Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 40 .. 45 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:10:00 -
[481]
Edited by: NightmareX on 21/02/2009 21:15:46
Originally by: Murina The mini gang would lose unless the amarr gang were morons or told to deliberately lose........
Ok then, wanna bet on it?.
100 mill TQ isk.
The fight will be on sisi when sisi is up and running with a stable build.
Atm sisi is to unstable and the Database is not working good.
And lets hope i can manage to put together 2 gangs with 10 peoples on each gangs though. I will just do it to prove it once for all that someone in this topic is horribly wrong.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:13:00 -
[482]
Originally by: Tankanaka You are constantly implying that Amarr do insane dmg from 0-45km.
I have never claimed lasers do insane dmg, you are exaggerating my facts to try and discredit them because you disagree with them.
Originally by: Tankanaka Train Amarr if you want to do mid range combat.
19ish days to amarr BS lvl5....
PS: ppl pestered me to post with my main or give his name so do the same or go away.
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:15:00 -
[483]
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Murina The mini gang would lose unless the amarr gang were morons or told to deliberately lose........
Ok then, wanna bet on it?.
100 mill TQ isk.
The fight will be on sisi when sisi is up and running with a stable build.
Atm sisi is to unstable and the Database is not working good.
And lets hope i can manage to put together 2 gangs with 10 peoples on each gangs though.
Sure.
Although the gangs will be fully inspected for relative SP, XP and ringers or those who may deliberately lose....
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:19:00 -
[484]
Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 21/02/2009 21:20:40
Originally by: dalman Why all frigate pilots have just accepted that they get shredded by imbalanced autocannons on vagas/ruptures/stabbers is beyond me.
Imbalanced?
There isnt that much of a difference in a frigate in getting shot at by rupture with barrage or thorax with null btw, they'll die just as quick, not even taking drones into account here.
And stabber? It gets owned by frigates if they know what to do, I can solo a stabber in the jaguar not going into half sheild.
And it would be pretty ridiculous whining about getting shred by a ship that excels at killing frigates like the vagabond, right?
ACs and blasters are perfectly in line with each other, dont forget the damage dealt and the fact that the ships they are mounted on are working quite different.
So if you boost blasters, regardless being it tracking, damage mod or whatever, ACs need a comparable boost for sure.
|
Zubakis
Bambooule
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:36:00 -
[485]
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Murina Wrong lasers are good at all ranges from 0-45km while blasters are only good at 0-10km.
Tell that to the Abaddon who got totally slaughtered by my Tempest because the Lasers does crap DPS at around 1-10 km. It's when we start to orbit Amarr BS'es at those ranges the Amarr BS'es gets in trouble.
The Abaddon never took my armor down to even 85% before the Abaddon died horribly to me. Well it might be because i was out tracking him when i was orbiting him.
It only shows that the Lasers are not good in the 0-10 km distance.
1vs1, lol, reality check, halloo
Even in theoretical 2vs2 situation, you'll be double webbed. And now try to orbit And if you web back, relative speeds will be between 10-30m/s. And now the amarr pilot just start to match your flight direction to reduce transversal even more. And see now no problem to track you.
Stop posting your 1vs1 comparisons, they are useless.
-- Zuba |
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:45:00 -
[486]
Originally by: Zubakis
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Murina Wrong lasers are good at all ranges from 0-45km while blasters are only good at 0-10km.
Tell that to the Abaddon who got totally slaughtered by my Tempest because the Lasers does crap DPS at around 1-10 km. It's when we start to orbit Amarr BS'es at those ranges the Amarr BS'es gets in trouble.
The Abaddon never took my armor down to even 85% before the Abaddon died horribly to me. Well it might be because i was out tracking him when i was orbiting him.
It only shows that the Lasers are not good in the 0-10 km distance.
1vs1, lol, reality check, halloo
Even in theoretical 2vs2 situation, you'll be double webbed. And now try to orbit And if you web back, relative speeds will be between 10-30m/s. And now the amarr pilot just start to match your flight direction to reduce transversal even more. And see now no problem to track you.
Stop posting your 1vs1 comparisons, they are useless.
Like i said on the earlier page.
Just wait until i have managed to set together a 10x Tempest or Megathron gang vs 10x Any Amarr BS'es gang on sisi.
You will think the Amarr BS'es will kill us, but no, i wont tell more.
Every ships will be using t2 modules and normal EANM's, 1600mm Plates, DC II and Damage Mods setups like we normally would do on TQ.
Check out my new flash web page: Dark Paradise |
dalman
Vale Tudo. Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:46:00 -
[487]
Originally by: Lilith Velkor Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 21/02/2009 21:20:40
Originally by: dalman Why all frigate pilots have just accepted that they get shredded by imbalanced autocannons on vagas/ruptures/stabbers is beyond me.
Imbalanced?
There isnt that much of a difference in a frigate in getting shot at by rupture with barrage or thorax with null btw, they'll die just as quick, not even taking drones into account here.
And stabber? It gets owned by frigates if they know what to do, I can solo a stabber in the jaguar not going into half sheild.
And it would be pretty ridiculous whining about getting shred by a ship that excels at killing frigates like the vagabond, right?
ACs and blasters are perfectly in line with each other, dont forget the damage dealt and the fact that the ships they are mounted on are working quite different.
So if you boost blasters, regardless being it tracking, damage mod or whatever, ACs need a comparable boost for sure.
dual 180mm with barrage (no ship bonus): optimal + falloff = 17,400 tracking = 1.2375 tracking * range = tracks a target going 2,153 m/s transversal
heavy electron with null (no ship bonus): optimal + falloff = 8,437.5 tracking = 0.1125 tracking * range = tracks a target going 949 m/s transversal
Factoring in shooting at frigs (roughly 40 radius / 125 resolution), that means: the AC track a frig going with 689 m/s transversal the blaster track a frig going with 304 m/s transversal
Yea, no difference at all
The only reason the vagabond excels at killing frigates is because the low-end autocannons are so out of balance in tracking.
(though the case is such that the low-end blasters should be given a small boost to tracking and the low-end autocannons should get a small nerf to tracking, rather than a bigger change to just one of them) Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me |
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:47:00 -
[488]
Originally by: Zubakis
Stop posting your 1vs1 comparisons, they are useless.
While I agree 1vs1 stats should not necessarily be a benchmark for a ships worth, they arent worthless at all, quite the contrary they are much needed to get a full picture.
If you just look at gang stats you increase gang size and end up with a pure dps/range ratio to determine a ships worth.
So to get a complete picture, you have to look at all of them, 1on1, small gangs, medium gangs, large fleets. If you dont you are just deliberately mudding down the waters.
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:50:00 -
[489]
Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 21/02/2009 21:50:54
Originally by: dalman
The only reason the vagabond excels at killing frigates is because the low-end autocannons are so out of balance in tracking.
Completely wrong, the only reason the vagabond excels at killing frigates is that tracking is irrelevant at 20km when you can negate 3/4 of the frigs transversal by mobing top speed.
180s on the vaga dont track a frigate below 8km at all.
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:51:00 -
[490]
Originally by: Lilith Velkor
Originally by: Zubakis
Stop posting your 1vs1 comparisons, they are useless.
While I agree 1vs1 stats should not necessarily be a benchmark for a ships worth, they arent worthless at all, quite the contrary they are much needed to get a full picture.
It was interesting to note that in the 1 v 1 BS scenario the pulse were still doing dmg inside 10km (the optimal range ppl relegated blasters to be "roled" into) while in the 30-45km pulse "roled" range blasters just happen to do 0 dmg...........
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:52:00 -
[491]
Originally by: Lilith Velkor
Originally by: dalman
The only reason the vagabond excels at killing frigates is because the low-end autocannons are so out of balance in tracking.
Completely wrong, the only reason the vagabond excels at killing frigates is that tracking is irrelevant at 20km when you can negate 3/4 of the frigs transversal by mobing top speed.
180s on the vaga dont track a frigate below 8km at all.
The zealot is a rather nice frig killer as well......
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:54:00 -
[492]
Originally by: Murina
It was interesting to note that in the 1 v 1 BS scenario the pulse were still doing dmg inside 10km (the optimal range ppl relegated blasters to be "roled" into) while in the 30-45km pulse "roled" range blasters just happen to do 0 dmg...........
