the game mechanics makes the fight happen in mid range more often and thus it is more difficult for blasterboat to get in range. I would say yes, that's what is happening.
And so what? The game mechs made the fight happen in web range for years now, you blaster guy were always getting to the good range, destroying any ship almost.
What we did as amarr pilot? well we just had to accept that and accept the fact that our mid range weapon were pointless because they were no way to keep someone at that range mind you? Tell me what allow amarr ship to keep an enemy at 30km? But I can tell you a good way to keep someone below 10km.
Man I don't even understand how people can complain about that, you're supposed to have gun that are only effective in close range but you did have the tools to do so, what tool had the amarr ship to keep people at mid range? NOTHING. They just had to suck it up and unevitably be in the web range, because amarr ship are not very known for their agility mind you?
Give laser a break for christsake. You no longer have your wtfpwn gun working on every combat so what? Live with it matey.
For once in a long time laser are good ( maybe OP i won't argue about that) give us a break. You guys should have definately tried to use laser those last year and you have notice how unfair the game was for us.
So CCP gave us some boost over time:
-Lower EM resist on armor
-Better tracking for pulse
-Lately grouping system that finally allows amarr to do effectively what everybody has always been saying to justify amarr's weakness let me say : insta changing crystal and so optimal. Because before switching 7-8 crystal on a laser boat was such a PITA that I didn't bother doing it, with the buggy system : each gun eating the crystal of the other one so in the end if you were to do it too fast you would end up with only one gun loaded.
So after those boost we now have good ship, and it's been about time that we do so.
Oh and sorry but the cap consumming gun is an issue mind you? Try firing MP II with 3HSII on a gedon or badon and you'll see how the cap goes, and I have all cap skills to 5 just not energy management. Try to fit a mwd and you can't even fire your guns forever you have to use a cap injector just to fire. Give a try minnie pilot. Not to mention firing with tachy.
So I am sorry but even with a cap injector if you have a mwd and get neut you're soon going to run out of cap, able to do nothing.
I myself am trained for caldari, gallente and amarr. And I have been seing the nerfbats quite sometime now so why not another one? So I'll leave you guys arguing about how much laser is OP and should be nerfed, I'm getting used to it. And you know what I don't even care. Because when I play with my corp&alliance they won't tell me " hey your ship suck" I just have fun with them, and I don't give a dam if the ship against me does 100-200 dps more than me or can hit better.
I play in gang and I think most of you don't because in a gang it doesn't really matter if your ship is not as efficient as the other one. Because unlike what people try to say, there is no race that is utterly weak against the other, some are better, but in the end when in gang it doesn't matter much.
But it seems some people forget that and only look at EFT or 1vs1 fight on test server which I don't give a f***.
|
Murina
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:45:00 -
[261]
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
Intresting that you say this of all people. You are the one that never looks at the big picture when discussing balancing. Ignoring cap use, fitting and mid slot gimpage on laser users in other threads and blindly looking at DeePeeEss charts and whining about rainge.
Cap can be sorted with a single module.
The slot layout and fitting ability on amarr ships is fine as well stop pretending its not.
|
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:52:00 -
[262]
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
Intresting that you say this of all people. You are the one that never looks at the big picture when discussing balancing. Ignoring cap use, fitting and mid slot gimpage on laser users in other threads and blindly looking at DeePeeEss charts and whining about rainge.
Cap can be sorted with a single module.
The slot layout and fitting ability on amarr ships is fine as well stop pretending its not.
8/4/7 geddon >>>>>> 8/3/8 geddon
8/2/3 coercer >>>>> 8/1/4 coercer
4/2/4 retri >>>>>> 5/1/4 retri
4/3/3 crusader >>>> 4/2/4 crusader
6/4/7 abso >>>>>> 7/3/7 abso
5/4/6 zealot >>>>> 5/3/7 zealot
You just have no clue about this game have you?
And how does one single module solve the problem of getting neuted`? You know minmatar guns are neut proof no matter how hard you neut. and YES it is important. |
Murina
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 11:59:00 -
[263]
Originally by: sandamar
Tell me what allow amarr ships to keep an enemy at 30km? But I can tell you a good way to keep someone below 10km.
No need as amarr hit virtually as hard as blasters under 10km unless the target ship has high and perfect transversal as well as being at a perfect range (that has a 2km or so window tiny window.
