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 : ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 [25]

Author Topic

Arkady Sadik
Minmatar
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.01.19 16:46:00 - [721]
 

Edited by: Arkady Sadik on 19/01/2009 16:48:18
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Amarr ships didnt change nor did their weapons


Ok. Let's say we take back the tracking boost and the resist changes to make your statement true and everyone is happy.


Edited to add: In case it's not clear, no, this post is not serious. I think reducing tracking on the pulse lasers would probably be good, but that's about it. And there are way more glaring balance problems than Amarr sub-capitals at the moment.

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.01.19 17:59:00 - [722]
 

Edited by: Murina on 19/01/2009 18:24:41


Originally by: Deva Blackfire

1-3 years ago when i asked how can i fly my geddon i heard "lul, go fly in a gang, train mega/pest for solo". Suddenly people started to use gangs more. Amarr ships didnt change nor did their weapons but gameplay changed and people started flying WAY more gangs. And suddenly my "lul gang only kiddo" ship started to shine in "gang only" combat. And now you whine that "amarr shouldnt be best in gang warfare"?


I doubt you heard anything or even asked, but even if you did nobody is saying that "amarr shouldn't be best in gang warfare" so please do not use quote marks unless you are quoting it makes you look stupid and manipulative. The fact is that they are too overpowered compared to the other races.

As per usual when emo is involved you are confusing a fix to a system that is overpowered compared to the others of that type as the same as making it useless or second rate, nobody is saying that at all but the gap between races is to wide and needs narrowing.


Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.01.19 20:14:00 - [723]
 

Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 19/01/2009 20:17:42
Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 19/01/2009 20:14:45
Originally by: Murina

As per usual when emo is involved you are confusing a fix to a system that is overpowered compared to the others of that type as the same as making it useless or second rate, nobody is saying that at all but the gap between races is to wide and needs narrowing.




But exactly WHAT made them overpowered? There was supposedly some tracking boost but for all i care pulses could lose what they got before - and they will STILL be best at med ranges. Only because current game evolved and its not centered around 1-3 ship gangs but 30-300 ones.

Resist nerf? Works all round for all weapon systems using EM/explo damage. Plus for high damage ammo its only 12,5% boost in effective damage (considering 50/50 em/thermal ratio). So what else?

As for quoting marks - if you read my post you should see i use em as emphasis not quoting.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2009.01.19 21:07:00 - [724]
 

Its not worth it Deva. They want blasters to be best till 15km-20km. They don't care what is balanced, they just want blasters to be the best option for weapons until you start sniping.

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.01.19 21:22:00 - [725]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Its not worth it Deva. They want blasters to be best till 15km-20km. They don't care what is balanced, they just want blasters to be the best option for weapons until you start sniping.


Ye i know :)
Myself i would boost blasters by like 5% and large ACs by 7-10% DPS but thats it (and in mean time kicked some DPS off 200mm small ACs).

Arkady Sadik
Minmatar
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.01.19 21:24:00 - [726]
 

Originally by: Deva Blackfire
But exactly WHAT made them overpowered?


A series of small adjustements that all were more or less necessary - pulses used to be pretty bad - but the combination had some bad effects. (Again, IMHO it's not like pulses are horribly overpowered and whatnot, it's a slight imbalance at best.)

It was called "Amarr need more oomph."

1) http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=474
Pulses got more tracking, and there was some rebalancing with armor resist mod cpu needs to make specific hardeners more worthwhile (didn't work, people just switched from EANMs to ANPs)

2) http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=489
Resists were changed to reduce the damage type drawback of lasers. This was a good idea, though it also caused specific hardener setups to be even less useful.


At this point, it was all mostly good, except that strong webs made the Amarr ships very potent even in close range already. But blaster ships still did outshine in close range due to the better absolute dps.


3) QR and the web changes hit (not bothering to find the dev blog for those). This did hurt the pulse lasers more than the blasters, because close-range tracking is even worse for them, but it also had the effect that blasters can't really shine in close-range anymore, either. This is more of an absolute values game than a percentage game. The problem is that blasters in short-range lose their absolute value dps. They might do percentually more dps than the pulses, but the absolute dps doesn't really compensate anymore for the deficiencies at medium range. (I hope I summed up the points of the blaster friends well enough, I don't fly blaster ships myself)


So, while the QR web changes were already a slight Amarr nerf, it also hit other ships and made the differences in efficiency wider. Blasters suddenly aren't "omgwtfbbq" at any range anymore, so their short range really starts to hurt. Hence why people start complaining now in mass.

Quote:
Resist nerf? Works all round for all weapon systems using EM/explo damage


Hybrids don't do EM/expl damage, so they were not affected at all.

Missiles are not affected much, as you won't shoot EM at armor tankers. They have a slight boost as you now can kill shields with ex slightly better.

For projectiles, the change meant equally little against armor tankers as you still want Fusion. It did have some effect in the t2 area, because now you are generally better off shooting EMP at most T2 ships than any other ammo type.

It was predominantly a laser boost, and it was a good one. Old news, though.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2009.01.19 21:43:00 - [727]
 

Originally by: Arkady Sadik
This is more of an absolute values game than a percentage game. The problem is that blasters in short-range lose their absolute value dps. They might do percentually more dps than the pulses, but the absolute dps doesn't really compensate anymore for the deficiencies at medium range. (I hope I summed up the points of the blaster friends well enough, I don't fly blaster ships myself)


Except that blasters did not lose their peak damage advantage in the short range. And that blasters never did so little DPS at longer range that such an absolute advantage(if it existed) would be warranted.

The complaints in this thread and they are all pretty much unwarranted/unfounded and/or simply contradictory to what actually happened with the game balance changes.

Quote:

For projectiles, the change meant equally little against armor tankers as you still want Fusion. It did have some effect in the t2 area, because now you are generally better off shooting EMP at most T2 ships than any other ammo type.


Don't underestimate the effect of shields on t1 armor tanked ships. It represents a significant amount of EHP that AC's had to bust through.

Originally by: Deva Blackfire

Ye i know :)
Myself i would boost blasters by like 5% and large ACs by 7-10% DPS but thats it (and in mean time kicked some DPS off 200mm small ACs).


That isn't a good idea. Large AC's would become an issue on the Maelstrom, and blasters are pretty much fine. If there is a problem with AC's, its best to examine it on a ship by ship basis.

E.G. The tempest, its low on damage. If the QR changes did not make the extra utility it brings sufficient to warrant being fine, then the solution is not to boost AC's, but to increase its drone bay(100 cubes of bandwidth and 200-300 cubes of space), giving it more versatility while only representing a 40 or so DPS increase(2/2/1 becomes 4 ogres an increase of about 1.4 medium drone DPS with 5 med instead of 2/2/1, you would increase by 3 medium drones of damage)

I really don't think there is anything wrong with the Mega or Hyperion as blaster boats. There might be an issue with the mega as a rail ship, but that is not so simple either and the Maelstrom is a better candidate for a change.

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.01.19 21:52:00 - [728]
 

Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 19/01/2009 21:52:17
Originally by: Arkady Sadik

Quote:
Resist nerf? Works all round for all weapon systems using EM/explo damage


Hybrids don't do EM/expl damage, so they were not affected at all.



I stated "weapon systems using EM/explo damage". So hybrids got ruled out.

Quote:

Missiles are not affected much, as you won't shoot EM at armor tankers. They have a slight boost as you now can kill shields with ex slightly better.



Actually unless ship tanks omni (EANM/ANP) then EM is lowest armor resist. Its also one of lowest resists on t2 armor tankers (only minmatar get natural resist on armor to EM but they shieldtank, rest of ships as soon as they use 2x explo hardener have EM as lowest).

Quote:

For projectiles, the change meant equally little against armor tankers as you still want Fusion. It did have some effect in the t2 area, because now you are generally better off shooting EMP at most T2 ships than any other ammo type.



RF EMP all the way. Or barrage. Anyways just check what ammo people use - and it will be those i posted.

@ Goum:
im still forgetting Pest has 75m3 not 125m3 bay.

Arkady Sadik
Minmatar
Electus Matari
Posted - 2009.01.19 22:21:00 - [729]
 

Originally by: Deva Blackfire
I stated "weapon systems using EM/explo damage". So hybrids got ruled out.


Strange, in a thread about blasters :-) But I figured I'd talk about all weapons there, to show that it was clearly a pulse boost. Same as the web changes were a pulse nerf, even though all turret ships got hit.

Quote:
Actually unless ship tanks omni (EANM/ANP)


Goumindong is quite right when he says that anything but that is quite useless these days. Specifically because of that EM resist problem. As I mentioned in my post. :-)


(Not going to discuss the resist changes again, did so in 2007 and it's not relevant to this thread :-))

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2009.01.20 01:08:00 - [730]
 

There was never a reason to tri-harden before the change either.

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.01.20 11:05:00 - [731]
 

Edited by: Murina on 20/01/2009 14:43:15


Originally by: Deva Blackfire


Ye i know :)
Myself i would boost blasters by like 5% and large ACs by 7-10% DPS but thats it (and in mean time kicked some DPS off 200mm small ACs).


Sounds like a start although i would need to see the overall figures as it is around the 10-20km that blasters can suffer badly even with long range ammo, and over 20km they should suck. I would also have the tracking on pulse lowered a reasonable amount.

ollobrains2
Gallente
New Eve Order Holdings
Posted - 2009.01.20 11:57:00 - [732]
 

another idea might be to intorduce some new weapon classes

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.01.25 00:36:00 - [733]
 

Ok lets play a game of fill in the blank.



Things that go _______ in the night.

Chi Quan
Bibkor Enterprises
Posted - 2009.01.30 21:13:00 - [734]
 

sidewaysnerfed like blasters ?
collaterally damaged like blasters ?

have a look at recent killboards Wink

Zamolxiss
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2009.01.30 22:19:00 - [735]
 

Originally by: Chi Quan
sidewaysnerfed like blasters ?
collaterally damaged like blasters ?

have a look at recent killboards Wink

biased much!? get a grip..

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.01.30 23:25:00 - [736]
 

blasters and ac need a buff, lasers need a nerf.

The end.

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.02.14 15:21:00 - [737]
 

Originally by: Murina
blasters and ac need a buff, lasers need a nerf.

The end.


Not quite...bump.

lecrotta
Minmatar
lecrotta Corp
Posted - 2009.02.21 13:54:00 - [738]
 

This thread should not die.

Chi Quan
Bibkor Enterprises
Posted - 2009.03.14 14:15:00 - [739]
 

i would like to say that the issue still persists

Murina
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.04.29 10:20:00 - [740]
 



May as well bump this then.


Pages: first : previous : ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 [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