open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked BOOST BLASTERS!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 35 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 : last (43)

Author Topic

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:08:00 - [1201]
 

Edited by: Andnowthenews on 01/03/2009 17:10:06


Originally by: NightmareX
off topic + TLDR


Anything on topic to add on this new page an explanation to why you think blasters are fine when on SHC gourm and all the others think the fix is a good idea done properly?.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:10:00 - [1202]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 17:15:43
Originally by: Andnowthenews
Originally by: NightmareX
TLDR


Can i assume it was another rant/justification that went in great off topic detail about how you are not a troll have never been a troll and will report anybody who goes into great detail about irrelevant off topic subjects..........LaughingLaughing

Try harder to prove that your right.

Ow look at that, your trying really hard to find a way to twist you away from what i was tellingLaughing.

Awesome way to prove that your rightLaughing.

EDIT:

Originally by: Andnowthenews
Edited by: Andnowthenews on 01/03/2009 17:10:06


Originally by: NightmareX
off topic + TLDR


Anything on topic to add on this new page an explanation to why you think blasters are fine when on SHC gourm and all the others think the fix is a good idea done properly?.

No with you here it's not possible to go on topic about Blasters here.

Haven't Goum told us many many times in this topic that boosting Blasters like you for example want them to be, then it's going to make them extremely overpowered while making some other weapons systems really underpowered and also makes combat in EVE very unbalanced?.

He have told that many times here. I don't care what he have said on SHC, when he have said something totally different here in this topic. That is what count, what he have said here in this topic.

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:11:00 - [1203]
 

Originally by: NightmareX
off topic troll


Look up i edited.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:14:00 - [1204]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 17:23:20
Originally by: Andnowthenews
Originally by: NightmareX
off topic troll


Look up i edited.

Look at my edited reply to, also the one before your posted here.

I'm waiting for another wall of troll and whine.

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:23:00 - [1205]
 

Edited by: Andnowthenews on 01/03/2009 17:25:58
Edited by: Andnowthenews on 01/03/2009 17:24:01
Originally by: NightmareX


Haven't Goum told us many many times in this topic that boosting Blasters like you for example want them to be, then it's going to make them extremely overpowered while making some other weapons systems really underpowered and also makes combat in EVE very unbalanced?.


I have made no posts about it, i am not a alt of your running mate no matter what that other fool insists on saying although i do think its funny how long the list is getting, when anybody post agreement he puts them on it heh. Very amusing considering he is a alt himself imho.

And the only posts i read of gourmindongs on here are those about rails being better than blasters in gang combat and that rails are also the comparable system to pulse, and that pretty much says it all as far as im concerned.

The underpowered system in eve as we speak is blasters, the fix suggested would not make them OP it would put them right.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:24:00 - [1206]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 17:27:30
Originally by: Andnowthenews
The underpowered system in eve as we speak is blasters, the fix suggested would not make them OP it would put them right.

So Artilleries is not more borked than Blasters isLaughing?.

Yeah it will put the Blasters right to put other weapons system down the drain. Isn't that cool to do?.

And because of that, the fix you and the others wants are absolutely gonna make Blasters OP / FOTM.

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:28:00 - [1207]
 

Originally by: NightmareX

So Artilleries is not more borked than Blasters isLaughing?.




As you were told on the last page, start a thread about it this one is for fixing a nd balancing blasters.

sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:29:00 - [1208]
 

Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 01/03/2009 17:31:39
Originally by: NightmareX


So Artilleries is not more borked than Blasters is


lol runs out of arguments starts off topic posts about arties....

Good job you are not policing yourself or you would get yourself banned from reporting off topic comments...LaughingLaughing

PS: YAY ANOTHER ALT:-

trollmoreX/trader20/maralt/sophisticatedlimabean/murina/cucac/and now the news...

Bolded mine.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:30:00 - [1209]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 17:38:47
Originally by: Andnowthenews
Originally by: NightmareX

So Artilleries is not more borked than Blasters isLaughing?.




As you were told on the last page, start a thread about it this one is for fixing a nd balancing blasters.

Dude, when you say Blasters are the weapon that need a fix most, i take that as a pure lie. And then i reply by giving you the fact that Artilleries are in need of a boost waaaaaaaaay more than Blasters.

