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 - 2009.02.11 15:23:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: NightmareX troll
Go away.
Oh, you want a hug?.
Check out my new flash web page 'Dark Paradise' |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 15:31:00 -
[92]
Originally by: NightmareX yet more troll
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
|
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 15:36:00 -
[93]
Edited by: NightmareX on 11/02/2009 15:36:27
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: NightmareX yet more troll
Check out my new flash web page 'Dark Paradise' |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 15:42:00 -
[94]
Edited by: Murina on 11/02/2009 15:47:56
Originally by: NightmareX So you the....
The range dmg ratios between races is broken and needs fixing.
Gallente should be the best at 0-10, from 10-20ish they should at least match lasers, from 20-30 they should falloff to 0 and should not hit over 30km, and from 30-45 pulse lasers should be the best.
This would be much more balanced, and you would know that if you were not a sissi/eft warrior.
YAY trolling removed.
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 15:48:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 11/02/2009 15:42:09
Originally by: NightmareX So you the....
The range dmg ratios between races is broken and needs fixing.
YAY trolling removed.
Your own trolling was also removed.
Anyways, why do we have 4 totally different weapon types in EVE?, is it because every of them should have the same stats in everything or is it because they are different in almost everyting?.
If we are going to do like you say, then why not just remove Blasters from the game, and then replace them with Lasers?.
Making 2 different weapon types have the same range and almost the same DPS is no point.
Check out my new flash web page 'Dark Paradise' |
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 15:51:00 -
[96]
Edited by: NightmareX on 11/02/2009 15:52:34
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 11/02/2009 15:47:56
Originally by: NightmareX So you the....
The range dmg ratios between races is broken and needs fixing.
Gallente should be the best at 0-10, from 10-20ish they should at least match lasers, from 20-30 they should falloff to 0 and should not hit over 30km, and from 30-45 pulse lasers should be the best.
This would be much more balanced, and you would know that if you were not a sissi/eft warrior.
YAY trolling removed.
Your own trolling was also removed.
Anyways, why do we have 4 totally different weapon types in EVE?, is it because every of them should have the same stats in everything or is it because they are different in almost everyting?.
If we are going to do like you say, then why not just remove Blasters from the game, and then replace them with Lasers?.
Making 2 different weapon types have the same range and almost the same DPS is no point.
And about the sisi thing you have a must of say everytime. Even a noobie sisi pvper knows that what your saying is wrong in every damn ways.
At least, i TEST out the different things on sisi, also weapons, ships and other modules, so i know how they works. I'm on sisi some few times every week. So i'm always updated on how things work.
Check out my new flash web page 'Dark Paradise' |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 15:52:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Murina on 11/02/2009 15:56:16
Originally by: NightmareX
Anyways, why do we have 4 totally different weapon types in EVE?, is it because every of them should have the same stats in everything or is it because they are different in almost everyting?.
If we are going to do like you say, then why not just remove Blasters from the game, and then replace them with Lasers?.
Making 2 different weapon types have the same range and almost the same DPS is no point.
You need to either learn how to read or how to comprehend, but then considering what you snip it seems you prefer to misrepresent and troll....
Lasers got a boost so they could hit well at 0-15 (blasters "roled" range apparently) not so long ago, while blasters do not hit at 30-45....But then nobody is asking for blasters to hit at 30-45 just to hit a little better at 10-20.
Quote: At least, i TEST out the different things on sisi
Sitting on sissi in your i win +5% implanted clone in yout ecm 1 v 1 fitted pest waggling your epeen does not make you knowledgeable about TQ pvp.
NightmareX Losses: 22 Kills: 207
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 15:56:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Murina Lasers got a boost so they could hit well at 0-15 not so long ago
No, they got a boost in tracking because the tracking Lasers had was extremely horrible. And i'm talking about mid-long range here.
Check out my new flash web page 'Dark Paradise' |
Cohkka
Celestial Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 15:56:00 -
[99]
Blasters are fine in a fraction of possible EVE combat situations. In any situation where there is the possibility to get webbed or scrambled by support ships Blasterboats are at a huge disadvantage. So in conclusion they are less usefull than lasers in 90% of EVE combat because of range/mobility limitations.
The reason for that is because active tanking is not viable in todays PvP (making the ships slower due to plates/rigs) and overall mobility of ships was nerfed in the last patch. Something HAS to change in order to make blasters usefull again. Either the weapon system needs change to accomodate the new combat enviroment or the ships need to. But we can't redesing the ships with Blasters in mind because they use rails as well (people tend to forget that). So maybe the only way out is to redefine the combat philosophy, just like it has sorta been done with Caldari. You know... specialize (altho it could as well backfire). Don't speak english, just F5, F5, F5... |
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 16:06:00 -
[100]
Edited by: NightmareX on 11/02/2009 16:07:15
Originally by: Cohkka Blasters are fine in a fraction of possible EVE combat situations. In any situation where there is the possibility to get webbed or scrambled by support ships Blasterboats are at a huge disadvantage. So in conclusion they are less usefull than lasers in 90% of EVE combat because of range/mobility limitations.
The reason for that is because active tanking is not viable in todays PvP (making the ships slower due to plates/rigs) and overall mobility of ships was nerfed in the last patch. Something HAS to change in order to make blasters usefull again. Either the weapon system needs change to accomodate the new combat enviroment or the ships need to. But we can't redesing the ships with Blasters in mind because they use rails as well (people tend to forget that). So maybe the only way out is to redefine the combat philosophy, just like it has sorta been done with Caldari. You know... specialize (altho it could as well backfire).
Well i see you points. But as long Projectiles and Missiles are getting a boost if Blasters does that, i wont complain.
The thing i see as a problem, is why boost 3 weapon types instead of nerfing one.
But as i see it, nothing need to be changed at all.
Kinda funny that i have never had a single problem with Amarr and Lasers in my Tempest in all of those 3+ years i have been using the ship.
A Megathron is more dangerous to me than a Geddon / Apoc or Abaddon ever will get, even when i start the fight 30km from the target. It's because of my EM and Thermal resists.
Check out my new flash web page 'Dark Paradise' |
|
Cpt Cosmic
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 16:09:00 -
[101]
your arguments are flawed because most fights are at point blank range (oh wait that is blasters prefered range!!!) because you have bubbles in .0 or you just warp to your buddy that already sits ontop of the enemy. if you dont wanna get owned by lasers, use tracking disruptors and dont engage bs at gates that are 50k off. damn use brains already
sniping fests dont have any blaster thus no problem here.
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 16:15:00 -
[102]
Edited by: Murina on 11/02/2009 16:15:40
Originally by: Cpt Cosmic your arguments are flawed because most fights are at point blank range (oh wait that is blasters prefered range!!!) because you have bubbles in .0 or you just warp to your buddy that already sits ontop of the enemy.
Only tacklers need be at ranges under 24km and you can just as easily warp to a buddy at 40-50km range as you can to 0km.
The benefit of lasers in a gang situation is that they can also burn away in different directions forcing the close range ships to burn after each ship one at a time, while the laser ships are still laying down very high dps.
Originally by: Cpt Cosmic if you dont wanna get owned by lasers, use tracking disruptors and dont engage bs at gates that are 50k off. damn use brains already
Td's work on all 3 gunnery races and as shown a race with 0-45km optimal has a greater benefit than one with 0-4.5km.
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 21:47:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Cpt Cosmic in gangs blasters are fine.
<o> Blasters are the WORST turret type to have in gang. Ok, so you melt the first target... and then you have to MWD like a moron all over the battlefied to get to targets, while Amarr ships are just reaching out and raping everything with Scorch.
Originally by: NightmareX
Take this as an example.
I warp into a Megathron at 30 km, the fight start right after that. I MWD to him and he can't hit me anything good before i'm in the 10 km range. Then when i'm getting into his 5 km range, i'm starting to take ALOT of damage. I go into armor, my armor goes down pretty fast because my Kinetic and Thermal resists are not so high.
After 4-5 mins my Tempest lose because it couldn't tank the insane DPS from the Mega.
/facepalm
You're doing it (very, very) wrong. Hint: look at the part of your post I bolded.
Double hint: You're MWDing a autopest into a Mega's blaster optimal, and then complain you lose? Are you freaking serious?
|
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:03:00 -
[104]
Edited by: NightmareX on 11/02/2009 22:05:02
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Originally by: NightmareX
Take this as an example.
I warp into a Megathron at 30 km, the fight start right after that. I MWD to him and he can't hit me anything good before i'm in the 10 km range. Then when i'm getting into his 5 km range, i'm starting to take ALOT of damage. I go into armor, my armor goes down pretty fast because my Kinetic and Thermal resists are not so high.
After 4-5 mins my Tempest lose because it couldn't tank the insane DPS from the Mega.
/facepalm
You're doing it (very, very) wrong. Hint: look at the part of your post I bolded.
Double hint: You're MWDing a autopest into a Mega's blaster optimal, and then complain you lose? Are you freaking serious?
It was an example if you didn't got that.
But yeah, if we should be more real, then yes, the first thing i will do if i see an Amarr BS is to MWD very close to him and orbit him. Because he wont hit me any hard then.
But if this is a Blaster Mega / Domi / Hyperion, then i will not go into their web range.
Check out my new flash web page 'Dark Paradise' |
Sensaja
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:15:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Sensaja on 11/02/2009 22:26:51
Originally by: Murina
Td's work on all 3 gunnery races and as shown a race with 0-45km optimal has a greater benefit than one with 0-4.5km.
amarr are mostly stationary or slow moving due to viable fittings, and cap issues.
gallenteans are mostly mobile and fast.
scorch: 45 / 2 = 22.5 = 22.5km lost range, and midrange advantage lost.
multifrequency: 15 / 2 = 6.5km = 6.5km lost range and outperformed by blasterboats at that range.
null: 11 / 2 = 5.5 = 5.5km lost range and short range dps advantage not lost.
antimatter: 4.5km / 2 = 2.25km = 2.25km lost and short range dps advantage not lost.
gallente
travel time of 5km at 500ms = 10 secs. travel time of 2.5km at 500ms = 5 secs.
amarr
travel time of 22.5km at 500ms = 35 secs. travel time of 6.5km at 500ms = 12 secs.
conclusion: TD's optimal range script turns long range weapons into mid range and mid range into crud, and barely affects ultra short range weapons.
so no, i disagree. TD's spell absolute doom for amarr whilst gallente brushes it off as if it were nothing.
|
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:16:00 -
[106]
Originally by: NightmareX
It was an example if you didn't got that.
But yeah, if we should be more real, then yes, the first thing i will do if i see an Amarr BS is to MWD very close to him and orbit him. Because he wont hit me any hard then.
But if this is a Blaster Mega / Domi / Hyperion, then i will not go into their web range.
Mate, you can't give examples of ******ed flying and then base your judgement of a weapon system's efficiency on it.
Someone could then go and say "I flew my Abaddon right into a Maelstrom's optimal and I couldn't hit him for **** with my lasers. Projectiles are OP!!!"
Get my drift?
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:19:00 -
[107]
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Murina
NightmareX TQ STATS. Losses: 22 Kills: 207
Oh look, it's like the 10th time you have posted my stats. Dayum, our memory must be very short since you post it so often.
And also, how many times have i told you it's not 207 kills, it's more around 600 kill in total. But dayum again, your memory is extremely bad, and are always forgetting that.
Its not my memory that is bad its yours.
If you remember i told you twice already i think you are a liar, i had not forgotten about your "claimed" kills at all....
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:21:00 -
[108]
Edited by: NightmareX on 11/02/2009 22:22:20
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Originally by: NightmareX
It was an example if you didn't got that.
But yeah, if we should be more real, then yes, the first thing i will do if i see an Amarr BS is to MWD very close to him and orbit him. Because he wont hit me any hard then.
But if this is a Blaster Mega / Domi / Hyperion, then i will not go into their web range.
Mate, you can't give examples of ******ed flying and then base your judgement of a weapon system's efficiency on it.
Someone could then go and say "I flew my Abaddon right into a Maelstrom's optimal and I couldn't hit him for **** with my lasers. Projectiles are OP!!!"
Get my drift?
If everybody could fly like Autopests, Blaster Megas and the other ships like they should, there wouldn't be any issues with the ships or weapons.
But as you probably know. ALOT of players are thinking they know what they are doing, while in fact they are flying a ship totally wrong.
But yeah, i see what you mean.
But i'm still saying it, and i wont change on it, but all weapons are now today balanced pretty good.
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Murina
NightmareX TQ STATS. Losses: 22 Kills: 207
Oh look, it's like the 10th time you have posted my stats. Dayum, our memory must be very short since you post it so often.
And also, how many times have i told you it's not 207 kills, it's more around 600 kill in total. But dayum again, your memory is extremely bad, and are always forgetting that.
Its not my memory that is bad its yours.
If you remember i told you twice already i think you are a liar, i had not forgotten about your "claimed" kills at all....
I'm a liar?.
Now only if you could stop lying your ass off, it would be great.
Check out my new flash web page 'Dark Paradise' |
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:23:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Sensaja
scorch: 45 / 2 = 22.5 = 22.5km lost range, and midrange advantage lost.
multifrequency: 15 / 2 = 6.5km = 6.5km lost range and outperformed by blasterboats at that range.
Both ammos hit at those ranges.
Originally by: Sensaja null: 11 / 2 = 5.5 = 5.5km lost range and short range dps advantage not lost.
antimatter: 4.5km / 2 = 2.25km = 2.25km lost and short range dps advantage not lost.
Null misses at 5.5km and under due to tracking penalty issues.
AM misses at 2.25km due to ultra close range tracking issues.
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 - 2009.02.11 22:24:00 -
[110]
Originally by: NightmareX it's more around 600 kill in total.
Proof or stfu.
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
|
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:27:00 -
[111]
Originally by: NightmareX
But yeah, i see what you mean.
But i'm still saying it, and i wont change on it, but all weapons are now today balanced pretty good.
Well I disagree but I respect your opinion.
|
Sensaja
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:28:00 -
[112]
Edited by: Sensaja on 11/02/2009 22:31:11
Originally by: Murina Edited by: Murina on 11/02/2009 22:27:22
Originally by: Sensaja
scorch: 45 / 2 = 22.5 = 22.5km lost range, and midrange advantage lost.
multifrequency: 15 / 2 = 6.5km = 6.5km lost range and outperformed by blasterboats at that range.
Both ammos hit at those ranges.
Originally by: Sensaja null: 11 / 2 = 5.5 = 5.5km lost range and short range dps advantage not lost.
antimatter: 4.5km / 2 = 2.25km = 2.25km lost and short range dps advantage not lost.
Null misses at 5.5km and under due to tracking penalty issues.
AM misses at 2.25km due to ultra close range tracking issues.
web?
hmm.. i'm pretty sure that each weapon system hits perfectly at point blank range when the transversal is low..
especially blasters due to their ultra short range..
are you saying that pulses are better than blasters at 5.5km and 2.5km ?
care to explain cause much sense you make not.
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:31:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Murina on 11/02/2009 22:32:26
WEBBED BC ORBITING
As you can see even a mega (tracking bonus) with ions (higher tracking than nuetrons) does not hit even with anti-matter particularly well under 4km let alone 3km and null is bloody awful under 6km..
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
NightmareX
Celtic Anarchy Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:32:00 -
[114]
Edited by: NightmareX on 11/02/2009 22:35:16
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: NightmareX it's more around 600 kill in total.
Proof or stfu.
Here is some proof that your a lying ass and that not all my kills exist on Battleclinic. LINK.
Happy now?.
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Originally by: NightmareX
But yeah, i see what you mean.
But i'm still saying it, and i wont change on it, but all weapons are now today balanced pretty good.
Well I disagree but I respect your opinion.
I respect your opinion to that you don't think they are.
But saying Lasers are overpowered like Murina says is just like aarrrggghhh, doh, stoooooooooooopid. Is it possible to be that, uhm, off?.
Check out my new flash web page 'Dark Paradise' |
Sensaja
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:32:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Murina orbitting battlecruiser against large guns
|
Emily Poast
The Whipping Post
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:36:00 -
[116]
A really stupid question here, but I am on my PDA and dont do math besides...
Yes. AM nerfs your optimal. How does fighting with Uranium, Plutonium, or Thorium (or whatever mid-range ammo is best) change this? I know the damage goes down, but you have better tracking, that will balance it out a little. What is your damage in the 10k-10k range then?
I am not being smarmy, I would genuinely like to know.
Though I have to say that 10 second ammo change times sucks for Hybrids.
|
Omara Otawan
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:38:00 -
[117]
Omg, its about spaceships, watch the movies and learn.
Obviously laser guns own, theres a reason darth vader had a giant laser on his deathstar instead of a giant blaster
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:39:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Sensaja
Originally by: Murina orbitting battlecruiser against large guns
Are you saying a gunnery BS should not be able to hit a BC when its webbed in the BS optimal?....
Or are the facts i just showed you inconvenient so you snipped and made a disparaging comment with a emocon...
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:40:00 -
[119]
Originally by: NightmareX
I respect your opinion to that you don't think they are.
But saying Lasers are overpowered like Murina says is just like aarrrggghhh, doh, stoooooooooooopid. Is it possible to be that, uhm, off?.
I don't think lasers need a nerf. The other weapon types just need a bit of readjusting.
|
Murina
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.02.11 22:41:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Deschenus Maximus
Originally by: NightmareX
I respect your opinion to that you don't think they are.
But saying Lasers are overpowered like Murina says is just like aarrrggghhh, doh, stoooooooooooopid. Is it possible to be that, uhm, off?.
I don't think lasers need a nerf. The other weapon types just need a bit of readjusting.
Exactly.
Originally by: 7shining7one7 Lasers get reduced dmg inside optimal if you are approaching with 0 transversal cos lasers fragment when you approach them
|
|
|
|
|
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 |