open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked 250mm > 425mm
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

Jim Raynor
Bad Kitty Inc.
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2003.08.15 11:45:00 - [31]

Edited by: Jim Raynor on 15/08/2003 11:47:06
Amorex is sort-of correct. We are comparing the best medium railgun to the worst large railgun.

I'm curious if anyone wants to take some time to test a 150mm prototype gauss gun vs a 250mm railgun if they would get simular results. I do believe that the 150mm Gauss has horrible range though, for a railgun..

When you compare a 425mm Prototype Gauss Gun vs a 250mm Prototype Gauss Gun, I'm sure it's a huge difference.

Here's the catch, of course, the 425mm Prototype Gauss Guns don't exist. So we're stuck with stock tech 1 large turrets that basically suck compared to our high graded medium turrets. Many people feel gyped, I know I do.

I do believe large turrets are weak. Lasers might be an exception as Tachyons are highly powerful and their frequency crystals give them higher damage than any large hybrid or projectile ammo, that has to be fixed soon.

The Tachyon Lasers might be the poster child for what large turrets should be like, they are quite good, better than any other large turret, by far.

Macabre Votum
Posted - 2003.08.15 11:51:00 - [32]

amorex if you are really trying to say that a 250mm proto should be able to do as much damage as a gun that takes 13 times more power, twice as much cpu, and twice as much cap, that only fits ona battleship, then i think you should stop playing eve.

my solution would be to lower rof by 8% and increase large charges dmg by 8%, and decrease the tracking speed of large by 8% more.

Do not tell me when I should quit or play. As I said onec again you are compearing Prototype Gauss vs Standart Rail, and by doing that you geting wrong here. Prototypes are better than standart rails, and compering them to standart market sold rail is a stupid thing.

Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2003.08.15 12:51:00 - [33]

"The Tachyon Lasers might be the poster child for what large turrets should be like, they are quite good, better than any other large turret, by far."

I agree. The solution is *NOT* to nerf tachyons. The solution is to fix the other large turrets.
After all they use 70 cap/shot not counting skills...

Posted - 2003.08.15 14:33:00 - [34]

what the ****.

we are NOT comparing the best 250mm railgun. not even close.


the best medium railgun is the 250mm special ops V guass gun with a straight up dmg mod of 4.2 and a range of 37200, rof of 6 seconds.

thats no skills, no modules.

i will compare the ****tiest 425mm rail to the best 250mm rail all day long and continue to say the worst 425mm rail should outclass the best 250mm rail because thats the truth.

the best 250mm rail, which you ppl obviously have no idea about, would ****, sodomize, and pillage the 425 easily.

battleships guns dont take up three thousand, seven hundred and twenty five power for no reason do they?

amorex, quit playing eve. or at least, know something before you post here.

Posted - 2003.08.15 14:37:00 - [35]

posting again because im simply baffeled at how daft some of you people are.


im going to try and make this as simple as i possibly can.

compare a 250mm rail I to a battleship size gun, DUAL 250mm rail I.



Posted - 2003.08.15 15:06:00 - [36]

Another solution "could" have been to have made these super 250mm guns so rare that the making this comparison pointless.

Another fix for the large guns could be to DOUBLE their range, which would account for the greater energy requirement but leave damage so that BS's aren't podding cruisers with one shot.

Posted - 2003.08.15 15:19:00 - [37]

sorry, but the first solution you had was bad. we need mroe variety, not less.

the second solution was still bad, but not as much as the first.

Colonial Fleet Services
Independent Faction
Posted - 2003.08.15 15:20:00 - [38]

Well besides it only doing so much damage but the ammo takes 5 times more space for the ammo compared to the med ammo. There needs to be a balance issue.

Just thought I would point that out too. Large guns suck unless you get an indy or someone to bring you ammo constantly.

Posted - 2003.08.15 15:26:00 - [39]

I agree with needing more variety just made that statement to bring to light that they aren't extremely rare thus your point IS worth discussion.

Second I think you could have made your point easier comparing standard 250mm with dual 250mm which doesn't provide twice the damage as one would expect since the dual is just side by side 250's(as stated in its description).

Posted - 2003.08.15 15:34:00 - [40]

you're right i should have used the dual 250mm rail I vs 250mm rail I to illustrate this problem, but i was fitted with the guns i showed stats for and i am far to lazy.


Cyrus Troy
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2003.08.15 17:04:00 - [41]

Edited by: Cyrus Troy on 15/08/2003 17:08:25
I hear a lot of good points about how Large weapons such as the 425 should be a lot better than mediums. It is obvious that someone firing a 9mm-hand gun, with bullets that are the size of your pinky finger, shouldn't do as much damage as a .50 cal, when the .50 cal is firing bullets the size of small coke bottles.

I'm also seeing a lot of posts about how battles should be longer though, possibly 3 times as long. I think they're right, so I'd really prefer to read posts that take in more of the bigger picture, than just someone ranting and calling people noobs, even if their suggestion is valid. If the damage of "Large" guns or ammo are increased, then battles will be even shorter, and why should a 1on1 bship battle last 30 seconds. So if the damage is increased, then we have to increase the shields and armour of all Battleships. If we do that, then cruisers will have even less chance of ever touching a BB. Then we better increase the damage of medium weapons?? Where is the balance? Right now I think I'd grade the whole battle system as a "B". What I can't help but think though, is that to improve things, I think the whole foundation needs to be re-mapped.

Cirrius Technologies
Posted - 2003.08.15 17:12:00 - [42]

Bring out the nerf axe

Silver Striker
Posted - 2003.08.15 17:39:00 - [43]

You can't use large weapons in the same way you use medium weapons.

Mediums are range for 10 - 20k engagements, perhaps a bit more. Larges are 30k and above depending on your modules.

You want to see a battleships with med weapons get owned by large just use the range. Keeping 30k between you and an opponent vastly changes combat. And using large weapons to go after cruisers isn't a good idea, Large weapons are for other battleships, so tracking does not need to be that high in the first place.

Range is a valuable part of combat. You don't have to charge into close combat for every engagement. If pirates are blockading your home system, establish bookmarks around your gates that will drop you at your max range and then open up on them. Or just jam them up.

Be a bit more creative than sitting right next to each other shooting all your guns. Winning an engagement doesn't mean destroying a ship, especially a battleship, if you can take up a position that he can't do anything about, like sitting at 60k and unloading on him, he will leave. Problem solved.

Dragon Emperor
Dark Design
Posted - 2003.08.15 17:55:00 - [44]

Edited by: Dragon Emperor on 15/08/2003 18:02:03
jesus...I wonder here's how many crying children want a "i win" button..... compareing a tech 5 weapon still in paper with a market bought tech 1 weapon ,and saying that tech 1 weapon should outclass the tech 5 weapon?Shocked are you idiot?
Large weapon does need buff, but obviously Almighty frstkor13 see something human can't see.Rolling Eyes

btw, if you want to discuss something, then first stop using a forum alt to write silly posts, second stop flaming everyone who doesn't agree with you.

Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2003.08.15 18:07:00 - [45]

So people finally figured out that most Large turret weapons suck.

Missile users figured out that missiles suck weeks ago, and basically for the same reasons the 425 is so bad considering the cost/firing rate etc.

Zagum Darkfin
Ghosting Corp
Posted - 2003.08.15 21:01:00 - [46]

Has anyone taken into account Range when using Large Turrets? Has anyone compared Neutron Blaster Cannons with say, cruiser Modal Blaster Cannons?

Come on, consider its application, use and range for each weapon. Why the **** would I want to use a 425mm rail at 10k range with a target moving at 350 m/s?? Of course the 250mm rail would perform better than a 425mm rail.

What if I wanted to hit you from 50k out? No way I would use a 250mm rail when I can smack you for 250-300 a pop with a 425mm.

I have nailed pirates at 30k range with a NBC in shorter time than using 250mm compressed rails.

Range is the key as well as how and what you use. If you get within my web statis range, you are toast with my large blaster turrets. Just saying something sucks because you dont know how to use it properly has no merit in this balancing arguement. If you were to compare Large Hybrids or Large Projectiles with Larger Lasers, then we could discuss this issue on a leveling playing field.

As for fight time, I have sat with a corp mate trying to get each other's shields down at point blank range and it took us 10 minutes.

CCP should restrict Large weapons to BBs, Meduims to Cruisers and Smalls to Frigates. This would then make each ship class more important and they would play more distinct roles in combat than having 1 UBER ship/mods ruling the battle field.

Yes, Dual weapons should fire TWO SHOTS to make their sucky stats make sense.

Luc Boye
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2003.08.16 00:02:00 - [47]

the best medium railgun is the 250mm special ops V guass gun with a straight up dmg mod of 4.2 and a range of 37200, rof of 6 seconds.

you play the game or just browse tti database?

Homo Erectus
The Initiative.
Posted - 2003.08.16 01:32:00 - [48]

Edited by: Homo Erectus on 16/08/2003 01:39:20
dragon emp, 'frstkor13' is the name I have used on forums since alpha6. it's the name I registered on the eve boards 2.5 years ago. its the name i used all throughout alpha/beta on the forums. that is the reason I have used it here. for me to have to explain this to a ******ed forum newbie like you, just accentuates my point.

I have used these guns, i have tested them inside and out.

this is the entire reason that ccp should just stop listening to the forums, because they are filed with stupid ass people who have no f'n idea. people who think up dumb ass **** like 'CCP should restrict Large weapons to BBs, Meduims to Cruisers and Smalls to Frigates.'.

I could blow holes through stupid crap like that all day long, but it's a waste of time.

i repeat, for the 3rd time now.

the worst 425mm rail should outclass the best 250mm rail.

(if i need to add in 'when dealing damage at optimal range' I can do that too.)

the worst 425mm rail should outclass the best 250mm rail when dealing damage at optimal range.

I will keep saying this, because I am right.

and yea luc, I actually play this game. I've probably put in 20 times as many hours fixing it as any 2 forums newbies in this thread have. did you even read the sig?

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2003.08.16 02:29:00 - [49]

Edited by: Jarjar on 16/08/2003 02:30:49
"CCP should restrict Large weapons to BBs, Meduims to Cruisers and Smalls to Frigates."

While you're at it, lower the battleships turret hardpoints to half... Anyone using 8 large turrets?
No thanks.

Luc Boye
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2003.08.16 02:35:00 - [50]

Edited by: Luc Boye on 16/08/2003 02:40:44
No I havent read your sig. I dont care really. I have registered my car 5 years ago... do you care? Everybody is entitled to opinion what makes you think that cos of the fact that you were in alpha, you can go on insult people? And yes I asked you if you play the game as it is.

You went on comparing item that isn't in the game yet AFTER people posted their opinions, just to "win". That is what I reacted to. And would not be intimidated by your ego ass even if you HOSTED the damn forum yourself, let alone registered at it "2.5" years ago.

"I know I am right" well congrats you don't need to discuss anything anymore, right? lol.

P.S. yes I basically agree that large guns should be upgraded, they should be able to make way more damage.

Posted - 2003.08.16 03:32:00 - [51]

luc wtf do ppl like you post if you don't read anything? you waste my time asking me a stupid ass question that you could have answered for yourself if your lazy ass would have taken 5 seconds to read 1 sentence.

Luc Boye
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2003.08.16 03:35:00 - [52]

Edited by: Luc Boye on 16/08/2003 03:42:50
Eh, why would anyone bother reading your posts? they consist of "stupid ass" "lazy ass" "****ty people" and similar expressions. Man it's been years since I left elementary school lol, I certainly don't want to go back there. So I read others posts and hop over yours. Got it? Wink

Ok, let's get serious, why do you think that large gun should outperform ANY medium gun? We're talking about different tech levels and it may be like this:

a.) you have no idea of the designers intention and weight of the fact that there are different tech levels. Do you think that WW1 battleship should outperform a modern AEGIS ship? That's different tech levels, right?

b.) as much as EVE-guru as you may consider yourself, the statement "the worst 425mm rail should outclass the best 250mm rail" is your ****ing OPINION not some frigging universal truth. It would be truth ONLY IF you were a developer and screwed up while you intented to make it so.

c.) I post, because with all your insults, man, you are just begging for it.

Posted - 2003.08.16 03:41:00 - [53]

the phrase 'lazy ass' actually wouldnt be used if people like you read in the first place.

'stupid ass' wouldn't be used either, if people who didn't know what they were talking about would simply not post.


Posted - 2003.08.16 03:46:00 - [54]

i hate people who edit their posts AFTER someone has replied to it.

Luc Boye
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2003.08.16 03:47:00 - [55]

ok hate some more:

"but i would probably have to explain this to the devs too, so here goes"

lol so tell me, when are YOU WRITING A GAME?

Posted - 2003.08.16 03:48:00 - [56]

anyone who tries to argue eve with reality, like you just did, completely and utterly fails. we're talking balance, in a game.

Luc Boye
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2003.08.16 03:51:00 - [57]

ok lets stop picking each other eyes for a moment. Why would tech 5 medium gun be unbalanced if it can beat the lowest large tech 1 gun of the same type, really?

What I am saying is that the quality if the tech 5 item may be reserved for the cause of the role play, as we see that now with jovian events.

Posted - 2003.08.16 04:05:00 - [58]

13 times more power usage, twice as much cpu, 3 times more cap usage, ammo takes up 5 times more space, skill to use costs so much more, training time takes so much longer.

well theres 6 reasons right off the top of my head.

Luc Boye
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2003.08.16 04:25:00 - [59]

Yea ok, but there is other part that makes the balance, namely price and availability. 425 rails go for 2 mil, gauss 250's go for (silly) 10 mil. I can't imagine how much would tech 5 med rails cost, and how rare their drops would be.

Their stats compared to the stock large rails ARE insane, yes, but maybe that's the whole point?

Anyway, is there a forum that you may have this discussion, where the devs might give a reply what were they thinking?

Warspite Developments
Posted - 2003.08.16 09:18:00 - [60]

Edited by: Doppelganger on 16/08/2003 09:20:55
Make the 425s optimal range something like 40-60KM.

It's a huge, slow firing, power eating deck gun, and should be treated as such. Up the damage, too....I'd say at least 25% more than the best 250mm rails at the same tech level. Downsides? You'd have to remain a long distance from your target -- not a terribly easy task for the relatively slow battleship unless you want to sacrifice yourself to a MWD. And of course, smaller, faster targets would just be damn hard to hit, as well as your own speed (in the case of MWD) sabotaging your accuracy until you slow down a bit. This may also make dual/quad/whatever useful.

I would say a 425mm rail should more or less only be a battleship to battleship or a marginal battleship to cruiser weapon choice. And forget about using it against frigates. Large guns for large ships, medium guns for medium ships, and small guns for small ships -- seems reasonable to me.

This may also mean that 425s will not be adopted so much for pirate killing and more for warfare between PCs, unless you have a good reason to be so far away from targets you have a hard time hitting, since there are no NPC battleships....yet.

"Outperform" is kind of a strange word. What the heck does it mean, anyways?

Pages: 1 [2] 3

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


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only