I don't need to make a new topic everytime i just want to meantion another weapon system in this topic.

And the thing that Artilleries need a boost waaaaaaay before Blasters or any other weapons sytems are a pure fact. So try all you want to take that fact away, but you can't.
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: NightmareX


So Artilleries is not more borked than Blasters is


lol runs out of arguments starts off topic posts about arties....

Good job you are not policing yourself or you would get yourself banned from reporting off topic comments...LaughingLaughing

So your saying that i'm just gonna let peoples tell that Blasters are the weapon that need a fix most when that's a lie?.

What the hell i'am supposed to say. I'am supposed to say yes Blasters need a fix much much more than Artilleries do?.

When someone makes a topic about something, then we are all free to say that for example that Blasters are not the weapon that needs a fix most if the topic is about boosting Blasters and that is the weapon that needs a fix most. I'm still on topic, because i'm still talking about Blasters.

And what about you when you talk about lasers when the topic is about Blasters?. WOOOOOOT, kk, reporting you for going off topicLaughing.

Dude, i'm not an idiot.

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:41:00 - [1210]
 

Edited by: Andnowthenews on 01/03/2009 17:41:57
Originally by: NightmareX
tldr+off topic troll


It seems to me that you did not have much to say in this thread from the start and now you have ran out of even that you spend most of you time trying to explain your off topic trolling as being insightful...

Its not, take a day off and read your posts tomorrow and you will see just how manic and pointless you posting have been over that last few pages.

Im done with you so reply/justify all you like but your wasting your breath to try and win a argument with me cos this is what i think and its not gonna change by you mouthing off at me, you will just reinforce/prove it..

Im gone..

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:41:00 - [1211]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 01/03/2009 17:41:55
Originally by: Andnowthenews

Anything on topic to add on this new page an explanation to why you think blasters are fine when on SHC gourm and all the others think the fix is a good idea done properly?.


If by "gourm" you're referring to me, then no, that is not true. Marns falloff suggestion is ridiculous. It would bring the "advantage point" for Amarr/Gallente to 21km. It would bring the "advantage point" for Amarr/Minmatar to 37.5km. It would obviate pulse lasers since in any situation you would ever want to fly them you would be better off lobbing torps instead (due to comparative tank issues). I argued quite strongly against it in that thread and will continue to do so.

Aside:

Reported for reportedly reporting the reported post of reports about reporting reportedly reported posts.

Goodness you people, get a room.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:43:00 - [1212]
 

Originally by: Andnowthenews
Originally by: NightmareX
tldr+off topic troll


It seems to me that you did not have much to say in this thread from the start and now you have ran out of even that you spend most of you time trying to explain your off topic trolling as being insightful...

Its not, take a day off and read your posts tomorrow and you will see just how manic and pointless you posting have been over that last few pages.

Im done with your reply/justify all you like but your wasting your breath to try and win a argument with me cos this is what i think and its not gonna change by you mouthing off at me you will just reinforce it..

Im gone..

Oh like you have anything more to add to this topic?.

All you can do is to whine whine whine and troll everybody else in this topic.

So when you talk about blah blah blah Lasers and booooo Blasters, then that is not off topic?. Yes it must be off topic when you talk about Lasers in a Blaster topic.

Get the point?.

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:46:00 - [1213]
 

Edited by: Andnowthenews on 01/03/2009 17:49:21


You seemed to agree with the idea but not the broad application, and wanted it done on a ship by ship, module by module application instead.

FROM SHC:
Originally by: Goumindong
It will also have a lot of unintended consequences.

Better to look at things individually and fix the balance problems there.




Or did i read wrong, if so i apologist.

PS: to nightmareX, take a day off pal your manic justificational ranting is getting stupid..

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:46:00 - [1214]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 17:53:12
Originally by: Goumindong
Edited by: Goumindong on 01/03/2009 17:41:55
Originally by: Andnowthenews

Anything on topic to add on this new page an explanation to why you think blasters are fine when on SHC gourm and all the others think the fix is a good idea done properly?.


If by "gourm" you're referring to me, then no, that is not true. Marns falloff suggestion is ridiculous. It would bring the "advantage point" for Amarr/Gallente to 21km. It would bring the "advantage point" for Amarr/Minmatar to 37.5km. It would obviate pulse lasers since in any situation you would ever want to fly them you would be better off lobbing torps instead (due to comparative tank issues). I argued quite strongly against it in that thread and will continue to do so.

Aside:

Reported for reportedly reporting the reported post of reports about reporting reportedly reported posts.

Goodness you people, get a room.

So your not lying at all now Andnowthenews?. Nah not at allLaughing, all Goum said on SHC or any other places in your dream world was trueLaughing.

See, my point still stands. Your a lying troll Andnowthenews.
Originally by: Andnowthenews
PS: to nightmareX, take a day off pal your manic justificational ranting is getting stupid..

Says the best troll and whiner in this topicLaughing.

Wow, don't tell that to others when you doing it your self at best.

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:49:00 - [1215]
 

Originally by: Goumindong

Quote:
emphasize their strengths and weakness, make them more distinct from other short range weapons


It is quite ironic that you are posting this in a thread where everyone else wants to extend the range of blasters to make them better in a gang, to make them less distinct weapons.

Aside: What do you think of the signature radius of the Hyperion.



This is the opinion of one Person in this Thread, one person != everyone. Many people stated mutliple times that range isnīt the problem on blasters, it is the efficency at her range. Rolling Eyes

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: The Djego

Since Lasers are intendet to work in exactly the same situations equaly well than Blasters and Aks?


No, it was a comment relating to their general strengths and weaknesses. I was saying they are pretty close to each other in efficacy and if you boost one, you're going to have to boost the rest.


Why not quoting the rest? Rolling Eyes

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Goumindong

Not again this stupid discussion, I explaind this to you multipe times why the advantages you see arnīt advantages on TQ, while you repeeting this line again and again without starting a real discussion.


No, you haven't. You've said "nuh uh". And each time i explain again how these mechanics work and how they hanged and what that means for the ships.


You keep evade multiple times a comment on my situational examples(related to TQ gameplay) where the big advantages you think to see in the raw data preaty much fail leading to the intendet advantage on TQ. So far we had Hype vs Mega, DPS vs DPS, Tracking vs Tracking, Range vs Range, Damage Type effects vs Armor/T2/Shields, so is this nothing, all points invalid, all arguments wrong? Rolling Eyes


Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: The Djego

1. Ofc they do and there arnīt any Threads about Rockets, Hams, Aks or Blasters on the Froums. When did you read the last Blasters\AKs\Rockets\Hams\Torps are op Topic, because they serious outperforme other Weapons in her intendet role?


I am not sure what you're saying.


Serious?

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: The Djego

2. No I donīt actualy mean this. Even if It would be hilariously broken in your Opinion I would call it hilariously funny, would be kind of a cure to the bing a bigger Blob sydrome and create situations where it wouldnīt be just stupid to warp in close range Gank Ships into a sniper Blob(asuming there is no lag in eve ofc) instead of bringing your own Sniper Blob or stuff like this.


No, it would not be a cure for the "bring a bigger blob" syndrome. People would just bring a bigger blob of the better ships.


So having 100 Blaster Ships in a Gang would be practical in the current Primary is..., Secendary is... F1-F8 gameplay we have, over 100 Lases/Rail/Arti fitted Ships to make it FOTM? Rolling Eyes

I personaly highly doubt this, it is practial in a smaller gangs and donīt traslates to good up to bigger ones.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:53:00 - [1216]
 

Originally by: Andnowthenews
]

FROM SHC:


You seem to have confused a singular complaint taken from a bevy of complaints aimed at a specific failing of the proposal combined with the reason that specific problem was a problem and the solution to the problem of the complaint as acceptance that there both is a problem and that the fix is good.

How you did that, will vex me until i figure out how many licks it takes to get to the center of a tootsie roll.

sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:54:00 - [1217]
 

Originally by: The Djego
Originally by: Goumindong



It is quite ironic that you are posting this in a thread where everyone else wants to extend the range of blasters to make them better in a gang, to make them less distinct weapons.

Aside: What do you think of the signature radius of the Hyperion.



This is the opinion of one Person in this Thread, one person != everyone. Many people stated mutliple times that range isnīt the problem on blasters, it is the efficency at her range. Rolling Eyes


I actually wanted them to do slightly better dmg at ranges they already hit at (10-20km) not extend the range any as that would not really suit the blaster idea.

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.03.01 17:58:00 - [1218]
 

Edited by: Andnowthenews on 01/03/2009 18:00:34
Edited by: Andnowthenews on 01/03/2009 17:59:54
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Andnowthenews
]

FROM SHC:


You seem to have confused a singular complaint taken from a bevy of complaints aimed at a specific failing of the proposal combined with the reason that specific problem was a problem and the solution to the problem of the complaint as acceptance that there both is a problem and that the fix is good.



It was just a post i saw that seemed to agree with the idea but not with applying it to every ship/system in eve and as such i agree with you.

But it seems you did not mean your posts to look that way so meh...it was a genuine error and i apologies for misreading it, hopefullly before the psycotic troll has me hunged or summat.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:02:00 - [1219]
 

Originally by: The Djego

This is the opinion of one Person in this Thread, one person != everyone. Many people stated mutliple times that range isnīt the problem on blasters, it is the efficency at her range


I am sorry, i have to deal with a number of people with multiple varying opinions. The vast majority of them have been arguing for an "increased gang role by extending the range of blasters".

If you want more efficiency in your range, i suggest flying a Hyperion.

Quote:

Why not quoting the rest?


The same reason i don't quote nested trees. Space.

Quote:

You keep evade multiple times a comment on my situational examples(related to TQ gameplay) where the big advantages you think to see in the raw data preaty much fail leading to the intendet advantage on TQ. So far we had Hype vs Mega, DPS vs DPS, Tracking vs Tracking, Range vs Range, Damage Type effects vs Armor/T2/Shields, so is this nothing, all points invalid, all arguments wrong?


I have not evaded anything. The rest i have no clue what you're talking about.

Quote:


Serious?


Seriously. I have a hard time reading your stilted English as it is. I understand that its not your first language and so am not begrudging you for it, but that doesn't make it any easier to understand what point you're trying to get across.

Quote:

So having 100 Blaster Ships in a Gang would be practical in the current Primary is..., Secendary is... F1-F8 gameplay we have, over 100 Lases/Rail/Arti fitted Ships to make it FOTM? Rolling Eyes

I personaly highly doubt this, it is practial in a smaller gangs and donīt traslates to good up to bigger ones.


Currently, of course not. But that was not the question. You purported a situation in which warping in at close range with a small group of blaster ships would give you enough of an advantage to beat a larger group of ships. I responded by saying "if that were possible, people would just bring a larger group of the ships that were better"

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:04:00 - [1220]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 18:08:51
Originally by: Andnowthenews
it was a genuine error and i apologies for misreading it

Thanks for finally admitting it that you missreads here.

Now if you only could do an apologie to all of the others here that are trying to tell you something with facts here, then it would be good.

Now, ktnxbai.

sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:06:00 - [1221]
 

Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 01/03/2009 18:06:30
Originally by: NightmareX


Now if you only could do the same to all of the others here that are trying to tell you something here.




As you are my alt i suggest you start learning from djego, oh and me...Very Happy

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:07:00 - [1222]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 18:08:13
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 01/03/2009 18:06:30
Originally by: NightmareX


Now if you only could do the same to all of the others here that are trying to tell you something here.




As you are my alt i suggest you start learning from djego, oh and me...Very Happy

LOLVery Happy.

Oh, i also recommend you to requote my reply there, since i edited it while you was replying to it.

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:08:00 - [1223]
 

Originally by: NightmareX
Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 18:06:08
Originally by: Andnowthenews
it was a genuine error and i apologies for misreading it

Thanks for finally admitting it that you missreads here.

Now if you only could do an apologie to all of the others here that are trying to tell you something here, then it would be good.

Now, ktnxbai.


I was not talking to you troll, go harass you buddy you fool you add nothing to this thread.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:09:00 - [1224]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 18:10:23
Originally by: Andnowthenews
Originally by: NightmareX
Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 18:06:08
Originally by: Andnowthenews
it was a genuine error and i apologies for misreading it

Thanks for finally admitting it that you missreads here.

Now if you only could do an apologie to all of the others here that are trying to tell you something here, then it would be good.

Now, ktnxbai.


I was not talking to you troll, go harass you buddy you fool you add nothing to this thread.

Oh the tears, they are so delightfulLaughing.

Andnowthenews
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:11:00 - [1225]
 

Originally by: NightmareX

Oh the tears, they are so delightfullLaughing.


You are the most disgusting and pathetic child troll on this entire forum.

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:12:00 - [1226]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 18:15:40
Originally by: Andnowthenews
Originally by: NightmareX

Oh the tears, they are so delightfullLaughing.


You are the most disgusting and pathetic child troll on this entire forum.

Now i feel hurt by you, i'm now gonna go and emo cry in a corner, just because of youLaughing.

Damn you, you destroyed all of my good feelings i had here nowCrying or Very sad.

sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:23:00 - [1227]
 

Edited by: sophisticatedlimabean on 01/03/2009 18:24:23
Originally by: NightmareX

constant troll


You are gonna get banned and you so deserve it.Very Happy

Anyway on topic.


Measuring success vs failure we see blaster gangs hardly winning against laser gangs even when fights start at 5km and never without heavy loses but if a fight started at 20+km we would see massive losses of blaster ships and very light losses for the laser gang.

Include the fact that in almost all situation on killboards we see lasers as top dmg dealers then id say this is a priority issue that needs fixing.

/waits for troll...Rolling Eyes

NightmareX
Nomads
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:24:00 - [1228]
 

Edited by: NightmareX on 01/03/2009 18:27:23
Originally by: sophisticatedlimabean
Originally by: NightmareX

constant troll


You are gonna get banned and you so deserve it.Very Happy

/waits for troll...Rolling Eyes

And you would not get banned because?. And you are not a troll your self because?

Dude i was just defending my self from someone that are calling me for troll, when in fact it's him that are trolling me. Because i said something that he knows is true, and are angry because of that.

I have the full right to defend back.

sophisticatedlimabean
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:27:00 - [1229]
 

Originally by: NightmareX
rant


/ignore

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2009.03.01 18:28:00 - [1230]
 

Edited by: The Djego on 01/03/2009 18:29:57
Originally by: Goumindong
Edited by: Goumindong on 01/03/2009 17:41:55
Originally by: Andnowthenews

Anything on topic to add on this new page an explanation to why you think blasters are fine when on SHC gourm and all the others think the fix is a good idea done properly?.


Marns falloff suggestion is ridiculous. It would bring the "advantage point" for Amarr/Gallente to 21km. It would bring the "advantage point" for Amarr/Minmatar to 37.5km. It would obviate pulse lasers since in any situation you would ever want to fly them you would be better off lobbing torps instead (due to comparative tank issues). I argued quite strongly against it in that thread and will continue to do so.



Graph from SHC

This is vs a 2 EANM+DCU Tank it is the worst case scenario for any Laser based ship. While Amarr/Gallente/Caldari T2 Ships have very good Kin Resists(and Therm, since Amarr will plug this hole) and Hardner Tanks also.

Hyperions DPS with AN crashes rapidly after 16km, Null Hype after 24km.
Abaddon is very simlar to the Null Hype with Multifrequency(25 DPS diffrence in itīs worst case scenario while still having the option to instant switching over to Scorch if required). Mealstorm is subpar with Barrage after 26km against the Scorch Abaddon(again in the worst case szenario for resistances for Lasers).

I can agree that for Antimatter the Range is to high(on the BS level, 8-10km instead of 16 would be more resonalbe) and Null gets a bit to much range(but not that drasticly, should fade more at 20km instead of 24km). Still keep in mind that Neutrons are restrict the Blaster Ships to weak tanks/buffer fits, what is not the case for 800er/Mega Puls fittings(exept on the Gedon). This is why I perfere mostly a solution around the Webs, since they only give a advantage where the Blaster Ship should have one, in Web range.

I can hardly see any kind of serious out of ballance issues for the Meal in this grap(keep in mind it based on the worst case for the Laser BS from the resistance point of view).


Pages: first : previous : ... 35 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 : last (43)

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