open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [ISSUE] Blasters 2.0
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : last (26)

Author Topic

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2010.05.15 08:14:00 - [331]
 

Edited by: The Djego on 15/05/2010 09:39:26
Originally by: Ephemeron
Speaking from personal preference as long time battleship user, I'd say a 20% raw dps increase for blaster will make me want to fly Megathrons again, even tho I'll still hate how hard it is to fit one.

Likewise, if blaster damage was increased 10%, I may try Mega and Hyperion once, but would stick to my preferred Dominix and Typhoon. Ability to fit heavy energy neutralizer >> extra dps.


Even with 20% raw DPS increase I don't see a real point in it, even before QR blaster ships where at least 10% DPS short to overcome similar flown\fitted ships by pure DPS advantage at her range(EHP\DPS wise).

The damage is also split into Drones and Guns so it is mostly a 12-16% boost for most ships.

Strong point of most good solo ships is not the DPS, it is the flexibility and the ability to leave next to no weaknesses in the offensive and defensive capability to prevent other ships from using them against your(ability to deal with small stuff, some kind of GTFO ability, ability to prevent/counter kitting, not losing all ability's if you get neuted, ability to dedicate range).

While blaster ships where not capable of doing some of this things they still had solid mix of it, enough to make them work. That changed with QR.

Originally by: Liang Nuren

IMO I think it depends what role you're trying to go for... and with blaster and laser ships that's the "damage dealer" role. Minmatar ships as a rule don't really fill this role. As I said, there's only a few options:
- Make blaster ships able to get to their targets in a timely manner and without expending 2-3 cap booster 800s to do it. (Read: Make them faster and/or more agile)
- Make blaster ships have nuts high DPS to offset the time it takes to get into range.
- Extend blaster range so that they come into range sooner
- Make lasers (and therefore projectiles and torps and pretty much everything else) do less damage.

-Liang


I'm quite happy with using ak ships as damage dealers atm, dps difference is not this big after putting selectable damage types in and using the bigger range window.

- A bit more speed/agility would be nice, but you will still lose the fights you would lose today so no big change.
- What exactly do you think is "nuts high DPS"? Also you still end up with a limited damage dealer for smaller gangs instead of a flexible solo ship.
- We already got AKs/Lasers for this.
- meh

Ryan Starwing
Gallente
Cryptonym Sleepers
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2010.05.17 02:44:00 - [332]
 

Blasters need a dps buff. They are ment to be face melters and are ment to pwn people if they land on them at 0. Right now lasers and autos do almost blaster dps with alot more uses.

Chi Quan
Bibkor Enterprises

Posted - 2010.05.17 12:10:00 - [333]
 

did i support this already?

Dzajic
Gallente

Posted - 2010.05.19 14:14:00 - [334]
 

Like all "hybrids need love" issues, supported.

Decon Ko
Posted - 2010.05.19 21:37:00 - [335]
 

semantically, more a fix than love,
supported.

Mkah Mvet
Duolith Systems

Posted - 2010.05.19 21:44:00 - [336]
 

Either blasters need love or blaster boats need unreasonably high native resists.

Doctor Aibolit
Posted - 2010.05.19 23:25:00 - [337]
 

EFT DPS of blasters is fine. The main problem is to apply that DPS.
Look at classes in fantasy universe. There are archer, rogue, tank and other. Every class has balance.
Tank has low DPS and high defence. Tank can do low damage long time due to defence.
Archer makes medium damage at long range. His tank is his speed.
Rogue (dagger) has high DPS but very short range. He should has something to apply his high DPS: speed, evasion or other tricks. Otherwise Rogue will die without inflicting damage to target.
So I hope you see some parallels.
Caldari has range,
Minmatar can kite (barrage + TC or TE = good range),
Amarr has good buffer tank and good DPS (with scorch they have long range and still good DPS )
Gallente has the shortest range and slightly bigger paper DPS. They have no speed advantage (hull is not the fastest + armor rigs reduce original speed and agility) They have no tank advantage: active tanking is not good with CAP eating weapon, buffer armor tank is not so good as Amarr (little low slots, no armor resist bonuses, waste of active tank bonuses). Shield tank works but it works better on shield ships.
Gallente should be fixed.
Simple solution: increase damage bonus for Gallente ships from 5% to 7.5% per level. Slightly increase base tracking speed of blasters.
Complicated solution: total strategy change for Gallente ships. Base speed increasing, signature decreasing, special bonuses like stasis web speed factor or other - I do not know. BUT it is difficult becouse it interferes with other EVE ships and items.

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.05.20 00:34:00 - [338]
 

Quote:
Complicated solution: total strategy change for Gallente ships. Base speed increasing, signature decreasing, special bonuses like stasis web speed factor or other
Congratulations on inventing Minmatar

I said it before and I say it again: there will be no proper solution to this issue until CCP deals with damage phobia.
Any "alternative" solution to blasters, such as the one I quoted, will simply decrease diversity by making things same. Or infringe on special roles of other races, thus guaranteeing future headache of fixing emergent problems with those other races.

Doctor Aibolit
Posted - 2010.05.20 01:29:00 - [339]
 

Originally by: Ephemeron
Quote:
Complicated solution: total strategy change for Gallente ships. Base speed increasing, signature decreasing, special bonuses like stasis web speed factor or other
Congratulations on inventing Minmatar

I said it before and I say it again: there will be no proper solution to this issue until CCP deals with damage phobia.
Any "alternative" solution to blasters, such as the one I quoted, will simply decrease diversity by making things same. Or infringe on special roles of other races, thus guaranteeing future headache of fixing emergent problems with those other races.


Do not cut my words from sentence. I indicated that I do not know exact complete solution because it is very difficult.
As for me increasing Gallente DPS is not a bad idea. This boost will slightly balance Gallente (but not solve) and will not brake Gallente role of close face eater. Now there is no sense to use blasters because Lasers do 85% DPS at 300% optimal and AC shoot farther with selective damage (on fastest ships in the game). There is only 1 reason to shoot blasters - You do not want to spend several months for other race BS and weapon :)
I would completely switch to Amarr or Minmatar if EVE had no Dominix, Ishtar and AC Myrm :)

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:10:00 - [340]
 

Hybrids could do DOT. That would be a niche no other ship has. It wouldn't match the graphics, but the graphics already don't match the way damage is done already (torps look like AoE but aren't, lasers look like DOT but aren't, projectiles shouldn't instantly hit targets but they do, etc).

Spugg Galdon
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:23:00 - [341]
 

I mentioned a penetration mechanic in the railgun thread but was told NO NO NO NO NO! by Liang.

To be honest it didn't look overpowered or unbalanced. The only tank type that suffered more than any other would be the passive shield tank. Could that be your "DOT"?

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:32:00 - [342]
 

Edited by: Bagehi on 20/05/2010 16:34:13
Originally by: Spugg Galdon
I mentioned a penetration mechanic in the railgun thread but was told NO NO NO NO NO! by Liang.

To be honest it didn't look overpowered or unbalanced. The only tank type that suffered more than any other would be the passive shield tank. Could that be your "DOT"?


Damage Over Time. It would impact all tanks similarly. What a penetration mechanic would do is turn everything a hybrid shoots into a hull tanker. There are fewer mods to support hull tanks, which is why only real men hull tank. It would take a ton of work to rebalance all the ships.

Imagine killing a Titan or Super Carrier simply by bypassing their normal tank (which usually has HP modifiers and resists at 90+%) and ripping through their hull that has no modifiers and can't get resists past 60%. The bigger the ship, the more vulnerable they would be to a penetration mechanic unless CCP followed the hybrids with massive boosts to hull HP on pretty much all ships. This would be the weird situation created by a penetration mechanic.

And what about structures? Would hybrids bypass the reinforce mechanic or would they be left with a noticeable nerf whenever they shoot something that reinforces?

Spugg Galdon
Posted - 2010.05.20 16:49:00 - [343]
 

Edited by: Spugg Galdon on 20/05/2010 16:51:50
Originally by: Bagehi
Edited by: Bagehi on 20/05/2010 16:34:13
Originally by: Spugg Galdon
I mentioned a penetration mechanic in the railgun thread but was told NO NO NO NO NO! by Liang.

To be honest it didn't look overpowered or unbalanced. The only tank type that suffered more than any other would be the passive shield tank. Could that be your "DOT"?


Damage Over Time. It would impact all tanks similarly. What a penetration mechanic would do is turn everything a hybrid shoots into a hull tanker. There are fewer mods to support hull tanks, which is why only real men hull tank. It would take a ton of work to rebalance all the ships.

Imagine killing a Titan or Super Carrier simply by bypassing their normal tank (which usually has HP modifiers and resists at 90+%) and ripping through their hull that has no modifiers and can't get resists past 60%. The bigger the ship, the more vulnerable they would be to a penetration mechanic unless CCP followed the hybrids with massive boosts to hull HP on pretty much all ships. This would be the weird situation created by a penetration mechanic.

And what about structures? Would hybrids bypass the reinforce mechanic or would they be left with a noticeable nerf whenever they shoot something that reinforces?



No thats not how my idea worked at all. My idea for a penetration mechanic didn't just bypass tanks. Give me a minute, I'll copy and paste it from the railgun thread.

Its a bit long to transfer over and spread over a few posts. Its easy to find, its on pages 24 and 25 of the railgun thread. As you will see its not a simple "I Win" mechanic.

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2010.05.20 17:06:00 - [344]
 

Originally by: Spugg Galdon
No thats not how my idea worked at all. My idea for a penetration mechanic didn't just bypass tanks. Give me a minute, I'll copy and paste it from the railgun thread.

Its a bit long to transfer over and spread over a few posts. Its easy to find, its on pages 24 and 25 of the railgun thread. As you will see its not a simple "I Win" mechanic.


I read it in the railgun thread when you originally posted it. You modified the penetration mechanic suggested long ago to be like the mechanic in place for <25% shields. Your idea was better than the old idea. I still worry how that would impact tanking as your idea would be a rather significant nerf to shield tanks (who have paper thin armor) and have max effectiveness (all shield tanks benefit from passive tank) at 30% shields (which would be passing a lot of damage into their weak armor/hull tanks).

Spugg Galdon
Posted - 2010.05.20 18:12:00 - [345]
 

Originally by: Bagehi


I read it in the railgun thread when you originally posted it. You modified the penetration mechanic suggested long ago to be like the mechanic in place for <25% shields. Your idea was better than the old idea. I still worry how that would impact tanking as your idea would be a rather significant nerf to shield tanks (who have paper thin armor) and have max effectiveness (all shield tanks benefit from passive tank) at 30% shields (which would be passing a lot of damage into their weak armor/hull tanks).



Yes but most of the volley would be hitting the shield in a buffer tank anyways as the mechanic puts most of the volley there by sharing it out in a ratio according to Shield:Armour:Structure. A heavy shield buffer tank tank ratio could be 5:1:1 so if a penetrating hit was scored which is chance based, 5 parts of damage would hit shields and 1 part would hit armour. That 1 part then had a modifier of 50%. So for ease a volley of 6 damage, 5 hits shields and 0.5 hits armour. After applying resists this ammount of damage bleed through could be acceptable as a boost to hybrids. Its just lateral thinking instead of MOAR DAMAGE!

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2010.05.20 18:38:00 - [346]
 

Originally by: Ephemeron
Any "alternative" solution to blasters, such as the one I quoted, will simply decrease diversity by making things same. Or infringe on special roles of other races, thus guaranteeing future headache of fixing emergent problems with those other races.


Putting peak DPS at the target within web range quickly, stop targets at gates solo without gimped tackling range and the ability to control range within web range where things that made blaster ships good at her niche.

Putting back the "lethal" in web range for gank style blaster pvp is a long overdone step and provides a lot more diversity than a bit more DPS would do.

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.05.20 19:06:00 - [347]
 

Originally by: The Djego
Originally by: Ephemeron
Any "alternative" solution to blasters, such as the one I quoted, will simply decrease diversity by making things same. Or infringe on special roles of other races, thus guaranteeing future headache of fixing emergent problems with those other races.


Putting peak DPS at the target within web range quickly, stop targets at gates solo without gimped tackling range and the ability to control range within web range where things that made blaster ships good at her niche.

Putting back the "lethal" in web range for gank style blaster pvp is a long overdone step and provides a lot more diversity than a bit more DPS would do.
My idea for Gallente niche is that operating blasters should be difficult, but those who can manage it, overcome the obstacles, would get rewarded by unparalleled DPS strength. And that means a difference of more than a single damage mod on any other ship.

Minmatar should do what you mentioned, be optimized for ease of use as opposed to dps power.

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2010.05.20 21:40:00 - [348]
 

Edited by: The Djego on 20/05/2010 21:41:02
Originally by: Ephemeron
Originally by: The Djego
Originally by: Ephemeron
Any "alternative" solution to blasters, such as the one I quoted, will simply decrease diversity by making things same. Or infringe on special roles of other races, thus guaranteeing future headache of fixing emergent problems with those other races.


Putting peak DPS at the target within web range quickly, stop targets at gates solo without gimped tackling range and the ability to control range within web range where things that made blaster ships good at her niche.

Putting back the "lethal" in web range for gank style blaster pvp is a long overdone step and provides a lot more diversity than a bit more DPS would do.


My idea for Gallente niche is that operating blasters should be difficult, but those who can manage it, overcome the obstacles, would get rewarded by unparalleled DPS strength. And that means a difference of more than a single damage mod on any other ship.

Minmatar should do what you mentioned, be optimized for ease of use as opposed to dps power.


I would be the last one agreeing against a DPS boost for blasters, I did fly them with maximum gank all the time. Then again I don't see the point without tweaking close range for blaster ships in favour of the blaster ship again. You request a very very limited small gang tool, I basically do the same, with the difference that the ships would be useful for solo PVP again.

Minmatar ships already do what I mentioned. There should not be a minmatar patent of being the all out solo pvp solution. If you are ready to take all the drawbacks and let go gtfo ability there should be a option for people that going in for a kill and are ready to die for it.

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.05.20 21:58:00 - [349]
 

tweaking close range in positive manner would be undoing the Great Nano Nerf. Make webs 90%, remove MWD deactivation for scramble, make ships fast again.

That has worked in the past, then CCP had to **** things up.

Raw damage is a single factor that can be used to manipulate balance in this case. It is the easiest way that would involve least amount of unexpected errors. Alternative balancing requires adjustment of multiple variables, the consequences of which are harder to predict and harder to tune properly.

While I don't doubt that balance can be achieved by adjusting many different factors, I simply find it unnecessary complication. And I don't trust CCP with anything complicated. We gotta keep things as simple as possible for them to get it right.

Soon Shin
Posted - 2010.05.21 05:29:00 - [350]
 

Edited by: Soon Shin on 21/05/2010 05:29:42
Simple the Blasters need MOAR DAMAGE!!!!! You don't need more range,just more damage a perhaps better tracking and/or decrease signature resolution. Blasters have more difficulty blaster smaller ships at their range vs Autocannons and Pulse lasers.

I'd say we increase dps by 25-30%, which will reward the player for being able to close into the enemy. A mere 10-15% more than Pulses or Auto's makes it not worth trying to travel towards your enemy and take damage before you can deal damage to them.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.05.21 11:27:00 - [351]
 

Edited by: Gypsio III on 21/05/2010 11:32:13

Originally by: Ephemeron
Quote:
Complicated solution: total strategy change for Gallente ships. Base speed increasing, signature decreasing, special bonuses like stasis web speed factor or other
Congratulations on inventing Minmatar.


Heh. CCP has only itself to blame for the current mess. It decided projectiles needed a generic boost, apparently on the basis of some kind of comparison with lasers, while ignoring the characteristics of the ships that they were mounted on. That was stupid - the more important comparison is with blasters, as both Minamtar and Gallente ships are best used in solo/small-gang combat.

So we got a projectile boost that undeservedly boosted Minmatar ships that were already near the top of the pile - Rifter, Hurricane, Vaga, etc. - while not really fixing the Minmatar ships that actually did need a bit of help. So now we have Minmatar ships that are faster, more agile and possess longer-ranged weapons than Gallente, and, thanks to the importance of being able to choose damage types in small-scale fights, can often simply out-gank their Gallente opponents at close-range as well.

Nice one, CCP. Neutral

I'm not sure that overwhelmingly increasing blaster DPS is the right way out here. Doing that can make blasters overwhelmingly powerful in their niche - but I don't think that's good for the game. Weapons should have an advantage in their niche, but it shouldn't be overwhelming, otherwise combat becomes more predictable and more boring.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2010.05.21 12:18:00 - [352]
 

Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/05/2010 12:29:34
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/05/2010 12:28:38
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/05/2010 12:25:35
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/05/2010 12:22:15
Originally by: Gypsio III
Heh. CCP has only itself to blame for the current mess. It decided projectiles needed a generic boost, apparently on the basis of some kind of comparison with lasers, while ignoring the characteristics of the ships that they were mounted on. That was stupid - the more important comparison is with blasters, as both Minamtar and Gallente ships are best used in solo/small-gang combat.

So we got a projectile boost that undeservedly boosted Minmatar ships that were already near the top of the pile - Rifter, Hurricane, Vaga, etc. - while not really fixing the Minmatar ships that actually did need a bit of help.


I told you guys that it would be like that and I got flamed to hell and back because no, projectiles are bad and need moar, and some were claiming what CCP is doing is not enough because of Scorch.

Actually I have to disagree with you on something, even the bad minmatar ships are solid now (well, OK, except the obvious trash which suffers from tier issues ala stabber and stuff). Even the Tempest is preety cool these days if you use it like a Tier 3 battlecruiser and not a gank/tank battleship (I don't really do sniping).

The previously bad ones are now actually rather passable and just fine, the previously good ones are just a bit too awesome because of a combination of ship stats and good weapons and so on. Still, doing anything with them doesn't fix Gallente in the slightest, because blasterboats already suck compared to Amarr/Caldari for everything (solo included tbh).

Blasters seem in many ways to be balanced around the state we had in 2007 when they were the ultimate closerange DPS dealers and, for instance, the difficulty of fitting neutrons was there to offset their facemelting capability. Then Amarr got boosted multiple times, then Minmatar got their boost, and so did Caldari a bit previously (torps did, at least). The fact you cannot fit highest tier guns without fitting mods on any sub-bs T1 ship is now completely out of place (both Minmatar and Amarr can).

Active tank bonuses on sub-BS ships need to go the way of the dodo, really. Utility high needs to be the norm even at the cost of just blatantly adding 1 more slot to some ships (what? Cyclone has 1 more slot then Brutix already). The guns themselves need a revisit - everything but neutrons has lol DPS and **** range and is really useless, and even neutrons are a bit meh. I think a ship makeover alone with easier fitting would go a looong way.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.05.21 17:33:00 - [353]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 21/05/2010 17:43:20
Originally by: Cpt Branko

I told you guys that it would be like that and I got flamed to hell and back because no, projectiles are bad and need moar, and some were claiming what CCP is doing is not enough because of Scorch.



First, it was obvious that something had to change, because there were really two "tiers" of weaponry - those that worked and those that didn't. There were plenty of arguments for bringing the overly awesome weapons down to earth, and plenty for boosting the overly sucky weapons up. CCP chose to boost the overly sucky weapons up. The end result was that projectiles are roughly balanced with missiles and lasers while hybrids are getting the shaft.

This wasn't necessarily the wrong solution - merely an incomplete one.

Quote:
Active tank bonuses on sub-BS ships need to go the way of the dodo, really.


Bite your tongue. There are ships which it works well on.

-Liang

Ed: And Gypsio, the only reason that people feel that Minmatar was better at "solo/small gang" PVP was mostly because they were better at avoiding solo and small gang PVP. When you look at the Vaga from the perspective of the Cerb, it looks pretty damn overpowered for solo/small gang PVP. And to a point, you'd be right. But looking at the Cerb from the perspective of a Vaga in a gang with more than 2-3 people and the Cerb starts to look pretty damn overpowered. This is not a problem.

Also, anyone looking to the Hurricane as being better at solo/small gang PVP with the Drake around is ****ing crazy. Even after the projectile boost. Shocked

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2010.05.21 19:35:00 - [354]
 

Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/05/2010 19:38:41
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Bite your tongue. There are ships which it works well on.



It doesn't work well on the Brutix or the Astarte because they need the speed and the damage mods and stuff. On paper it works on the Myrmidon, particularly with drugs and stuff but tbh the typical way to die in a solo BC is to get (baited and) blobbed or die in a gang on gang fight, where in both situations nanoing it (particularly if you have snakes) is just much better, and you still kill the usual suspects.

So while the rep bonus is somewhat useful sometimes, I'd argue there is a ton of bonuses the Myrm could get which would be much much more useful because so many good setups don't use it at all.

I guess they're OK on BS because tank scales much better then DPS as you go up.

But anyway, the rep bonus has nothing at all to do on turret ships which need damage mods to be useful.

Fistme
Posted - 2010.05.21 20:28:00 - [355]
 

Or the Brutix and Astarte need more lows.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2010.05.21 22:05:00 - [356]
 

Originally by: Fistme
Or the Brutix and Astarte need more lows.


And more fitting and stuff and so on.

The thing is this; to get a credibleish active tank for a BC you need a minimum of 5 lowslots (2 reps, 2 eanms or eanm/exp hardener for astarte, dc), which leaves you with exactly 0 lowslots on the, say, Brutix. Which translates into ****poor DPS by virtue of not fitting any damage mods.

So let's add one extra lowslot (which would be good), OK, now you can have a magstab, but even if fitting got changed so you can in fact fit cap booster, neutrons, dual reps and mwd (which would be a huuuge fix for the Brutix), we're talking about the difference between 735 DPS for maxed 1 mfs brutix and 848 DPS for maxed 2 mfs Brutix (plated tank requires one low less), or 934 DPS for 3-mfs shield Brutix (which could then fit, eg. dual TEs or TE plus speed mod or stuff).

Sure, such a active armor brutix would be modestly useful for someone who does use drugs and have a fancy implant or two, but for it to really make sense the armor rep rig penalty needs to get changed to something other then speed (something irrelevant, preferably, and this should be done anyway). Else when you combine the speed drop and the DPS drop and so on between a shield buffer version and active armor version it's not really worth it for a lot of situations.

On the other hand, it could live with a generically useful bonus like, eg. falloff. Or anything gun related for that matter.

Fistme
Posted - 2010.05.21 22:26:00 - [357]
 

rack of ions and 2x rep with 6 lows would be more than enough to bring a dual rep brutix in line with other ganky bcs.

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.05.21 22:47:00 - [358]
 

Originally by: Fistme
rack of ions and 2x rep with 6 lows would be more than enough to bring a dual rep brutix in line with other ganky bcs.


active tanking BC don't make sense as long as you can get 1.52x more armor for just 6 mil worth of rigs. And the 1600mm plate is significantly better than armor rep.

Just calculate how long you need to active repair in order to break even with the plate on HP added - forget the cap requirements

1600mm plate: 4200 hp, *1.25 from skill, *1.52 from rigs, total hp bonus: 7980
medium armor repper: 320 hp over 9 sec (after skill), *1.375 hp ship bonus, *1.2 from combat booster, *1.41 from active boost rigs (stacking penalized), you get: 744.48 / 9 sec or 82.72 hp/sec

Therefore, to active repair 7980 you need 96 seconds and about 1715 cap
This doesn't even include the added HP bonus from passive HP rigs to base ship armor, which for typical bc adds at least another 2000 hp, while active rigs get nothing like that.

So in best case scenario, your active rep plays you your advantage if the battle duration is at least 100 seconds and you don't neuted. And you are willing to pay for boosters.

With passive mode you get all those benefits upfront, not 100 seconds later. And if you are in a real pinch, you WANT those hp up front, or you die.

Thank's to CCP's carelessness with defensive rigs, making them vastly superior to offensive ones and making them ridiculously cheap, active armor rep has became near obsolete.

Since passive armor rigs are so advantages to have, they are nearly a must-have, and that means you have to sacrifice speed, at least 15% less speed.

I suppose this is a rant for another topic. But the root of the problem is the same - CCP has incompetent game designers.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2010.05.21 22:53:00 - [359]
 

Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/05/2010 23:00:09
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/05/2010 22:59:05
Originally by: Fistme
rack of ions and 2x rep with 6 lows would be more than enough to bring a dual rep brutix in line with other ganky bcs.



Ions and 1 mfs? With ganky BCs? It does 700 dps, ffs, at hugging ranges.

Let's compare it to other stuff:
- blaster Myrmidon: 846 DPS
- HPL Harb: does 823 DPS, can fire all way to disruptor range
- FMP/plated/2hs Harb: 669 DPS, again longer ranged
- 3 mfs neutron Brutix: 934 DPS
- HAM Drake: 719 DPS w Terror Rage (usable vs BCs), 654 DPS w CN terror, again longer ranged
- 3 gyro 425mm II 2 neut shiedfit Hurricane: 763 DPS w selectable damage types and much longer range

So you do lower end (basically you outdamage FMP Harb and CN terror drake) to gain a active tank which slows you down using weapons which have hugging range (this is sortof important) and that somehow is in line with those ships? I don't think so, tbh. If it could fit neutrons and if armor repair rigs didn't kill speed like they do (which in addition to bad range hurts you even more, since any ship above can preety much kite you with rig penalty in), then you might have a point but this way, no, not really.

Originally by: Ephemeron
Since passive armor rigs are so advantages to have, they are nearly a must-have, and that means you have to sacrifice speed, at least 15% less speed.



Tbh, I wouldn't agree on armor rigs being a must (passive tanking, yes). For a ship like the Brutix the killer really is the speed penalty (plus lower agility and speed because of plate anyway). It does 0 damage outside of scram range, so unless it's fast enough to have a good chance of getting there, no matter how much EHP you've stacked it's still useless. It really likes the shield amount rigs better, and you still gain 16K EHP more then rep fit. Changing rep and resist rigs not to penalize speed (and leaving trimarks penalizing speed) would bring in some more balance between them.


Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2010.05.22 02:32:00 - [360]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 22/05/2010 02:34:58
Originally by: Ephemeron
1600mm plate: 4200 hp, *1.25 from skill, *1.52 from rigs, total hp bonus: 7980
medium armor repper: 320 hp over 9 sec (after skill), *1.375 hp ship bonus, *1.2 from combat booster, *1.41 from active boost rigs (stacking penalized), you get: 744.48 / 9 sec or 82.72 hp/sec
Overload the rep like any sane pilot would do and it starts to look a lot better.
Quote:
So in best case scenario, your active rep plays you your advantage if the battle duration is at least 100 seconds and you don't neuted. And you are willing to pay for boosters.
Or you're engaged in more than one fight. Or the fight is not contiguous. Or....
Quote:
With passive mode you get all those benefits upfront, not 100 seconds later. And if you are in a real pinch, you WANT those hp up front, or you die.
Actually for the most part you just die anyway. The margin on fights you can escape because of plates vs reps is pretty thin when you're flying in very small gangs/solo
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Ions and 1 mfs? With ganky BCs? It does 700 dps, ffs, at hugging ranges.
Tank matters just as much as gank.
Quote:
Tbh, I wouldn't agree on armor rigs being a must (passive tanking, yes). For a ship like the Brutix the killer really is the speed penalty

Again, see how it keeps coming down to the speed aspect?

Making them fast and agile will not remove the advantage of skirmish from Minmatar. The advantage of skirmish is to be able to run away and you cannot do that when your effective range is within full tackle(scram/web) range and you have little extra support mechanisms(spare high slots for neuts, etc)


Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : last (26)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only