Originally by: sandamar
Oh and sorry but the cap consumming gun is an issue mind you? Try firing MP II with 3HSII on a gedon or badon and you'll see how the cap goes, and I have all cap skills to 5 just not energy management. Try to fit a mwd and you can't even fire your guns forever you have to use a cap injector just to fire.
Blaster ships need a injector to run guns + mwd as well pal.
Originally by: sandamar
I play in gang and I think most of you don't because in a gang it doesn't really matter if your ship is not as efficient as the other one.
Virtually all pvp involving BS is gang pvp pal that is why any non-existent problems you think amarr may have with cap, fittings or slot lay out are irrelevant. The fact that they virtually match in close and also out range and out damage all other systems as well is why they are OP.
Originally by: sandamar
But it seems some people forget that and only look at EFT or 1vs1 fight on test server which I don't give a f***.
Exactly and they are the ones trying and failing to defend amarr. |
Murina
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:01:00 -
[264]
Edited by: Murina on 09/01/2009 12:02:45
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
Intresting that you say this of all people. You are the one that never looks at the big picture when discussing balancing. Ignoring cap use, fitting and mid slot gimpage on laser users in other threads and blindly looking at DeePeeEss charts and whining about rainge.
Cap can be sorted with a single module.
The slot layout and fitting ability on amarr ships is fine as well stop pretending its not.
8/4/7 geddon >>>>>> 8/3/8 geddon
8/2/3 coercer >>>>> 8/1/4 coercer
4/2/4 retri >>>>>> 5/1/4 retri
4/3/3 crusader >>>> 4/2/4 crusader
6/4/7 abso >>>>>> 7/3/7 abso
5/4/6 zealot >>>>> 5/3/7 zealot
You just have no clue about this game have you?
And how does one single module solve the problem of getting neuted`? You know minmatar guns are neut proof no matter how hard you neut. and YES it is important.
You have no clue about this thread do you?.
/points out that we are talking about BS pulse...
Oh and a cap injector sorts out the issue of nuets and blaster BS have the same issue btw. |
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:01:00 -
[265]
Originally by: Murina
No need as amarr hit virtually as hard as blasters under 10km unless the target ship has high and perfect transversal as well as being at a perfect range (that has a 2km or so window tiny window.
Nope, you're just making it up. A blatant lie. |
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:02:00 -
[266]
Edited by: Shira Rayborn on 09/01/2009 12:02:50
Originally by: Murina
You have no clue about this thread do you?.
/points out that we are talking about BS pulse...
You do know that the geddon is a BS, right? Besides you said amarr SHIPS and not amarr BS above. |
Murina
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:06:00 -
[267]
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
Originally by: Murina
No need as amarr hit virtually as hard as blasters under 10km unless the target ship has high and perfect transversal as well as being at a perfect range (that has a 2km or so window tiny window.
Nope, you're just making it up. A blatant lie.
Actually its a accurate statement but your welcome to try and prove me wrong, id look back a bit as even gourmindongs graphs showed pulse out damaging blasters just under 10km even WITH perfect (imposable) transversal. |
Murina
Gallente
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:09:00 -
[268]
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
Originally by: Murina
You have no clue about this thread do you?.
/points out that we are talking about BS pulse...
You do know that the geddon is a BS, right?
I know it what about it?, i think its a fine ship when used correctly considering the massive and OP range/dmg ratio pulse get.
|
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:18:00 -
[269]
Originally by: Murina
Actually its a accurate statement but your welcome to try and prove me wrong, id look back a bit as even gourmindongs graphs showed pulse out damaging blasters just under 10km even WITH perfect (imposable) transversal.
Nope, you just can't read. YOU should show the graphs because it is YOU that is whining and wants to change something.
|
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2009.01.09 12:19:00 -
[270]
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
Originally by: Murina
You have no clue about this thread do you?.
/points out that we are talking about BS pulse...
You do know that the geddon is a BS, right?
I know it what about it?, i think its a fine ship when used correctly considering the massive and OP range/dmg ratio pulse get.
You claimed mid slot gimp of amarr doesnt exist. I showed you a bunch of amarr ships that are ALOT better with one high or low moved to a mid. You are making things up again and are playing dumb now because you know you were wrong earlier. Ever get tired of being wrong all the time?
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |