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 : ... 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 ... : last (26)

Author Topic

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2010.05.05 23:05:00 - [211]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 05/05/2010 23:14:07
How about we continue this here. No need to clutter this thread with discussions that are not towards the merits of the proposal in the OP, which is about increasing the range or damage on all blasters because of a perceived inadequacy of the weapons.

Originally by: Bagehi
Sometimes I think he sincerely believes this stuff (I mean, he wrote a 19 page document) and a little rational criticism is all it will take for him to realize that he is wrong. Then he argues that the Rokh is bordering on being an overpowered ship.
If only you had rational criticism.

Still waiting on that explanation for how Repair Amt bonus > Resist bonus by the way ;)
Originally by: Frodo Zsakos
No the rokh is truely an op ship it was proven with math ,why cant you still accept it?Shocked
The nickname for EVE has always been "spreadsheets online". And its not because the math doesn't correspond to the gameplay.

Mimiru Minahiro
Posted - 2010.05.06 02:50:00 - [212]
 

Edited by: Mimiru Minahiro on 06/05/2010 03:13:46
Edited by: Mimiru Minahiro on 06/05/2010 03:12:35
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Mimiru Minahiro
-base EM/EXP resistances got changed
Mainly it served to make scorch better, but scorch isn't typically used in small fights as much as it is in larger ones(except as an opener).
Quote:
-During that same patch amarr got a 15%dmg boost
There was no strict damage boost to Amarr for any weapons. There was a tracking boost
Quote:
-since the "heyday" (where according to Goumi the Ruppy was better than the Rax)projectiles have recived boosts to dmg and tracking.
Bonuses to damage and falloff yes, not bonuses to tracking



Not much time so will make this quick:

1) EM/EXP resist nerf: This resulted in a 18% increase in dmg for scorch and 12%increase for MF. (these numbers are rough..its 18.4ish% and 11.5ish. dont have a calculator atm so did it in my head)

2) For some reason a dmg increase sticks out in my head for large lasers...but i may be remembering an effective dmg increase from tracking given fits/fights at the time. Its been a few years since i thought about it Laughing

3)Check patch notes for Dominion. tracking was increased for arty to get the variation between tiers correct. This is why i said "projectile".


I agree with:
1)The playstyle inherrent in blaster boats is largely out of fashion, or as you say "weak". Blanket Boosting tracking and/or dmg wont make it a stonger playstyle unles you overbuff...which would just be breaking everything else.

BUT...

"better/Stronger/more popular" playstyles were boosted in dmg and tracking...which just serves to make a sub-par style even more worthless. Giving hybrids a boost can at least return some of the ground lost.

This doesnt mean that ships cant be modified if a boost occurs. The tracking bonus on mega/ranis could be removed if a general tracking buff was implemented for example. Or removing turret slots from drone boats, or.... you get the idea.

edit:added last paragraph

Krathos Morpheus
Legion Infernal
Posted - 2010.05.06 04:09:00 - [213]
 


Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2010.05.06 05:12:00 - [214]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 06/05/2010 05:12:35
Originally by: Mimiru Minahiro
1) EM/EXP resist nerf: This resulted in a 18% increase in dmg for scorch and 12%increase for MF. (these numbers are rough..its 18.4ish% and 11.5ish. dont have a calculator atm so did it in my head)

This assumes that you're always shooting at armor and that you have no drones.

For instance, lets look at a harbinger shooting at a Brutix that only has a DCII for a tank. Before the change the Brutix had roughly 34,600 EHP against a harb with scorch loaded. After, 32,980. A difference of 4.91%

This damage advantage clearly goes up when the % of hit points in armor goes up(for whatever reason), but its never so pronounced as the simple "vs armor" numbers would suggest.
Quote:
2) For some reason a dmg increase sticks out in my head for large lasers...but i may be remembering an effective dmg increase from tracking given fits/fights at the time. Its been a few years since i thought about it
No such analysis was done, and if it were it would be very suspect.
Quote:
"better/Stronger/more popular" playstyles were boosted in dmg and tracking...which just serves to make a sub-par style even more worthless. Giving hybrids a boost can at least return some of the ground lost.

This doesnt mean that ships cant be modified if a boost occurs. The tracking bonus on mega/ranis could be removed if a general tracking buff was implemented for example. Or removing turret slots from drone boats, or.... you get the idea.
See, that is the thing. It would not return some of the "ground lost". The boosts did not make them gain any real ground in terms of what was best. You still don't have a reason to choose blaster boats.

This is why I said that if you completely undid the laser and AC changes it would not change peoples preference for lasers or ACs over blasters.

Mimiru Minahiro
Posted - 2010.05.06 08:08:00 - [215]
 

Edited by: Mimiru Minahiro on 06/05/2010 08:08:56
Originally by: Goumindong
For instance, lets look at a harbinger shooting at a Brutix that only has a DCII for a tank. Before the change the Brutix had roughly 34,600 EHP against a harb with scorch loaded. After, 32,980. A difference of 4.91%

This damage advantage clearly goes up when the % of hit points in armor goes up(for whatever reason), but its never so pronounced as the simple "vs armor" numbers would suggest. ............See, that is the thing. It would not return some of the "ground lost". The boosts did not make them gain any real ground in terms of what was best. You still don't have a reason to choose blaster boats.

This is why I said that if you completely undid the laser and AC changes it would not change peoples preference for lasers or ACs over blasters.



On the first point i cannot check your numbers because i do not have an old version of eft handy and i do not have the inclination at the moment to work it out by hand.

However, assuming that your numbers are correct it only stands to reason that shooting any ship that has a bulk of its HP in structure/shield with a DCU II would see less % benefit given the 60% resist of a DCU II and the fact that base EM shield resist was not changed. Thus why a gank brutix and/or only fitting a DCU sees a smaller net change, and why when you fit plates the numbers scew back towards the 18/12%figure. A harbinger shooting another harbinger would see a larger % gain by comparison... unless cookie cutter fitting is LSE's on Harbs now.

With that said EMP/fusion/hail/barrage/etc... got a boost during that resist nerf by virtue of it hitting armor and/or shields harder (no change on the structure buffer tanks though). Then things got boosted for projectiles just recently.

Re: your objection to the Lost ground argument:
If you argue that boosting blasters dmg and/or tracking will not change the fact that we will have no reason to chose them over AC's or Pulse,then there is little reason to object to a boost in the first place. You can be confident that such a boost, even a large one, is absolutely worthless in terms of what is "best".

Now if you argue that such changes (large boosts for example)would be detrimental then suddenly blasters are "best" at something.... and considerably enough better than anyother option that they break eve. This is what you have said in earlier posts.

Can you please clarify your argument for me? I find it unclear.

Cyan Cure
Posted - 2010.05.06 08:52:00 - [216]
 

There is so much EFT bulls**t here, i have nothing left to puke with, but my own intestents.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2010.05.06 09:16:00 - [217]
 

Originally by: Mimiru Minahiro
On the first point i cannot check your numbers because i do not have an old version of eft handy and i do not have the inclination at the moment to work it out by hand.
I did it with the current. Its why i only used the DC. 1 Tech 1 adaptive Magnetic plating with 0 compensation skills = 50->60% em resists on armor. Damage Control's resists are not stacking penalized and so the base works when its activated.

If we go to 3 trimarks, DC and 1600mm plate the difference becomes 56,166 EHP after, 60,954 before. A difference of 8.5% for scorch. Less for AM. Now i am sure we can break 10% if we consider big active tanks or Zealots(shooting at big armor tanks). But in the end its not that significant.

Doesn't mean i agreed with the change, quite the opposite. The point was that we weren't talking a move to domination due to it. Especially since the strength of other damage types in those situations was still quite strong relatively.
Quote:
unless cookie cutter fitting is LSE's on Harbs now.
They're not that uncommon.
Quote:

If you argue that boosting blasters dmg and/or tracking will not change the fact that we will have no reason to chose them over AC's or Pulse,then there is little reason to object to a boost in the first place. You can be confident that such a boost, even a large one, is absolutely worthless in terms of what is "best".

Now if you argue that such changes (large boosts for example)would be detrimental then suddenly blasters are "best" at something.... and considerably enough better than anyother option that they break eve. This is what you have said in earlier posts.

Can you please clarify your argument for me? I find it unclear.
Small amounts, to the effect to correct for the AC/Laser boosts it won't have much of an effect. That doesn't mean it won't be possible to boost blasters to have an effect. But consider either of those two scenarios. If you boost them a small amount and they're still terrible... nothing changes except the already good Vigilant, Daredevil, and Taranis do more DPS. But now you still need more changes to blasters. So the whines will continue. If you boost them a lot then you will overboost things and move things out of whack and then you will get whines from laser users or AC users.

And that is what is being asked for here. Either a boost to damage or a boost to range. A boost to damage can have significant consequences for ships that don't have as many issues. A boost to range would be paradigm breaking.

An example of what I am attempting to describe might be this. Imagine that a strength of 6 is the "proper strength for a ship" and there are 5 ships that use the weapons ranging from strength from 1 to 5. If you boost the system such that the ships in the middle (str 3) hit the proper strength then you have a set of ships from 4 to 8. Two of which are still underpowered, one of which is just right and 2 of which are now overboosted.

Rather than do that, its better to evaluate each ship individually and ask why its not performing and what it needs to perform without breaking the paradigms. The answer IMO is pretty clearly that the thorax and hyperion need speed and agility and that the Brutix needs to be brought in line with the tier 2 BC's. But that is not what is requested, so i cannot give my support and will continue to argue against such changes.

Naomi Knight
Amarr
Posted - 2010.05.06 10:18:00 - [218]
 

It is much easier to boost hybrids then cut back those ships which become ops(note that ccp didnt do this to laser/projectile ships which are op atm). Currently 90% of hybrid ships are lacking efficiency and half of them are completly useless.

If ccp fix them one by one it is fine with me ,but I cant see how that would happen ,if I look at how they balanced in the past.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 10:45:00 - [219]
 

Originally by: Naomi Knight
It is much easier to boost hybrids then cut back those ships which become ops(note that ccp didnt do this to laser/projectile ships which are op atm). Currently 90% of hybrid ships are lacking efficiency and half of them are completly useless.

If ccp fix them one by one it is fine with me ,but I cant see how that would happen ,if I look at how they balanced in the past.


Awww boohoo, maybe you should find an effective way to use the ships with Hybrid guns then maybe?.

It's not all about DPS dude.

Cyan Cure
Posted - 2010.05.06 11:19:00 - [220]
 

Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Naomi Knight
It is much easier to boost hybrids then cut back those ships which become ops(note that ccp didnt do this to laser/projectile ships which are op atm). Currently 90% of hybrid ships are lacking efficiency and half of them are completly useless.

If ccp fix them one by one it is fine with me ,but I cant see how that would happen ,if I look at how they balanced in the past.


Awww boohoo, maybe you should find an effective way to use the ships with Hybrid guns then maybe?.

It's not all about DPS dude.


Well, i can argue with you here, blasters are all about DPS. But since i'm really bored i'll add this, log into EVE and play it a bit, for once. Really, buy a ship, like a Cruiser (i'd prefer if it was fitted with blasters, but ev'rything will do in your case, just leave your 50 friends and an FC behind), go for a roam. I mean undock, set your autopilot to 0.4-0.0, set Security Pentalty to 100, throw a dart on the map and go.

If you do that, i'll proudly become the first person on the Eve-Online forums that will actually care about what you have to say.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 11:35:00 - [221]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 06/05/2010 11:35:42
Originally by: Cyan Cure
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: Naomi Knight
It is much easier to boost hybrids then cut back those ships which become ops(note that ccp didnt do this to laser/projectile ships which are op atm). Currently 90% of hybrid ships are lacking efficiency and half of them are completly useless.

If ccp fix them one by one it is fine with me ,but I cant see how that would happen ,if I look at how they balanced in the past.


Awww boohoo, maybe you should find an effective way to use the ships with Hybrid guns then maybe?.

It's not all about DPS dude.


Well, i can argue with you here, blasters are all about DPS. But since i'm really bored i'll add this, log into EVE and play it a bit, for once. Really, buy a ship, like a Cruiser (i'd prefer if it was fitted with blasters, but ev'rything will do in your case, just leave your 50 friends and an FC behind), go for a roam. I mean undock, set your autopilot to 0.4-0.0, set Security Pentalty to 100, throw a dart on the map and go.

If you do that, i'll proudly become the first person on the Eve-Online forums that will actually care about what you have to say.

Well i can agree that Blasters is mostly about DPS. But Blasters already have quite alot of DPS. So it's fine as it is.

But i was more thinking on Railguns that the DPS isn't all there. Because if DPS have been all in fleet fights, then my 1400mm Tempest would suck badly. But it doesn't. The Tempest is pretty nice in fleet fights.

And Rokh and Mega with Railguns works good in their ways to.

Cyan Cure
Posted - 2010.05.06 12:16:00 - [222]
 

Originally by: NightmareX

Originally by: Cyan Cure
stuff


Well i can agree that Blasters is mostly about DPS. But Blasters already have quite alot of DPS. So it's fine as it is.

But i was more thinking on Railguns that the DPS isn't all there. Because if DPS have been all in fleet fights, then my 1400mm Tempest would suck badly. But it doesn't. The Tempest is pretty nice in fleet fights.

And Rokh and Mega with Railguns works good in their ways to.


I'm impressed. Restraint, not feeding the troll. Anyways, what you have said is the problem we have here. You and Goumindong (he never touched a blaster in his life, so i'm more than happy to ignore whatever he has to say) only think in 0.0 fleet battle terms, not what happens on the daily basis to people using blasters in their T1 frigates, cruisers and battlecruisers. Right now flying blaster boats consists of (hopefully) ramming your target and trying not to overshoot, overloading ev'rything and trying to kill your target before it moves too far away.

Not trying to sound like an elitist PvPer here, but most of the time all it takes is to click to the right or left as the opponent and you start the fight at 10km, blasters don't do nearly enough damage even if you'll manage to get into range to make up for that.

IMHO what is needed here is redution of mass to some blaster boats, or 'least try it out on Sisi. Again, i'm not an expert on ship balance, but it doesn't seem reasonable that ship with lowest range are also one of the slowest.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 15:11:00 - [223]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 06/05/2010 15:22:25
Originally by: Cyan Cure
Originally by: NightmareX

Originally by: Cyan Cure
stuff


Well i can agree that Blasters is mostly about DPS. But Blasters already have quite alot of DPS. So it's fine as it is.

But i was more thinking on Railguns that the DPS isn't all there. Because if DPS have been all in fleet fights, then my 1400mm Tempest would suck badly. But it doesn't. The Tempest is pretty nice in fleet fights.

And Rokh and Mega with Railguns works good in their ways to.


I'm impressed. Restraint, not feeding the troll. Anyways, what you have said is the problem we have here. You and Goumindong (he never touched a blaster in his life, so i'm more than happy to ignore whatever he has to say) only think in 0.0 fleet battle terms, not what happens on the daily basis to people using blasters in their T1 frigates, cruisers and battlecruisers. Right now flying blaster boats consists of (hopefully) ramming your target and trying not to overshoot, overloading ev'rything and trying to kill your target before it moves too far away.

Not trying to sound like an elitist PvPer here, but most of the time all it takes is to click to the right or left as the opponent and you start the fight at 10km, blasters don't do nearly enough damage even if you'll manage to get into range to make up for that.

IMHO what is needed here is redution of mass to some blaster boats, or 'least try it out on Sisi. Again, i'm not an expert on ship balance, but it doesn't seem reasonable that ship with lowest range are also one of the slowest.

To the first thing. Yes, Blasters is very close range weapons, and you just have to live with it. It's how they work. It's like we who use AutoCannons are in 80% of all times in falloff range and have to live with way lower DPS than the EFT shows they have.

Simply because when you goes into falloff, you lose DPS. And even then, it's working pretty good that way for AutoCannons.

It's just the way how you use the ships with AutoCannons.

But to the Blasters again. They do poor damage at more ranges, but the thing is to get inside optimal on your guns fastest possible. Once that happens, you can do insane amount of DPS. Ofc, if you decide to move 15 km to get inside optimal on your Blasters on the target, then it can hurt a bit if you get shoot before you are in optimal.

But in most cases, the DPS the Blasters have does so much DPS that they do so much damage that they can manage to kill the target before you die then. Even if you had to move 15 km.

So it's all about taking risks. Like an Abaddon pilot is doing against an AC Tempest with dual Heavy Neuts orbitin the Abaddon at 1 km. Because the Abaddon wont hit that Tempest any good and the Tempest will tank the Abaddon because if the Tempest is fitted right, it will have a bit high EM and Thermal resists.

Or like having a Neutron Mega inside 5 km on your Tempest. That's not fun i can tell you.

So it's not only Blaster pilots who have to take risks to get something killed.

And no, lowering the Mass on some Blaster boats is not the right way to go.

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2010.05.06 16:10:00 - [224]
 

Supported. Tracking speed should be inversely proportional to intended effective range of turret.

Other hybrid disadvantages compared to autocannons in small gang/solo warfare.
1. Can't switch damage types. Hybrids are useless against T2 Caldari/Gallente hulls, but projectiles are effective against all T2 ships since they can switch to damage resistance hole.
2. Hybrids use cap. Energy nuetralizer means game over for any Gallente blaster boat. Auto cannons will still deal damage.





NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 16:14:00 - [225]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 06/05/2010 16:16:12
Originally by: X Gallentius
Supported. Tracking speed should be inversely proportional to intended effective range of turret.

Other hybrid disadvantages compared to autocannons in small gang/solo warfare.
1. Can't switch damage types. Hybrids are useless against T2 Caldari/Gallente hulls, but projectiles are effective against all T2 ships since they can switch to damage resistance hole.
2. Hybrids use cap. Energy nuetralizer means game over for any Gallente blaster boat. Auto cannons will still deal damage.

This is a good example on someone who doesn't understand the advantages and downsides every of the weapon types have and then don't understands the balance between themugh.

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2010.05.06 16:53:00 - [226]
 

What exactly is the downside of an auto-cannon compared to a blaster again?


NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 17:03:00 - [227]
 

Originally by: X Gallentius
What exactly is the downside of an auto-cannon compared to a blaster again?



Fighting in falloff and lose quite alot of DPS?. And on top of it doesn't have quite alot of DPS to begin with.

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2010.05.06 17:06:00 - [228]
 

Fighting in falloff is an advantage since the blaster can't hit it. Surely there must be some other reason.

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2010.05.06 17:09:00 - [229]
 

Originally by: NightmareX

Originally by: Cyan Cure
Originally by: NightmareX

Well i can agree that Blasters is mostly about DPS. But Blasters already have quite alot of DPS. So it's fine as it is.

But i was more thinking on Railguns that the DPS isn't all there. Because if DPS have been all in fleet fights, then my 1400mm Tempest would suck badly. But it doesn't. The Tempest is pretty nice in fleet fights.

And Rokh and Mega with Railguns works good in their ways to.


I'm impressed. Restraint, not feeding the troll. Anyways, what you have said is the problem we have here. You and Goumindong (he never touched a blaster in his life, so i'm more than happy to ignore whatever he has to say) only think in 0.0 fleet battle terms, not what happens on the daily basis to people using blasters in their T1 frigates, cruisers and battlecruisers. Right now flying blaster boats consists of (hopefully) ramming your target and trying not to overshoot, overloading ev'rything and trying to kill your target before it moves too far away.

Not trying to sound like an elitist PvPer here, but most of the time all it takes is to click to the right or left as the opponent and you start the fight at 10km, blasters don't do nearly enough damage even if you'll manage to get into range to make up for that.

IMHO what is needed here is redution of mass to some blaster boats, or 'least try it out on Sisi. Again, i'm not an expert on ship balance, but it doesn't seem reasonable that ship with lowest range are also one of the slowest.

To the first thing. Yes, Blasters is very close range weapons, and you just have to live with it. It's how they work. It's like we who use AutoCannons are in 80% of all times in falloff range and have to live with way lower DPS than the EFT shows they have.

Simply because when you goes into falloff, you lose DPS. And even then, it's working pretty good that way for AutoCannons.

It's just the way how you use the ships with AutoCannons.

But to the Blasters again. They do poor damage at more ranges, but the thing is to get inside optimal on your guns fastest possible. Once that happens, you can do insane amount of DPS. Ofc, if you decide to move 15 km to get inside optimal on your Blasters on the target, then it can hurt a bit if you get shoot before you are in optimal.

But in most cases, the DPS the Blasters have does so much DPS that they do so much damage that they can manage to kill the target before you die then. Even if you had to move 15 km.

So it's all about taking risks. Like an Abaddon pilot is doing against an AC Tempest with dual Heavy Neuts orbitin the Abaddon at 1 km. Because the Abaddon wont hit that Tempest any good and the Tempest will tank the Abaddon because if the Tempest is fitted right, it will have a bit high EM and Thermal resists.

Or like having a Neutron Mega inside 5 km on your Tempest. That's not fun i can tell you.

So it's not only Blaster pilots who have to take risks to get something killed.

And no, lowering the Mass on some Blaster boats is not the right way to go.


Blasters are the shortest ranged weapons on the slowest ships. ACs are on the fastest ships and have longer range. Pulse have fairly insane range and only a slight decrease in damage compared to blasters and AC on ships that are faster and have more armor than blaster boats. Please explain how this is balanced.

Amongrimm
Posted - 2010.05.06 17:15:00 - [230]
 

dont forget torps with insane dps insane range and nice platforms

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 17:16:00 - [231]
 

Originally by: X Gallentius
Fighting in falloff is an advantage since the blaster can't hit it. Surely there must be some other reason.


Yeah, and then the Blaster Mega have the advantage again that if he scramble your Tempest and web you and keeps you in his optimal once he's there, then the Blaster pilot have a big advantage to, right?.

Each weapon types have advantages over other weapon types that is weak in something, like Autocannons can keep hitting in deep falloff while the Blasters can't really hit you. But if you look the other way. If the Blaster Mega can keep you scrambled and webbed inside 5 km, your in trouble.

See where i'm going?.

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2010.05.06 17:18:00 - [232]
 

Edited by: Bagehi on 06/05/2010 17:23:02
Originally by: Amongrimm
dont forget torps with insane dps insane range and nice platforms


As long as you can wait ~10 seconds for your torps to land. Most close range ships will have fired their second or third shot by then. Torps work best at extremely close range, where other ships have tracking problems but missiles do not.

Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: X Gallentius
Fighting in falloff is an advantage since the blaster can't hit it. Surely there must be some other reason.


Yeah, and then the Blaster Mega have the advantage again that if he scramble your Tempest and web you and keeps you in his optimal once he's there, then the Blaster pilot have a big advantage to, right?.

Each weapon types have advantages over other weapon types that is weak in something, like Autocannons can keep hitting in deep falloff while the Blasters can't really hit you. But if you look the other way. If the Blaster Mega can keep you scrambled and webbed inside 5 km, your in trouble.

See where i'm going?.


Except that requires the use of two mid-slots, and assumes the minmatar ship doesn't also have scram+web, and requires the gallente ship to magically be fast enough to catch the minmatar ship and keep it within range.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 17:29:00 - [233]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 06/05/2010 18:18:43
Originally by: Bagehi
Except that requires the use of two mid-slots, and assumes the minmatar ship doesn't also have scram+web, and requires the gallente ship to magically be fast enough to catch the minmatar ship and keep it within range.


Lets take the Blaster Mega vs the AC Tempest here again.

A smart Blaster Mega pilot fit Warp Scramblers instead of Warp Disruptors. But a Tempest pilot doesn't fit a Scrambler, but a Disruptor.

So what does this ends up with?, yes, the Blaster Mega can keep you scrambled (keep your MWD disabled) while the Tempest only have the Mega disrupted. So it means that the Tempest can't use the MWD to get out. But the Blaster Mega can use the MWD to get back into optimal of the Tempest if he wants. So it means that the Tempest is dead meat if that happens.

So it's all about not being inside web / scram range of the Mega in a Tempest. And that's gonna be as much of an issue as a Mega have to get into web / scram range to the Tempest.

Ofc, if you jump into a system and lands 20 km from a Mega, it shouldn't be an issue for the Tempest. But if a Mega warps right on top of your ass, you might be in trouble if your in a Tempest and gets scrambled and webbed by that Mega.

But if that Mega had been an Abaddon for example, then the Tempest would never move away from the Abaddon if you want to fight the Abaddon. The Tempest will then MWD as fastest possible really close to the Abaddon and orbit it at 1 km and then shoot him.

Do you understand now what i'm trying to tell here?. It's just a basic understanding on how each ships and weapons works.

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2010.05.06 18:23:00 - [234]
 

Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: X Gallentius
Fighting in falloff is an advantage since the blaster can't hit it. Surely there must be some other reason.


Yeah, and then the Blaster Mega have the advantage again that if he scramble your Tempest and web you and keeps you in his optimal once he's there, then the Blaster pilot have a big advantage to, right?.

I'm coming at if from a smaller ship perspective where time to get out of web/scram range is much less. In vast majority of the cases, the auto-cannon fitted ship will get outside web/scram range and then kite the blaster fitted ship to its death (The Minmatar ship is faster, has as many if not more mid slots for webs/scrams, etc..).

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2010.05.06 18:27:00 - [235]
 

Originally by: Cyan Cure
Goumindong (he never touched a blaster in his life, so i'm more than happy to ignore whatever he has to say) only think in 0.0 fleet battle terms
You also haven't read what I've written have you? The problem with blasters is, explicitly, that they cannot be solo/small gang platforms if they don't have the speed and agility to perform tackling duties and still get damage done.
Originally by: Bagehi
Blasters are the shortest ranged weapons on the slowest ships. ACs are on the fastest ships and have longer range. Pulse have fairly insane range and only a slight decrease in damage compared to blasters and AC on ships that are faster and have more armor than blaster boats. Please explain how this is balanced.

There are only two blaster boats in the entire game that are slower than their pulse laser equivalent. That is the Taranis compared to the Crusader and the Thorax compared to the Omen. Few would claim the Omen is superior to the Thorax and the Taranis is not considered a deficient ship. The Deimos is faster than the Zealot[1657(d) vs 1406(z)], the Hyperion is faster and more agile than any Amarr Battleship, and the Brutix is effectively the same speed as the Harbinger.

Some of them might not be fast, or agile enough, but that does not change their actual relative speeds. You ought to respect that when doing your analysis or people won't take you seriously, kinda like when you say that resist bonuses are not as good as repair bonuses(srsly, still waiting for the logic on that one)

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 18:29:00 - [236]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 06/05/2010 18:32:52
Originally by: X Gallentius
Originally by: NightmareX
Originally by: X Gallentius
Fighting in falloff is an advantage since the blaster can't hit it. Surely there must be some other reason.


Yeah, and then the Blaster Mega have the advantage again that if he scramble your Tempest and web you and keeps you in his optimal once he's there, then the Blaster pilot have a big advantage to, right?.

I'm coming at if from a smaller ship perspective where time to get out of web/scram range is much less. In vast majority of the cases, the auto-cannon fitted ship will get outside web/scram range and then kite the blaster fitted ship to its death (The Minmatar ship is faster, has as many if not more mid slots for webs/scrams, etc..).

I see what you mean, but that's Minmatars job to kite.

Amarr's job is to always keep range. While Gallente's job is always to get closest possible fastest possible. And Caldari's job with Missiles is something totally different again than the other 3 races have.

Liberal Sparrow
Gallente
Posted - 2010.05.06 18:36:00 - [237]
 

suported

why do you suppose 1on1 mega vs tempest?
you said mega is more dangerous than abaddon to your tempest.
that's true because damage type

in other case..
how do you think about meet t2 ship or shield tank ship.
in this case, tempest is more useful by choosing damage type.

yes.. AC's strength is damage type ,and also Blaster's strength is only DPS
but, everybody know that blaster just has a little bit more

yes so, DPS must be boosted , and also tracking too

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 18:39:00 - [238]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 06/05/2010 18:57:34
Liberal Sparrow, it was an example to show why Blasters are fine and why Autocannons are fine in their way.

And those things with Blasters and Autocannons will still be valid if we are talking 5 vs 5 or 20 vs 20.

You still have to get close to your targets in your Mega's fastest possible while the Tempest have to kite other ships that it should avoid to get to close to. But still be within RR range to the others in your gang as much as you can.

EDIT: You said that Blasters just have a little more DPS than other weapon types. On paper yes, but try to include resists into it all and don't just look at the EFT DPS, and you will see that a 2x damage mod Neutron Mega does like 5-6% more DPS than a 3x damage mod Abaddon after resists on a target that is armor tanked for example if the Abaddon use 7x Pulses and one RR.

Well to make it clear. You all are supporting this topic only because you mean Blaster ships is to hard to use and then want Blasters boosted so your life in EVE can be easier.

Like our lifes with Autocannons and Minmatar ships is any easier than Blasters and Gallente ships is nowRolling Eyes.

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2010.05.06 18:57:00 - [239]
 

Edited by: Bagehi on 06/05/2010 18:59:40
Originally by: NightmareX
Edited by: NightmareX on 06/05/2010 18:18:43
Originally by: Bagehi
Except that requires the use of two mid-slots, and assumes the minmatar ship doesn't also have scram+web, and requires the gallente ship to magically be fast enough to catch the minmatar ship and keep it within range.


Lets take the Blaster Mega vs the AC Tempest here again.

A smart Blaster Mega pilot fit Warp Scramblers instead of Warp Disruptors. But a DUMB Tempest pilot doesn't fit a Scrambler, but a Disruptor.

So what does this ends up with?, yes, the Blaster Mega can keep you scrambled (keep your MWD disabled) while the Tempest only have the Mega disrupted. So it means that the Tempest can't use the MWD to get out. But the Blaster Mega can use the MWD to get back into optimal of the Tempest if he wants. So it means that the Tempest is dead meat if that happens.

So it's all about not being inside web / scram range of the Mega in a Tempest. And that's gonna be as much of an issue as a Mega have to get into web / scram range to the Tempest.

Ofc, if you jump into a system and lands 20 km from a Mega, it shouldn't be an issue for the Tempest. But if a Mega warps right on top of your ass, you might be in trouble if your in a Tempest and gets scrambled and webbed by that Mega.

But if that Mega had been an Abaddon for example, then the Tempest would never move away from the Abaddon if you want to fight the Abaddon. The Tempest will then MWD as fastest possible really close to the Abaddon and orbit it at 1 km and then shoot him.

Do you understand now what i'm trying to tell here?. It's just a basic understanding on how each ships and weapons works.


Fixed it for you. A Tempest would likely have neuts as well, so a blasterthron best kill it quick before it has 0 cap (doesn't take long). So, no, a rationally fit AC Tempest would laugh in the face of a Megathron. You don't fly a PVP ship solo without scram and/or nuet and expect to survive against another PVP ship. But, this is 1v1 with PVP ships (which rarely happens). In a gang or fleet, blaster boats are useless. Shooting a miner or ratter can be done as easily in a dustbin with a staple gun as anything else, not a rational niche for a ship if it can be done by any properly fit ship.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.05.06 19:04:00 - [240]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 06/05/2010 19:35:52
Bagehi, don't be stupid. Do you know the reason why Tempest pilots doesn't fit a Scrambler?, because most of the time, you have to keep distance. And with distance, you can't keep the targets scrambled. And if you can't keep them scrambled then, they just warps away then.

And if you have to get close to an Abaddon or Geddon, it doesn't matter if you have scrambler or a disruptor fitted then, because they aren't going anywhere as long they don't fit scramblers then. But what is the odds to find an Abaddon or Geddon with Warp Scrambler fitted?. Tiny i will say.

Yeah the Tempest will most likely have dual Heavy Neuts fitted or one Heavy Neut and one RR, but what does those Neuts really means to a gang that is full of passive tanked ships that just gets repped by others in the gang?.

It doesn't helps that much there.

Yes against an active tanked ship or smaller targets, the dual Heavy Neuts will help ALOT against that in most cases.


Pages: first : previous : ... 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 ... : 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