open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked DPS graphs: BS vs. BC
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 ... : last (25)

Author Topic

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.17 20:22:00 - [541]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 17/12/2008 20:22:28
Originally by: Chi Quan

if someone would make a graph of f(speed,agility)->max orbit velocity, one would see that the range drop does not scale properly with the tracking increase.


Define properly.

Quote:

if you mean that gang weapons are pulses, rails, arties and beams, than that once again shows how good pulses are, as obviously they can be used in gang as well as close quarters.
you also marvelosly deducted that solo warfare is dead


1. For different sizes of gangs they operate at different efficiencies. Pulse ships for instance are pretty bad in large gangs.

2. Who said that solo warfare was dead? I said that some people might have stopped doing it, but that is more their choice now isn't it.

Quote:

don't jump between the refferences here, you can not switch rails and blasters in mid fight. if you fit pulses you have a system that is effective at both long and short range.


50km is not "long range"

100km is not "long range".

Hell, back with the overpowered locus rig stacking you could have some issues at 135[the pro pulse Apocs were at 150].

****, when i fly a beam Abaddon at 152+20 i often feel like I need more range.

Quote:
does any (sane) bs fit include small guns?


His point was that the small rails vs small pulses have roughly the same area of effectiveness when compared to large blasters vs large pulses. He was then making the point that if you consider the large blaster vs large pulse to be overpowered as you claim then you must also consider small rails to be overpowered because it has, roughly, the same relationship.

Originally by: Chi Quan
red line -- single dual heavy pulse tech 2(lowest tier) on abbadon, all skills 5
green line -- single dual 150 railgun tech2(lowest tier) standard antimatter on hype, all skills


What is it with you and low tier rails?

Also: I am seriously laughing at putting dual heavy pulses on an Abaddon.

Chi Quan
Bibkor Enterprises
Posted - 2008.12.17 20:26:00 - [542]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: maralt

Personally to balance things out i would put tracking on pulse to around the same as 425mm rail guns at least for starters.


Which is reasonable as soon as pulse ships start shooting at 190+30km.

Shorter range = Better tracking


that 190+30 is for the rokh, which gets a bonus to hybrids range. unbonused range is around 130+30 (t2 tachyons clock in at 120+25 but have a higher damage).
'really want to snipe? take an apoc.
who is pushing weapon systems into roles they don't belong in now? decide, are pulses short range systems or not?

and i missed that:
Quote:
We already have, its the pilots not wanting to use the role that the ships were designed for.. Now where is my damned cookie.

and we are back to square one, what roles do blasterships have now, that cant be fulfilled better by other ships? what is their unique edge?

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.17 20:41:00 - [543]
 

Edited by: maralt on 17/12/2008 20:45:35

Gourmindong tried to palm off the overpoweredness of pulse with several poor excuses in this thread.

My personal favorite was comparing them to rails and pointing out that rails get 30+30km with AM and as such were a virtual match for pulse that get 45+10km.Shocked

But then later when the suggestion was made that pulse should be balanced with rails as far as tracking is concerned a major EMO foot stomping fit was soon posted by the DONG himself claiming that the tracking was insufficient for such purposes......LaughingLaughingLaughingLaughing

The hippocracy as well as a obvious bias within a few posts was excellent to see and i especially enjoyed reading the twinky excuses he tried to make to cover it.


ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.Very Happy

Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
Posted - 2008.12.17 21:57:00 - [544]
 

Originally by: Captator
Originally by: Pohbis
Edited by: Pohbis on 17/12/2008 18:40:09
TL;DR

Blasters still rule at short range.

Amarr is overpowered.

Missiles suck more than ever.

Was wondering where all Bellums blaster-whines went. I see someone shut him up wih facts and colorful graphs. Thanks SecHaul.


Laughing those graphs if you looked at them were supporting bellum's point.


Yeah, his did. From EFT, which DPS tool is FUBAR.

The rest didn't.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.17 21:59:00 - [545]
 

Originally by: Pohbis
Originally by: Captator
Originally by: Pohbis
Edited by: Pohbis on 17/12/2008 18:40:09
TL;DR

Blasters still rule at short range.

Amarr is overpowered.

Missiles suck more than ever.

Was wondering where all Bellums blaster-whines went. I see someone shut him up wih facts and colorful graphs. Thanks SecHaul.


Laughing those graphs if you looked at them were supporting bellum's point.


Yeah, his did. From EFT, which DPS tool is FUBAR.

The rest didn't.


Proof or stfu, i look forwards to seeing your graphs.

Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
Posted - 2008.12.17 22:23:00 - [546]
 

Originally by: maralt
Proof or stfu, i look forwards to seeing your graphs.
Sure. Which statement are you refuting?

That blasters are best for short range?

That lasers rule at medium and long range?

Or that missiles don't win in any, non-thought up, scenario?

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.17 22:38:00 - [547]
 

Originally by: Chi Quan

that 190+30 is for the rokh, which gets a bonus to hybrids range. unbonused range is around 130+30 (t2 tachyons clock in at 120+25 but have a higher damage).


Tracking computers, locus rigs, and tracking enhancers are your friends. Clearly i was talking about moduled ranges in all instances. In those instances, range is more important than both tank and damage. Because no ship will be able to close the range before a group of longer range ships kill them.

Now, Apocs are great, but if you're making an argument as to the Apoc being overpowered, you're doing it in the wrong thread, since this one seems to be about closer ranges where the optimal bonus on the Apoc doesn't matter.

You made a claim that pulse ships could "hit long ranges" i refuted this by explaining that long ranges means topping 140km in a BS at the very least for optimal.

Quote:
decide, are pulses short range systems or not?

The answer is no. The system is not binary.

Quote:

and we are back to square one, what roles do blasterships have now, that cant be fulfilled better by other ships? what is their unique edge?


Solo/Small gang bs.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.17 22:41:00 - [548]
 

Originally by: maralt

But then later when the suggestion was made that pulse should be balanced with rails as far as tracking is concerned a major EMO foot stomping fit was soon posted by the DONG himself claiming that the tracking was insufficient for such purposes


Actually i said that since rails had a much longer total effective range the tracking on pulses needed to be better than the tracking on rails.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.17 23:01:00 - [549]
 

Edited by: maralt on 17/12/2008 23:03:52
Edited by: maralt on 17/12/2008 23:03:07

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: maralt

But then later when the suggestion was made that pulse should be balanced with rails as far as tracking is concerned a major EMO foot stomping fit was soon posted by the DONG himself claiming that the tracking was insufficient for such purposes


Actually i said that since rails had a much longer total effective range the tracking on pulses needed to be better than the tracking on rails.


And yet you used them in a comparison to pulse and pulses effective ranges like they were a valid option to use in the same scenarios pulse are effective.

You even quoted available ranges of 45+10km for pulse and 30+30km for AM rails AS IF THEY WERE VALID CHOICES AT THOSE RANGES.

Tbh i do not see why you have a problem with a tracking reduction on pulse as at their longer ranges it will be irrelevant cos the need for tracking at range is less (as you pointed out), and at shorter ranges your gang members (as you keep bleating out that amarr are gang ships) will have the target webbed and slowed so the transversal will still be low enough for you to hit it.

In fact amarr should have utterly awful tracking up close and need support to slow the targets so they can hit things at close range so they fit this "GANG SHIP ROLE" you seem to want to use to justify their overpoweredness.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.17 23:15:00 - [550]
 

Originally by: maralt

And yet you used them in a comparison to pulse and pulses effective ranges like they were a valid option to use in the same scenarios pulse are effective.

You even quoted available ranges of 45+10km for pulse and 30+30km for AM rails AS IF THEY WERE VALID CHOICES AT THOSE RANGES.


They are valid choices at those ranges. At those ranges tracking matters much less.

Quote:

Tbh i do not see why you have a problem with a tracking reduction on pulse


Because pulse ships are designed for optimal use on the small side of medium gangs, not the large side. I am not convinced that a reduction is necessary for any reason. They really are terrible in close range, and the web nerf has made that come out extensively.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.17 23:21:00 - [551]
 

Edited by: maralt on 17/12/2008 23:39:58


Originally by: Goumindong


They are valid choices at those ranges. At those ranges tracking matters much less.





Only if you are operating at those max ranges, for rails at the 60km your ok, at the 40 your okish but inside 30-40km you start missing (unless the target ship is tackled/webbed ect ect to reduce his transversal) while pulse do not miss so the comparison of rails and pulse is not valid.


Originally by: Goumindong
They really are terrible in close range, and the web nerf has made that come out extensively.


Rubbish...pulse do almost as well as blasters at very close range (5-10km) and at close range (10-20km) they out class them utterly and they have no competition at 30-60km.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.17 23:47:00 - [552]
 

Originally by: maralt

Only if you are operating at those max ranges, for rails at the 60km your ok, at the 40 your okish but inside 30-40km you start missing (unless the target ship is tackled/webbed ect ect to reduce his transversal) while pulse do not so the comparison of rails and pulse is not valid.


I do not understand what you're trying to say? You're trying to say that because pulse are designed to operate at a shorter range that within the specific ranges we were discussing we cannot compare the weapons?

Rail ships hit from around 30-190km depending on fits. Pulse ships hit from around 10 to 45. You're complaining about the ability of the ships to hit within the ranges at 30-45km. But if you want to hit at those ranges you can certainly fly rail ships.

Quote:

Rubbish...pulse do almost as well as blasters at very close range (5-10km) and at close range (10-20km) they out class them utterly and they have no competition at 30-60km.



This is a lie. Pulse ships are just as bad compared to blasters within web range as blasters are to pulses outside of it.

Actually look at where the bars are relative to one another on a vertical scale. I know it looks like there is more space between them at the longer ranges, but there isn't. That is a product if your imagination created by seeing the area rather than the vertical differences.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.18 00:03:00 - [553]
 

Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 00:12:30

Originally by: Goumindong


Rail ships hit from around 30-190km depending on fits.

Beam ships hit from around 30-190km depending on fits. (in fact 218km optimal in a apoc with rather nice tracking and dmg with tac 2s and aurora)


This is why beams are relatively balanced with rails and that pulse are a utterly different system and not even close to being a viable candidate for comparison to rails or visa versa.


Originally by: Goumindong
Pulse ships hit from around 5km to 60+km depending on fit and for 50+km of that range they out dmg and then out range every other comparative system.


With a large tracking nerf to pulse they will be considerably more balanced and while still effective at long ranges, but at closer ranges as long as they have tacklers with them they will also be ok, and that should not be a issue as im told they are "GANG" ships.





Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.18 00:39:00 - [554]
 

I still don't get it. You're saying that you cannot compare pulses and rails even though they can both operate within the same gang types with one having an advantage on the smaller side and one on the larger side.

That is almost like saying you cant compare blasters and pulse. I suppose then we should remove the pulse lasers from the graphs in this thread. How then would we complain about pulse laser imbalance?

Think of it as an overlapping issue. Lasers are middle gang weapons which slightly overlap into shorter ranges. Rails are larger gang weapons that overlap fairly well into middle gangs. Blasters are solo/small gang weapons that overlap decently into middle gangs.

You want to ignore the middle gang options that exist in order to declare pulse lasers imbalanced. They aren't, you just are ignoring how weapons overlap with each other.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.18 00:51:00 - [555]
 

Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 00:55:42
Originally by: Goumindong


You want to ignore the middle gang options that exist in order to declare pulse lasers imbalanced.

I am not ignoring anything im pointing out that pulse are way overpowered as they are almost as effective as blasters at the closest ranges blaster get, while also outclassing them inside 20km and utterly out ranging them at 30km+.

Now you may think that making up "gang styles" and "roles" will deflect or justify this overpoweredness but it does not and will not.


Originally by: Goumindong
you just are ignoring how weapons overlap with each other.


And if i could switch from blasters to rails in space as fast as pulse can swap crystals you would have a point.

In fact its because pulse overlap and outclass blasters and AC in DMG/RANGE ratios at virtually every available range while having 30+km extra range on top of them that is the problem.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.18 05:24:00 - [556]
 

Originally by: maralt
while also outclassing them inside 20km



Blasters gain just as much advantage over lasers under 10km as lasers do over blasters till about 30km.

Theron Gyrow
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2008.12.18 08:02:00 - [557]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: maralt
while also outclassing them inside 20km



Blasters gain just as much advantage over lasers under 10km as lasers do over blasters till about 30km.


Wasn't it you who said that it was easy to maneuver to reduce transversal?

Anyway, I disagree with blasters having advantage beyond 8km or so, but I am glad that your opinion is that reducing the effective range of large lasers to 30km would balance the situation pretty well. I'd personally prefer keeping the range and tweaking the lasers in other ways, but you're finally acknowledging the issue.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.18 09:14:00 - [558]
 

Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 10:31:06

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: maralt
while also outclassing them inside 20km



Blasters gain just as much advantage over lasers under 10km as lasers do over blasters till about 30km.


Wrong...lasers gain not only gain more inside 10km, its also more like from 3-7/8km and even that its marginal and as you can see the window of effect is much narrower.

As well as the fact that lasers do not just hit up to 30km they hit out to over 60km.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.18 10:39:00 - [559]
 

Originally by: Theron Gyrow

Wasn't it you who said that it was easy to maneuver to reduce transversal?

Anyway, I disagree with blasters having advantage beyond 8km or so, but I am glad that your opinion is that reducing the effective range of large lasers to 30km would balance the situation pretty well. I'd personally prefer keeping the range and tweaking the lasers in other ways, but you're finally acknowledging the issue.


1. Yes, much easier for fast high agility ships with extra med slots.

2. Blasters advantage starts around 14km or so depending on target transversal. Disagree all you want, the facts say otherwise.

3. 30km, ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Range is not a flat sliding scale, where some number of KM on any side are equivalent to some number of KM on the other.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.18 10:56:00 - [560]
 

Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 10:57:59

Originally by: Goumindong


1. Yes, much easier for fast high agility ships with extra med slots.


Their are no fast high agility BS they are all slow and have poor maneuverability compared to every other conventional class in eve.

Originally by: Goumindong
2. Blasters advantage starts around 14km or so depending on target transversal. Disagree all you want, the facts say otherwise.


Under perfect circumstances and against certain types of tanks blasters are slightly better at 8-14km, but in most cases lasers equal or out perform blasters at those ranges, while having another 45km+ on top of that to be very effective in.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.18 11:36:00 - [561]
 

Originally by: maralt

Their are no fast high agility BS they are all slow and have poor maneuverability compared to every other conventional class in eve.


Other than the Tempest, Hyperion, Dominix, and Megathron

Quote:

Under perfect circumstances and against certain types of tanks blasters are slightly better at 8-14km, but in most cases lasers equal or out perform blasters at those ranges, while having another 45km+ on top of that to be very effective in.



So now we're discussing the Apoc on the top end and the Abaddon on the short end?

Not that it would matter much, the 30km on the other side is not "worth more" than the 14km below.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.18 14:03:00 - [562]
 

Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 14:14:00

Originally by: Goumindong


Other than the Tempest, Hyperion, Dominix, and Megathron


Just because these BS are marginally faster and more agile than the other BS does not make them interceptors or cruisers, they are still slow ass BS. Even BC are pretty poor as far as agility and speed go for matching alignment against smaller ships let alone BS.

Originally by: Goumindong


Not that it would matter much, the 30km on the other side is not "worth more" than the 14km below.


Blasters hit for 0 dmg after 30km to 60+km,

Less dmg than pulse from 14km-30km

Slightly more or less depending on the circumstances from 8km-14km

Slightly more from 5km-8km.

And that is why lasers are utterly overpowered.

ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETHVery Happy



sdthujfg
Posted - 2008.12.18 15:49:00 - [563]
 

Originally by: maralt
Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 14:14:00

Originally by: Goumindong


Other than the Tempest, Hyperion, Dominix, and Megathron


Just because these BS are marginally faster and more agile than the other BS does not make them interceptors or cruisers, they are still slow ass BS. Even BC are pretty poor as far as agility and speed go for matching alignment against smaller ships let alone BS.

Originally by: Goumindong


Not that it would matter much, the 30km on the other side is not "worth more" than the 14km below.


Blasters hit for 0 dmg after 30km to 60+km,

Less dmg than pulse from 14km-30km

Slightly more or less depending on the circumstances from 8km-14km

Slightly more from 5km-8km.

And that is why lasers are utterly overpowered.

ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETHVery Happy





Are you seriously stupid or do you like playing dumb?

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.18 16:01:00 - [564]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 18/12/2008 16:02:36
Originally by: maralt

Just because these BS are marginally faster and more agile than the other BS does not make them interceptors or cruisers, they are still slow ass BS. Even BC are pretty poor as far as agility and speed go for matching alignment against smaller ships let alone BS


1. A cruiser is marginally faster and more agile than a battleship. The key is how large the margin is. With these BS, the margin is pretty significant to the point where they are nearly as agile as BCs are and certainly the margin between a plated battlecruiser and these ships is smaller than the margin between these and the less agile BS.

2. You do not need to be as agile as a cruiser or interceptor in order to partake in solo and small gang combat.

Quote:

Blasters hit for 0 dmg after 30km to 60+km


At 27km, Neutron blasters with Null hit for 39.5% of their dps. The 0 DPS point on Neutron blasters hits at around 45km, though the DPS before then is very low.

Drones operate out to 60km.

Quote:


Less dmg than pulse from 14km-30km

Slightly more or less depending on the circumstances from 8km-14km

Slightly more from 5km-8km.


The advantage that blasters have from 0-10km is just as large as the advantage that lasers have from 14-30. You will notice that even with only a single web, the Megathron will stop doing damage to a BC significantly under the 5km mark.

You will also notice that the existence of a single web makes space 2.4 times more difficult to move through. This means that the area from 14-30km is a 16km effective range while the range from 0-10 is 24km effective. While this alone does not have any say as to whether or not any specific ship or weapon system is overpowered or not, it does lend evidence, especially with the types of engagement ranges typical for these types of fights that you are talking out of your ass.

2. The

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.18 16:48:00 - [565]
 

Edited by: maralt on 18/12/2008 17:54:40
Originally by: Goumindong
You do not need to be as agile as a cruiser or interceptor in order to partake in solo and small gang combat.



As far as BS are concerned the difference in speed and agility is not important at all as small gang combat with BS relies on tacklers to be properly effective.

And the target selection available to solo a BS is so small it is not worth doing (that is why nobody really does it in a BS) and ppl use smaller more effective classes of ships that are versatile enough and have a good available target selection for solo pvp.


Originally by: Goumindong
At 27km, Neutron blasters with Null hit for 39.5% of their dps. The 0 DPS point on Neutron blasters hits at around 45km, though the DPS before then is very low.


It is not just "very low" it is utterly insignificant.

Originally by: Goumindong
You will also notice that the existence of a single web makes space 2.4 times more difficult to move through. This means that the area from 14-30km is a 16km effective range while the range from 0-10 is 24km effective.


1. The 0-10km AVAILABLE range you claim is actually around 4km-10km for turret BS and that is 6 x 2.4 = 14.4.

2. Not only that but the web in question increases the hit rate and abilities as a percentage of pulse as much as it does blasters.

So once again pulse get the very best of virtually all the ranges open to blasters and 30km where they have no real opposition at all.

ZE "BALANCE" BAT COMETH.Very Happy

Christari Zuborov
Amarr
Ore Mongers
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2008.12.18 18:47:00 - [566]
 

I really don't see ccp lowering tracking on pulse lasers when they've just boosted them.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.18 19:08:00 - [567]
 

Originally by: Christari Zuborov
I really don't see ccp lowering tracking on pulse lasers when they've just boosted them.


Considering the rather large nerf and adjustment virtually every ship and a lot of modules have taken in this last patch id say there will be a lot of balancing to be done due to the effects, and previous adjustments are less important and hardly a reason to keep a broken and overpowered system the way it is.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.18 22:48:00 - [568]
 

Originally by: maralt

As far as BS are concerned the difference in speed and agility is not important at all as small gang combat with BS relies on tacklers to be properly effective.


That depends entirely on the size of the gang. Speed and agility are non zero factors in fleet warfare, it follows that they are also non zero factors in smaller gangs and in fact more important.

Quote:
And the target selection available to solo a BS is so small it is not worth doing (that is why nobody really does it in a BS) and ppl use smaller more effective classes of ships that are versatile enough and have a good available target selection for solo pvp.


Target selection goes both ways. Cruisers may be more able to catch and kill targets, but they are also easier to kill themselves. This limits their target selection at the high end

Quote:

It is not just "very low" it is utterly insignificant.


About as significant as the DPS that lasers do under 10km when blasters are still doing considerable DPS.

Quote:
1. The 0-10km AVAILABLE range you claim is actually around 4km-10km for turret BS and that is 6 x 2.4 = 14.4.



Actually its more like 1-10km for blasters.

Quote:

2. Not only that but the web in question increases the hit rate and abilities as a percentage of pulse as much as it does blasters.


Incorrect. Tracking works very similarly to falloff. Gains and losses in the middle of spectrum are more servere than gains and losses in the end. Notice how the falloff curve looks like an S? Tracking is the same way, though the S is not quite as severe.

What this means is that if you're getting tracking boosts and still climbing the curve. You get much more boost compared to someone at the bottom end.

As well, there is the issue of hit quality. Hit quality is another compounding factor whereby the maximum non wrecking hit that you can achieve is equal to your hit chance plus .99.

This means that every increase in high chance is further increased by an exponential factor(final expected DPS = (x-.01)(x+.49/2)+.03 when X > .01)

Now, naughty boys spreadsheet will do this for you[under variable hit distribution], but it goes to show just how powerful tracking increases really are.

maralt
Minmatar
The seers of truth
Posted - 2008.12.18 23:13:00 - [569]
 

Edited by: maralt on 19/12/2008 09:30:45




Originally by: Goumindong


About as significant as the DPS that lasers do under 10km when blasters are still doing considerable DPS.


Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


Considering the ship has transversal the lasers are doing great DMG down to 4km in this graph. While over 30km the blaster dmg is pretty much 0.



Originally by: Goumindong
Actually its more like 1-10km for blasters.


Its almost 0-10 for every turret BS with low or 0 transversal.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2008.12.19 12:31:00 - [570]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 19/12/2008 12:34:37
Originally by: maralt

Considering the ship has transversal the lasers are doing great DMG down to 4km in this graph. While over 30km the blaster dmg is pretty much 0.



Void

Also, at 4km, the laser ships are doing worse than the blaster ships are doing at 15km.


Pages: first : previous : ... 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 ... : last (25)

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