EVE Search - Tachyon equivelants for the other races...

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Tachyon equivelants for the other races...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.07 14:52:00 - [1] If you're going to compare ships, at least compare the right ships and give a reasonable explanation of what is happening. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=937520&page=20#585
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.07 14:55:00 - [2] Hitting well at 50km doesn't make much difference if your enemy is 5km from you. Yes, pulse lasers are better for large gangs. Just as they are bad when you're moving and likely to land <12km from someone.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.07 15:03:00 - [3] Originally by: Murina They're fine under 12km /posts a graph that shows blasters doing 50% more gun DPS under 10km before resistances before drones /Leans back
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:14:00 - [4] Originally by: Murina I can see how you would think that cos of the spikes of dmg but follow the math Faction AM vs faction MF first ok?. IL use our pimped fits.. Faction AM hit for 1500 for 4.5km, 1500 x 4.5km = 6750 dmg Faction MF hit for 1200 for 15km, 1200 x 15km = 17880 dmg Null hits for 1256 for 11km, 1256 x 11km = 13816 dmg Scorch hits for 959 for 45km, 959 x 11km = 43155 dmg Now Blasters may have the spike of dmg greater than lasers at 4.5km, but that is it while lasers do very high amounts of dmg in close but also vast amounts of dmg out to 45km all in optimal. And dmg spikes within a tiny optimal is not worth squat when your facing such overwhelming optimal firepower. Is this a joke? O.K. for a second. Follow the math 10 x 10 = 100 +55 = 155 Therefore blasters are overpowered... My math is just as relevant to the question of which weapon is better as your math. Which is to say, not at all.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 00:21:00 - [5] Edited by: Goumindong on 08/02/2009 00:21:46 Originally by: Murina Originally by: Goumindong troll Go away fool we dont need another troll, jumping in half way through a conversation. Yes, you are plenty for the entire forum. Would you care explaining how ignoring tracking, and time is acceptable to the issue? Oh, and... Megathron w/ railguns /w Aurora 300 dmg x 191km = 57,000 OMG its overpowered compared to both! Nerf Mega's with rails! No, the answer is that "your math" is stupid, incomplete and contextless. It means nothing.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 06:03:00 - [6] Originally by: Murina And Beams with aurora 205 x 325 = 62525 and i didn't even try hard to boost the dmg..... NULL = OPTIMAL 11 FALLOFF 16, Tracking on a nuetron hyperion 0.04059 MF = OPTIMAL 15 FALLOFF 10, Tracking on mega pulse baddon 0.04219 You still don't understand the complaint do you?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.08 22:57:00 - [7] Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 08/02/2009 10:22:26 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Murina And Beams with aurora 205 x 325 = 62525 and i didn't even try hard to boost the dmg..... NULL = OPTIMAL 11 FALLOFF 16, Tracking on a nuetron hyperion 0.04059 MF = OPTIMAL 15 FALLOFF 10, Tracking on mega pulse baddon 0.04219 You still don't understand the complaint do you? Well it seems to me that you want ppl to match ammo by tracking penalty instead of the comparative range they give their systems... No, i want you to make analysis that mean something. Range means nothing if you do not figure how long the target stays at each point. Once you have how long the target stays at each point then you can start comparing how much damage each does.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:24:00 - [8] Originally by: Murina Im pretty sure the ship will be in the optimal of MF (0-15km) longer than in the optimal of null(0-11km). Simple math really. Also you need to take into account how much dmg the ship takes while getting into the optimal high dmg ranges, saying hey look i burned into blaster antimatter range of you and i am gonna hit you for a uber 1300+dps is worthless if you have 20,000 ehp left cos of the pounding you took to get their and he has 90.000 and is still hitting you for a 1000dps. Again, the question is not "does one stay in that range longer?". The question is "how much damage is accumulated as you move through that range after tracking, damage types, and time is accounted for?" If you answer the first question, then you get the answer that range is always better. And its not. If you answer the second question then you might find which is better for whatever situation. For instance, if you had an enemy that started at 15km, had 100k hit points and traveled to 5km in 15 seconds then stayed there. All at 0 transversal then assuming an average of 1/2 damage from the blasters at 1500 DPS and 100% damage from the lasers at 1200 DPS, in that 15 seconds the blasters rack up 11250 damage and the lasers 18000. So the lasers have 82k left and the blasters 88750 left. So the blasters then kill the target in 59.16 seconds after closing and the lasers kill the target in 68 seconds after closing. Of course we're making some pretty big assumptions here. 1. We're assuming a low EHP value for a battleship. This advantages the lasers since more of the damage as a percentage is chipped away in closing. 2. We're assuming no missed ships via transversal, which will advantage the ship with higher tracking(The blaster ship) 3. We're assuming that all damage types are equal, and they aren't. 4. We're assuming our DPS numbers are correct 5. We're assuming you move about 10km in 15 seconds 6. We're assuming blaster ships hit for 1/2 damage(not true because of drones) at 10km and 0 damage (not true because of drones) at 15km. Now, my analysis is not perfect because of the above assumptions and because I am not figuring distance as an integral of the acceleration formula, nor am i figuring tracking as a multiplier to dps based on range and transversal assuming parties attempt an optimal playstyle. But its a lot better than your analysis
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 00:40:00 - [9] Originally by: Murina Wrong it will effect blasters more as they will be in falloff initially while lasers are in perma optimal. No, i accounted for that. Quote: Most ehp tanks have their dmg holes plugged so that its not significant. No, they don't and if they do, they're dumb. We've been over this before. Specifically hardening is only beneficial when you know what you're going to be getting into. It takes too many slots and gives too little benefit. Quote: Situations dictate that dmg is imposable to quantify due to the infinite variety of situations. :roll: Quote: Highly doubtful when you consider the laser ship will be burning away and the effect of overheated webs. Highly doubtful when you consider the blaster ship is faster, more agile, has more webs, has more ability to run an MWD, has the initiative of overloading and can just warp away if the laser ship does get away. Quote: A fact that applies to both ships to a extend dependent on type due to drone bays. not from a 15km starting point.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 01:37:00 - [10] Originally by: Murina Your right ppl do not fit race specific tanks they fit onmi tanks with plates and omni tanks plug all holes as equally as possible, so the difference in damages is negligible.. No, its not. Omni tanks and plates do not "plug all holes as equally as possible". They provide the same multiplier on base armor EHP. That is a large difference. Quote: The biggest assumption of all is the assumption that ships and especially gank/tank fitted battle ships should be balanced on how they fight against each other in a 1 v 1 situation. No such assumption was made by anyone but you.

Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:09:00 - [11] Edited by: Goumindong on 09/02/2009 13:10:40 Originally by: Murina No plated setups use dhc's and eanm and thats what plugs the holes down to at best ex weakest vs em strongest a 10% differance max. I am unsure if you know this, but the difference between 60% resist and 70% resist is not 10%. The difference between an armor EM resist and EX resist after all your hardening and plating is done is about 44% on a non-amarr, non-minmatar ship(less for the Amarr, more for the minnies) Quote: Your "assumption" list just happened to be about a 1 v 1 engagement pal. Not really, no.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:22:00 - [12] Edited by: Goumindong on 09/02/2009 13:22:12 No, they weren't. You have a reason to believe they were 1v1 based? Also, i have 744 kills confirmed(not counting all but 4 scored before GS(around 120 or so iirc, but that info is lost, and hilariously counting 2 from LV). Does that make be a better pvper than you? Does that mean i am more right than you? A: No, it doesn't. Please stop arguing about it.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:35:00 - [13] Originally by: Murina For starters you cannot approach lots of ship all at the same time unless they are sitting still in a stupid bunch. That problematic transversal you mention is only a issue for the ship you are orbiting and not even that much in a BS vs BS fight (your comparison not mine). Depends on how many ships you're with. The problematic transversal is not only an issue if the ship is orbiting you. Quote: Call me when you get to around 2-3 thousand, oh and that includes me being absent for a year or so setting up a business and moving house it only covers back to 06/07 not back to 03 when i started. You're deliberately missing the point again. Also, who is your main?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:49:00 - [14] Originally by: Murina No it does'nt, at lest not if blaster ships wanna get into optimal, they all need to burn towards the same target while the targets buddies can all burn away hitting for optimal dmg. And if they wanna hit the secondary they need to chase that down and it will be at max velocity by then... while still getting hit for optimal dmg... Only if your pilots are psychic. Quote: Im not missing the point he is and you are, preaching about having a +5% fitted clone in a kronos on sissi and fighting a 4-5 ship gang is not valid pvp experience and certainly not summat to base balancing systems or races on TQ. The guy is a fool playing on sissi with unrealistic fits in unrealistic scenarios and a safety net of 100isk per item LOL. I am preaching no such thing. I am arguing that "kills" means nothing. Only logic. Again, who is your main?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 13:58:00 - [15] Originally by: Murina Originally by: Goumindong Again, who is your main? Not telling, find out for yourself. So your argument is "I have more kills than you and that makes me more right than you but i wont tell you under what character i have more kills"? Riiiiiight. You're making an argument to authority without even any authority.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:08:00 - [16] Originally by: Murina Quote: So your argument is "I have more kills than you and that makes me more right than you but i wont tell you under what character i have more kills"? NO Well then why do you go on harping about kills and not posting with your main? There are a few reasons to withhold your main. 1. You don't have a main other than Murina 2. You're trolling and don't want repercussions falling on your main 3. Your main does not live up to the web you have created There is no reason to withhold your main if you're being honest. And you certainly are arguing that your prodigious kill count warrants you to be considered an authority. (if you were not, you would not be arguing with kill counts with Nightmare, you would instead be arguing that his kills are irrelevant, which you are not doing). So, which of the three is it?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:11:00 - [17] Originally by: Murina 1 v 1 BS probabilities that have no place on TQ anymore. 1. This is not true 2. No one is arguing the ships should be balanced around 1v1. Quote: And nightmares ideas that all revolve around fantastical ships with fantastically impractical fits for anything but 1 v 1, in enclosed areas with structured rules. Do they? What are his fits? Arguing that sisi performs differently than TQ is one thing. Arguing that he is wrong because of it is another. Granted, he is pretty terrible. But he might not be as terrible as you, that is up in the air. Quote: And who my main is and the thousands of kills he has in gang combat in TQ ECT eve does not effect either of those points. Indeed it does not, so why do you keep bringing it up?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:19:00 - [18] Originally by: Murina TOLD YA IT WAS ALREADY ON HERE.... You'll excuse me for not reading all of the tripe that has been spewed in this thread. Also, confirm it.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.09 14:29:00 - [19] Originally by: Murina How a BS performs in a 1 v 1 fight with another BS is not a important factor on TQ and certainly not a basis for balancing them for use on TQ. It is a factor, but no one is arguing it should be a prime point. You keep saying people are, but they aren't. Quote: When you start a comment with "everybody else fits +5% implants on sissi so why shouldnt i" and then go on about "my experiences in my pvp kronos vs gangs" its not worth listening after that as reality on TQ is out the window. Well, if everyone is fitting 5% implants and you "even the field" by fitting them then how much different would that be from a no implant situation on TQ? There is a difference, but its not going to be seen with implants. Its like saying using all 5's is bad comparison, when it is a rather decent comparison since it makes everything equal.

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.