Yea well, compare large ACs with pulses and you are even worse off than blasters imo, but thats my opinion.
Pulses are superior to ACs at all ranges basically, ACs might reach out far with barrage but the dps is laughable at best.
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:55:00 -
[493]
Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 21/02/2009 21:56:32
Originally by: Murina
The zealot is a rather nice frig killer as well......
Well with the zealot it makes sense to pimp up tracking to a point where you shred frigates at all ranges even, its the better frigate killer than the vaga.
Besides its damage output is not rubbish, take into account that a vaga does about 50-60% of its onpaper dps at the range it can really track frigs well, not so for the zealot.
|
dalman
Vale Tudo. Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 21:59:00 -
[494]
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: Lilith Velkor
Originally by: dalman
The only reason the vagabond excels at killing frigates is because the low-end autocannons are so out of balance in tracking.
Completely wrong, the only reason the vagabond excels at killing frigates is that tracking is irrelevant at 20km when you can negate 3/4 of the frigs transversal by mobing top speed.
180s on the vaga dont track a frigate below 8km at all.
The zealot is a rather nice frig killer as well......
Yes... ...which is because, as mentioned a hundred times already in the thread, lasers are overpowered in the tracking*range stat and one of them should be nerfed a bit. Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me |
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:03:00 -
[495]
Originally by: dalman
Yes... ...which is because, as mentioned a hundred times already in the thread, lasers are overpowered in the tracking*range stat and one of them should be nerfed a bit.
If you ask me, they are just overpowered in the damage department, I can see why pulse lasers should track best (tracking at max range, which is kind of a one-sided stat btw) followed by autocannons and then heavy blasters.
What I cant see however is why a pimped flashlight should do more damage than a projectile with nuclear warhead or a chunk of pure antimatter though...
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:06:00 -
[496]
Originally by: Lilith Velkor
If you ask me, they are just overpowered in the damage department, I can see why pulse lasers should track best (tracking at max range, which is kind of a one-sided stat btw) followed by autocannons and then heavy blasters.
The longer the range the less tracking is needed to hit.
Originally by: Lilith Velkor What I cant see however is why a pimped flashlight should do more damage than a projectile with nuclear warhead or a chunk of pure antimatter though...
RL comparisons = meh.
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:17:00 -
[497]
Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 21/02/2009 22:27:51
Originally by: Murina
Exactly, the longer the range the less tracking is needed to hit, that is why blasters need a major boost to tracking with the web nerf ect.
I'd rather like to see them getting a considerable damage boost if any tbh, as tracking boost (especially a 'major' one) will open a whole new can of worms. The web nerf was much needed thing for small ships against bigger ones, and kinda reverting that with a tracking boost to guns (in general, not only blasters) wouldnt be a good idea.
Giving them their teeth back against their respective class by upping dps looks more sensible to me, besides tracking can then be achieved by fitting while keeping 'old' dps.
Quote: RL comparisons = meh.
I know there is railguns, but did they invent blasters by now in RL?
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:38:00 -
[498]
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 21/02/2009 20:29:53
Originally by: Goumindong Thorax, Myrmidon, Hyperion, Taranis...
Ignoring that this thread is about BS.....
The Hyperion and thorax suck in gang combat due to their crappy range and the myrm is good with a passive shield tank projectile guns and drones.......
I thought you wanted to know which ships were "kings of the short range". You got your answer, those ships are the kings of the short range in their respective classes.
If you wanted to know about gang ships, you should have asked about gang ships.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:41:00 -
[499]
Originally by: dalman
Yes... ...which is because, as mentioned a hundred times already in the thread, lasers are overpowered in the tracking*range stat and one of them should be nerfed a bit.
Tracking * Range is a stat that means nothing.
What only matters is tracking @ range. I.E. Tracking @ the range where you are right now.
And tracking @ the range you are right now always gives advantages to blasters and autocannons if there is any advantage to be had.
|
dalman
Vale Tudo. Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:47:00 -
[500]
Edited by: dalman on 21/02/2009 22:54:49
Originally by: Lilith Velkor (tracking at max range, which is kind of a one-sided stat btw)
Of course it is a one-sided stat.
If you read up, you'll see me talking about "intended range". And that is a proper stat to use. To "correctly" balance the turrets, the devs will have to sit down and think about what the intended range should be for each turret. And then adjust tracking on all of them so that tracking * range is roughly the same for all guns.
Since guns have different falloff, we'll of course end up with some balancing issues in this. Like the low-end autocannons. And ofc it's also ok so say that "yes indeed, the dual 425mm shall have an intended range of 2km but come with the huge bonus of being able to hit up to 30km range with - with a greatly overdimensioned tracking at that range letting it rip cruisers". As long as it has to pay for it in other areas. But atm it does not. It has very low fitting reqs, uses no cap and does decent DPS.
So the situation today is that:
- low-end blasters are considerably underpowered. Should have their tracking boosted (keeping them distinctly different from other races with their short range).
- high-end blasters and high-end autocannons are fairly balanced.
- low-end autocannons are considerably overpowered. Need to have either range or tracking or dps nerfed - I suggest tracking.
The only reason ppl aren't moaning so much about this is because of the lenient fitting reqs on 800mm cannons - there's simply so few ppl that use these (and as I said, for some strange reason frigates seems to have accepted the overpowered dual 180s).
- lasers are overpowered. Probably less overpowered than the dual425 vs electrons comparision - but it's a bigger issue since the high-end ones are overpowered. I'd suggest a tracking nerf on the megapulses and an optimal range nerf on the dual heavies.[/*]
Originally by: Goumindong Tracking * Range is a stat that means nothing.
What only matters is tracking @ range. I.E. Tracking @ the range where you are right now.
And tracking @ the range you are right now always gives advantages to blasters and autocannons if there is any advantage to be had.
Yes - just like the amarr/minmatar player gets a big bonus from holding a Gallente electron blaster at say 6-7km, the same gallente electron blaster should have a big bonus from tracking if it gets within say 1km range.
That's the whole point of balancing you know... Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me |
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:53:00 -
[501]
Originally by: dalman
If you read up, you'll see me talking about "intended range". And that is a proper stat to use
No, its not. PvP fights do not happen with each ship at their "intended range". They fight with ships at whatever range they happen to be at.
I could just as well say that railguns are imbalanced because their tracking at range is so much better than everything else. Except that would be ******ed as explained above and as we have gone over many many many times before.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 22:58:00 -
[502]
Originally by: dalman
Yes - just like the amarr/minmatar player gets a big bonus from holding a Gallente electron blaster at say 6-7km, the same gallente electron blaster should have a big bonus from tracking if it gets within say 1km range.
That's the whole point of balancing you know...
They do. Do you even look at the relative advantages? Good lord, at lower ranges, gallente ships tear things apart. They have great damage types, high DPS, just as much tracking as anything else(and relatively large tanks).(though their sig radius might be a bit high).
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 23:02:00 -
[503]
Originally by: dalman
(and as I said, for some strange reason frigates seems to have accepted the overpowered dual 180s).
And as I said, for frigates it makes 0 difference if its a 425mm or a 180mm, it will either track perfect if you are at the proper range or it doesnt track at all.
The reason people choose 180s over 220s are fitting, and nothing else. If you cant track it with 220s, you wont track it with 180s.
Also, with autocannons you get so little dps increase for sizing up it is generally not worth the extra pg compared to blasters.
|
dalman
Vale Tudo. Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 23:14:00 -
[504]
Originally by: Goumindong They have great damage types
Err, so now you're even saying that it's great to do the most resisted damagetypes I'd say that that sums up pretty much all of what you're saying.
Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 23:24:00 -
[505]
Originally by: dalman
Originally by: Goumindong They have great damage types
Err, so now you're even saying that it's great to do the most resisted damagetypes I'd say that that sums up pretty much all of what you're saying.
Dalman old buddy, it's pointless getting into any argument with Goum, he trolls these threads and just plays word games. I'm now under the impression, he's on a massive goon type troll fest through these forums.
He'll have you believe he's the last stand against bad balance decisions, with a hot line direct to the devs.
Regards Mag's |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 23:35:00 -
[506]
Originally by: dalman
Fights happen with one ship pretty much at its "intended" range and one ship pretty much at its "oooops f**k up"-range.
So why is the laser ship always the one at its "intended" range and the blaster ship always the one at its "oooops **** up" range when we're talking about stuff like this?
Quote:
Err, so now you're even saying that it's great to do the most resisted damagetypes I'd say that that sums up pretty much all of what you're saying.
If by "the most resisted" you mean "the least resisted" then yes. Kin and therm are not the most resisted damage types. They might be the most resisted damage types when people tank like idiots(tri-hardening is dumb, provably so, as has been done many times) or maybe people simply know what you're flying and they making smart choices from that colors your perceptions?
|
Cohkka
Celestial Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 23:48:00 -
[507]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: dalman
Fights happen with one ship pretty much at its "intended" range and one ship pretty much at its "oooops f**k up"-range.
So why is the laser ship always the one at its "intended" range and the blaster ship always the one at its "oooops **** up" range when we're talking about stuff like this?
Just maybe it's because a Mega ends up being far away from it's target 90% of the time? Amarrs intended range is everything below 45km and 8km upwards as they outperform every other BS gun on that range. Should we start calculating propabilitys or do a gazillion of possible scenarios? Or is it now obvious enough that there's something wrong?
Don't speak english, just F5, F5, F5... |
dalman
Vale Tudo. Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.02.21 23:52:00 -
[508]
Originally by: Goumindong
So why is the laser ship always the one at its "intended" range and the blaster ship always the one at its "oooops **** up" range when we're talking about stuff like this?
They are? Since you're typing "we" in your anser to me, I assume this "we" is you and me. Then you're hereby challenged to find anything I've said to back up this comment of yours...
Originally by: Goumindong
If by "the most resisted" you mean "the least resisted" then yes. Kin and therm are not the most resisted damage types. They might be the most resisted damage types when people tank like idiots(tri-hardening is dumb, provably so, as has been done many times) or maybe people simply know what you're flying and they making smart choices from that colors your perceptions?
When I make a general statement, which "most resisted damagetypes" clearly is, it's not supposed to be applied on a specific situation but on a total average. And ofc it's stupid to triharden (see, now I made another general statement).
And Mag's, I know :) Am I forced to have any regret? I've become the lie, beautiful and free In my righteous own mind I adore and preach the insanity you gave to me |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 00:00:00 -
[509]
Edited by: Goumindong on 22/02/2009 00:01:21
Originally by: dalman
They are? Since you're typing "we" in your anser to me, I assume this "we" is you and me. Then you're hereby challenged to find anything I've said to back up this comment of yours...
"we" is the general "we" not the specific "we". And yes, this thread (and the others like it) contain many prime examples.
Examples of you doing it(though you won't ever use those exact words) can be seen on this very page.
Quote:
When I make a general statement, which "most resisted damagetypes" clearly is, it's not supposed to be applied on a specific situation but on a total average. And ofc it's stupid to triharden (see, now I made another general statement).
On "total average" the two best damage types are kinetic and thermal. Its only in the specific(some t2 ships, foolishly tanked ships) where other damage types become significantly advantageous. Even after the resist changes, kin/thermal are still the best damage types to do to nearly all sniping battleships(Rokh = EM slant, Abaddon = slight ex slant, though i don't have the numbers off hand.)
I was saying that you were wrong.
|
Lilith Velkor
Minmatar DEATH'S LEGION Red Box.
|
Posted - 2009.02.22 00:03:00 -
[510]
Originally by: Goumindong
So why is the laser ship always the one at its "intended" range and the blaster ship always the one at its "oooops **** up" range when we're talking about stuff like this?
"Intended range" is nonsense anyway, make that "enforcable range" and you might have a point.
What is true however, is that a pulse laser ship in small gang engagements (which occur on gates frequently) will most likely be in optimal range at the very beginning of the engagement, while a blaster ship most likely will have to close in first to inflict his full damage potential.
Coupled with the fact that compared to autocannons they dont lose out on most of their dps when shooting far out, one might think they have quite a generous engagement window, more so since crystals can be easily switched.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 40 .. 45 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |