open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Feedback on Rocket Changes
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 : last (15)

Author Topic

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.11.14 19:51:00 - [391]
 

Originally by: Tsubutai
Originally by: Gypsio III
As a very general example, a fast frigate can use its superior mobility to better escape unfavourable situations and more easily tackle targets. This advantage should not be accompanied by a further advantage in tank 'n' gank once tackled - remembering of course that ease of application of damage within tackle range is influenced by mobility issues.


This absolutely does not follow. You're consistently ignoring the fact that the ability to apply damage at range is also hugely important - again, by your logic, it would be grossly unfair for a Mega to be both faster than a laser boat *and* to have a significant tank+DPS advantage at close quarters. In reality, it cannot function without both. The same goes for a frigate that is equally comfortable at 13km as it is at 0 versus one with an effective engagement range that tops out at 7 km (and doesn't really hit its maximum DPS potential until around 2 km or so).


I'm not ignoring the ease of application of damage at range! Honest! I'm absolutely counting that as part of the "advantage" that a slower frigate such as a rocket Kestrel or a null/rail Merlin needs to have over, say, a Rifter. It must be that way, because that still leaves the option open for the Rifter to win by getting in close soon enough - if the slower frigate had teh same ease of application of damage as the faster one, then it would almost always win, and any fight at close range would be stupidly predictable.

My entire point is that the balance between superior DPS-at-range must be finely balanced with the mobility advantage! With the current rockets, this isn't the case, because their damage is so feeble, but I'm optimistic that the Sisi rockets will be about right.

Pesets
The Hunt Club
Posted - 2010.11.14 23:28:00 - [392]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
Originally by: Pesets

That's... not quite how it works. "Explosion velocity" is compared against the target's signature radius, it's analogous to turrets' "resolution". There's no actual 20m sphere the ship needs to be in to take damage.

Google "Stafen's formula".


Close, but not quite. Explosion velocity is measured against target velocity. Explosion radius is measured against signature radius. Faster explosion velocity = good. Smaller explosion radius = good. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you typoed, because you effectively told the person you quoted that they're wrong, then restated what you said was wrong in a factual sense.


Shocked Umm... yea, i meant to say "explosion radius", not "velocity". Sorry for the confusion.

rodensteiner
Amarr
OMGROFLSTOMP
Posted - 2010.11.15 14:55:00 - [393]
 

So far the rocket changes seem to be working well [on SiSi] I killed a Wolf with a Hawk, and while flying a Vengeance was nicely killing a Daredevil (until he ran away in low low hull)

The one thing that I think may still need a bit of work...it seems that the rocket launchers don't hold quite enough ammunition. During a 1-on-1 frigate fight using any other weapons system I don't think I've ever had to reload.

Bayushi Tamago
Posted - 2010.11.16 11:31:00 - [394]
 

So, I've read the first couple pages and it would be nice if:
1) The missile range you calculate should be your actual engage range, not 5 to 10k more than the range where your missile burn out (I have the same problem with the drake with its heavies)
2) That rockets either had range that isn't basically instadeath or a damage bonus that makes it worth it to enter the instadeath range
3) Other frigates wouldn't need to basically all look up to the rifter because of fitting problems (Especially rocket/missile frigs) - hint: let the kestrel use standards instead of forcing it to use rockets

If CCP really doesn't want to fix the rocket problem, then rockets need to go

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.11.17 06:12:00 - [395]
 

So I finally got around to installing Sisi again and testing rockets. The results?

First fight:
Actively tanked hawk vs Enyo

Lows:
Basic Power Diagnostic
Ballistic Control 2
Meds:
Small Cap Booster 2
Medium Shield Booster 2
MWD 2
Faint Epsilon Scram
Highs:
Rocket Launcher 2 x 4
Caldari Navy Thorns
Rigs:
EM Screen
Capacitor safeguard 1

Result: Fail. I tanked him for a little bit, but I didn't put out nearly enough dps to break the Enyo's tank. Half armor at best.

Second fight:
Hawk vs Wolf
Same fit.

Result: Fail. My shields melted so fast to his rep fleet emp that the booster couldn't keep up. Clearly the inability to actively tank and fill in the EM resist is the hawk's biggest weakness.

Third fight:
Buffer Hawk vs same Wolf
Lows:
PDS 2
BCS 2
Meds:
Medium Shield Extender 2
MWD 2
Magnetic Scattering Amplifier 2
Faint Epsilon Scram
Highs:
Rocket Launcher 2 x 4
caldari navy thorn
Rigs:
EM Screen
Defense Extender 1

Result:
Success. Finally, a fit that works. With the added EM resists I was able to stave off that nasty rep fleet emp long enough to break through his armor and structure. The wolf was armor tanked with a damage control 2, so it took a while, but I did overcome him without going into armor.

Fourth Fight:
same Hawk vs. Ishkur

Result:
Success. Ishkur had fail tank, which made it easier, but I shot him down without taking too much shield damage. Extreme thermal resist of the hawk definitely helped. I fought another Ishkur with faction lows and he whooped the **** out of me.

Fifth Fight:
same Hawk vs. Sentinel

Result:
Draw. I ended up warping out due to sheer boredom. All he did was kite me out of rocket range once I was neuted out. Since I had a pure passive tank he couldn't put a big enough dent in it with his drones before I would shoot them down. He started pulling them in before I could kill them, but at the same time it wasn't enough time to deal any real DPS. Futility at its worst. The rockets put big dents in his tank when I could hit and if I had stayed long enough for him to cap himself out I might have won, but it was agonizingly slow and I hadn't packed enough ammo for the long haul(faction ammo isn't easy to come by on Sisi).

Rockets themselves appear usable now, but the hawk still needs work. The shield boost bonus is useless. You can't put a booster on it with a cap injector, an MWD, and a point AND have a mid slow left to fill that EM hole. That kills you. The only way to do it is with a deadspace booster and I couldn't find one on Sisi to test with. In terms of tech 2 fits, active fails every time. Not enough mid slots. Not enough CPU. Not enough base capacitor capacity or recharge. Buffer works ok, but it doesn't play to the hawk's strengths. Suggest hawk's bonus changed from 7.5% to shield boost to 5% all shield resistances.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.11.17 08:48:00 - [396]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
So I finally got around to installing Sisi again and testing rockets. The results?




Comments:

Your active Hawks without webs are awful, either because your unwebbed target will fly straight up to its optimal and kill you, or it will disengage.

Oh FFS, you don't have a web on the other fit either.

Kronanius
Posted - 2010.11.17 10:28:00 - [397]
 

I must preemptively point out that I have not read all 14 pages of this topic; I read the first 3 or 4 and glanced through the rest.

I've been using rockets in numerous ships for a long time; I enjoy them because they fit my style of play, and I hope the current changes will allow them to improve their performance vs. smaller ships.

However, I notice that there seems to be little to no use of T2 rocket ammo; and personally, I can and do ***** out the rage rockets to rather decent effect on the vengeance and pve kestrel.

It would seem to me that the "range" issue that gets a lot of complaints could be fixed by capping the negative velocity effects of the javelin rockets to something like a max of ~15%. And this (and, indeed, as all T2 ammo would be better-off as) really should not be cumulative. It gives a major bonus to ships with massive damage from a few guns, ie. any Sansha's ship (or, in this case, rockets), while severely crippling ships with a vast number of hardpoints (like destroyers). [Note: I'm just using these cases as overall examples to illustrate a point that *pertains* to rockets; I'm not trying to argue the case for off-topic T2 ammo "stuff".] And while you're at it, make it feasible to produce these damn things without a T2 BPO; increase the T2 BPC batch size or something so that these things can be constructed in a semi-affordable manner.

I don't think that it is unreasonable to insist that if somebody wants maximum performance of a certain type out of his rockets, he should have to train a few skills to level 5 and use the T2 ammunition.

So rather than making a ton of ship modifications (although, God knows, the Hawk could use a boost), consider messing with the T2 ammo properties to improve rocket performance: it scales nicely (ie. some rockets will be "meh" after the fixes (regular), some rockets will be "decent" (faction), and some will be *situationally* "good" (T2)) and manages to confront a variety of problems without running into the problem CCP Chronotis mentioned involving a certain Crow and too much killitude.

Finally, I would point out that I have not tested anything on SISI; I would love to give some real feedback, but I'm a "Linux-only" user: the patching program and Wine are rather incompatible at the best of times (a different complaint for another thread), and the SISI patch is borking harder and harder with every expansion.

Lugalzagezi666
Posted - 2010.11.17 10:42:00 - [398]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
...

And then you will learn about kiting and exploiting targets weakness /range, tracking.../, maybe even something about fitting ships and hopefully stop posting info that has absolutely no value for balancing ships/weapons.

Just fyi - if you used web and gremlin rockets on your hawk you could safely stay at 8k and kill that enyo without even needing much shield boosting. But hey, shooting its highest resist makes it more interesting, right?

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.11.17 15:50:00 - [399]
 

Originally by: Kronanius
However, I notice that there seems to be little to no use of T2 rocket ammo; and personally, I can and do ***** out the rage rockets to rather decent effect on the vengeance and pve kestrel.


Rage rockets on Sisi had (have?) an explosion radius of 30 m. That's frigate-sized, in contradiction of Rage/Fury's "normal" role of being used against ships a size larger. So I haven't been using Rage in my tests agaisnt other frigates out of expectation that Rage's stats will get tweaked.

Originally by: Kronanius
It would seem to me that the "range" issue that gets a lot of complaints could be fixed by capping the negative velocity effects of the javelin rockets to something like a max of ~15%.


The speed penalty to Jav is really annoying and makes it close to unusable on the frigate scale, where speed is most important and the extra few km gained is likely to be lost through missile flight dynamics and not very useful anyway, considering its position in the 10-20 km range range.

But why doesn't Scorch or Barrage get a similar speed penalty? Barrage doesn't because it supposed to be an offensive option, being used to stay out of the optimal of, e.g., blasterboats. But what about Scorch? Amarr ships are about as slow as Caldari ones, often more so after they stick several metres of armour on. Jav missiles are intended as a defensive weapon, to be used when you can't get close enough to hit a target with normal ammo, and Scorch should be the same, instead of its current status as offensive and defensive without any significant drawbacks.

Either a) give Scorch a ship velocity penalty to bring it into line with Javs as a defensive weapon, or b) remove the velocity penalty from Javs. Although b) is the sensible option, a) would be much more entertaining. Razz

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.11.17 19:23:00 - [400]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III

Comments:

Your active Hawks without webs are awful, either because your unwebbed target will fly straight up to its optimal and kill you, or it will disengage.

Oh FFS, you don't have a web on the other fit either.



And what mid slot would you propose I fit that web on? The active hawk's weakness wasn't speed or kiting, it was the EM resist hole. I didn't even have the mids to fill THAT in. At least the passive hawk was MWD stable, so any kiting problems could easily be resolved by leaving the MWD on. Oh, FFS you didn't consider that either.


Originally by: Lugalzagezi666

And then you will learn about kiting and exploiting targets weakness /range, tracking.../, maybe even something about fitting ships and hopefully stop posting info that has absolutely no value for balancing ships/weapons.

Just fyi - if you used web and gremlin rockets on your hawk you could safely stay at 8k and kill that enyo without even needing much shield boosting. But hey, shooting its highest resist makes it more interesting, right?


And then you will learn about making useful posts, testing, the hawk's gaping weakness, range tracking maybe even something about how the hawk has massive fitting deficiencies and perhaps stop posting info that has absolutely no value for balancing ships/weapons.

Just fyi - the hawk already has few enough mid slots without fitting a web, i.e. the EM resist hole I already informed you about. But hey, shooting ammunition with which I get no bonuses to with no EM tank, which essentially makes me an enyo only killer nvm Minmatar and Amarr frigs who extend far beyond 8km, while he is forced to shoot at my highest resistances makes it more interesting, right?

Shawn Pierce
State War Academy
Posted - 2010.11.17 19:35:00 - [401]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
'Hawk versus other ships' Stuffs


How about trying a different fit:

[Hawk, Whee Rocket Buff!!]
Damage Control II
Power Diagnostic System II

1MN Afterburner II
Gistii B-Type Small Shield Booster
Medium Shield Extender II
Warp Scrambler II

150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket

Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I

Nice buffer, nice resists, good rep for a frigate. It's not a pure 'RocketHawk' but it doesn't need to be. Would be slightly more successful than the fits you posted, especially when operating in scram range.

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.11.17 21:50:00 - [402]
 

Originally by: Shawn Pierce

How about trying a different fit:

[Hawk, Whee Rocket Buff!!]
Damage Control II
Power Diagnostic System II

1MN Afterburner II
Gistii B-Type Small Shield Booster
Medium Shield Extender II
Warp Scrambler II

150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket

Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I

Nice buffer, nice resists, good rep for a frigate. It's not a pure 'RocketHawk' but it doesn't need to be. Would be slightly more successful than the fits you posted, especially when operating in scram range.


Originally by: Kai Yuen
The only way to do it is with a deadspace booster and I couldn't find one on Sisi to test with. In terms of tech 2 fits, active fails every time. Not enough mid slots. Not enough CPU. Not enough base capacitor capacity or recharge. Buffer works ok, but it doesn't play to the hawk's strengths. Suggest hawk's bonus changed from 7.5% to shield boost to 5% all shield resistances.


Yea, I thought of that one too. It doesn't matter. The deadspace booster might perform well, but that isn't balance. Why should the hawk be forced to use a deadspace booster to function as intended when every other AF works fine with tech 2 gear? It lacks fitting power and slots. Plain and simple. It works so much better as a buffer than an active shield tank. It also makes it more robust. Active tanks are extremely vulnerable to neuting and many assault frigs and faction frigs have utility highs to fit neuts. The passive buffer has no such handicap. It can tank and fire away with 0 capacitor. Buffer also works well against greater numbers. Say the active tank can easily stave off 1 other frigate. Maybe even 2 tech 1 frigates, but once that active tank is overcome by the third it melts like butter. Not enough hp to work with. The buffer performs better. I took out 2 rifters and a punisher solo all at the same time with 10% shields left to spare. The buffer stands up to the added DPS long enough for me to cream one or 2 rifters and I was unaffected by their neuts. In fact, with the t2 PDS after the neuts were gone my cap came back fast enough for me to chase the punisher down before he could warp. Had I been reliant on webs he would have been long gone once my capacitor was empty.

Buffer is so much more versatile and with the t2 resistances the hawk does it well. Put a passive EM hardener on and 1 EM rig and you're golden. Kiting and webs? Why bother? That's just putting in effort you don't have to. Sure, I can web an enyo and kite his range, but that tactic is exclusive to the enyo. The ishkur and sentinel neut your active tank down every time. The vengeance, retribution, wolf, and jag laugh at your lack of em resists. The shield boost bonus won't save you. My buffer hawk creamed everything but the sentinel and a faction fit ishkur, and the sentinel couldn't even seal the deal. Either they need to introduce added fitting power or get rid of the shield boost bonus altogether and give us passive tank bonuses.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.11.17 23:17:00 - [403]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
HHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG


Oh this is too stupid for words.

Fit the web in one of your four medslots. Prop mod, web, scram, tank mod.
You plug the EM hole with rigslots and DC.
Desiring MWD stability on a ship designed to operate within scramble range is just moronic.
You used kinetic ammo against T2 Gallente resists? WTF were you thinking?

Come on. It's hardly Challenge Anneka.

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.11.18 00:00:00 - [404]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
DUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!


Oh this is too stupid for words.

One tank mod won't cut it. That's glaringly obvious. You need at least 2. Prop, scram, tank, resist. Only way to make the tank viable, otherwise you're going into the kill zone wrapped in paper.
I don't desire MWD stability, it just happened to be that way. It was there so I use it. If they don't scram me I can stay on them. If they do then I can scram back and fire.
I used the ammo I had. Faction ammo isn't exactly easy to come by on the test server and I was in the FFA zone. Whatever was in the launchers at the time of the engagement got fire.

Come on. It's hardly Challenge Anneka.

Tsubutai
The Tuskers
Posted - 2010.11.18 07:04:00 - [405]
 

Edited by: Tsubutai on 18/11/2010 09:12:18
Originally by: Gypsio III
I'm not ignoring the ease of application of damage at range! Honest! I'm absolutely counting that as part of the "advantage" that a slower frigate such as a rocket Kestrel or a null/rail Merlin needs to have over, say, a Rifter. It must be that way, because that still leaves the option open for the Rifter to win by getting in close soon enough - if the slower frigate had teh same ease of application of damage as the faster one, then it would almost always win, and any fight at close range would be stupidly predictable.

My entire point is that the balance between superior DPS-at-range must be finely balanced with the mobility advantage! With the current rockets, this isn't the case, because their damage is so feeble, but I'm optimistic that the Sisi rockets will be about right.

New rockets in general are OK, it's the Hawk's +25% damage that I take issue with. The Hawk beating most other AFs at 7km is fine and obviously working as intended. The problem is that it's also not appreciably disadvantaged at 1 km, especially compared to other frigates with decent DPS at range: 10k EHP and 170 - 190 DPS before heat with no issues applying that damage at any range makes it very competitive as a brawler, particularly when the attacking AF is going to have spent at least a few seconds getting pummeled by rockets while closing range. New rockets = good, +25% damage on the Hawk = excessive.

As for javelins/precisions and their speed penalties vs. LR turret ammo... tracking penalties are meaningless, amirite? Especially for turrets that don't have insta-ammo swaps.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.11.18 09:13:00 - [406]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
lol


Four tank mods, not one. SSB/MSE, DC, rig, rig.
Knowingly making conclusions based upon the use of the wrong ammo is just stupid.

Come on, just use T1 and mentally adjust. If your opponent uses T1 ammo too then there's no problem at all. Hell, with the current Rage stats you can use that without too much problem, especially if you chug a Crash. Here's a proper Hawk fit for you.

[Hawk, Rocket MSE MWD]
Damage Control II
Micro Auxiliary Power Core I

Catalyzed Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters
Medium Shield Extender II
Stasis Webifier II
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I

Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket
Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I

If you drop the neut and switch to a named MSE you can fit a BCS. The MSE fit is better against high-applied-damage opponents such Jag or Wolf. Against low-applied-damage opponents such as Vengeance, Hawk or Enyo a nos-powered SSB can work better.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.11.18 09:43:00 - [407]
 

Originally by: Tsubutai

New rockets in general are OK, it's the Hawk's +25% damage that I take issue with. The Hawk beating most other AFs at 7km is fine and obviously working as intended. The problem is that it's also not appreciably disadvantaged at 1 km, especially compared to other frigates with decent DPS at range: 10k EHP and 170 - 190 DPS before heat with no issues applying that damage at any range makes it very competitive as a brawler, particularly when the attacking AF is going to have spent at least a few seconds getting pummeled by rockets while closing range. New rockets = good, +25% damage on the Hawk = excessive.


I certainly take the point that it's very hard to avoid the Hawk's damage. Possibly too hard; we'll see. I'm not completely convinced that the 10%/level kinetic damage bonus is excessive though. In the AF class, the kinetic bonus only "works" against the Jaguar and Wolf - against the other races' AFs, it doesn't really offer any bonus over hitting their resist hole. Okay, in TQ often you don't have time to reload, or the situation changes, so you're stuck with kinetic and the new bonus will certainly help - but the high kinetic resists limit the magnitude of this "help".

The case where it certainly does make a difference is obviously against the Jaguar and Wolf. Too big a difference? I'm not convinced. From my Sisi tests, a Wolf or Jag was competitive with a SSB Hawk, so I don't think it's a problem there. They found it tougher against a MSE Hawk, but the Wolf/Jag can also hit the Hawk's resist holes, whether with EMP or Barrage. In fact, I'm showing that a MSE II-DC II-2x shield resist-rigged Jaguar has more EHP to kinetic than a named MSE (PG)-DC II-2x shield resist rigged Hawk does to EMP. In any case, I suppose we just come back to my original comment that the Hawk should be have some sort of advantage against a Jaguar/Wolf...

Hang on, how are you getting 170-190 DPS before heat from a Hawk? And an ABing Jaguar will still get a some sort of 11-12% damage mitigation from speed.

Kronanius
Posted - 2010.11.18 12:32:00 - [408]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
The speed penalty to Jav is really annoying and makes it close to unusable on the frigate scale, where speed is most important and the extra few km gained is likely to be lost through missile flight dynamics and not very useful anyway, considering its position in the 10-20 km range range.

But why doesn't Scorch or Barrage get a similar speed penalty? Barrage doesn't because it supposed to be an offensive option, being used to stay out of the optimal of, e.g., blasterboats. But what about Scorch? Amarr ships are about as slow as Caldari ones, often more so after they stick several metres of armour on. Jav missiles are intended as a defensive weapon, to be used when you can't get close enough to hit a target with normal ammo, and Scorch should be the same, instead of its current status as offensive and defensive without any significant drawbacks.

Either a) give Scorch a ship velocity penalty to bring it into line with Javs as a defensive weapon, or b) remove the velocity penalty from Javs. Although b) is the sensible option, a) would be much more entertaining. Razz


That's essentially what I was getting at. ;)

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.11.18 19:53:00 - [409]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III

DUHR DUHR DUHR
Fail fit:




Wow, after all that *****ing you buffer fit it anyways. What a waste of time this conversation was. The web isn't necessary. Rocket explosion velocity is 225 with skills. Applying damage was never an issue. It was always tank. Your EM resists is still a glaring hole. Not gonna cut it, Nancy. Neuts are no good vs. Minmatar, Vengeance, OR the Ishkur. In fact, the only thing they're good against are other Hawks that are actively tanked. Everything else laughs. You'd cap yourself out too, making your little web useless.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.11.18 21:52:00 - [410]
 

Oh man I'm being trolled silly here... Laughing

I gave you a buffer fit because you wanted a buffer fit, Einstein.
No, applying rocket damage is still an issue, which is one of the reasons for the web.
That fit does not have an EM hole. Its lowest EHP is to explosive.
Neuting an opponent causes him to lose tackle, not you. Unless you're an idiot. Laughing

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.11.19 02:52:00 - [411]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
Oh man I'm being trolled silly here... Laughing

I gave you a buffer fit because you wanted a buffer fit, Einstein.
No, applying rocket damage is still an issue, which is one of the reasons for the web.
That fit does not have an EM hole. Its lowest EHP is to explosive.
Neuting an opponent causes him to lose tackle, not you. Unless you're an idiot. Laughing


Oh man I'm being trolled silly here... Laughing

No, you gave me a buffer fit because only buffer works. I never asked for any of your fits, Einstein. Applying rocket damage was only an issue with dual prop ships, and they pwn your face outside of web range anyways, so the web won't save you. That fit still doesn't have the passive tank required to bring down the wolf or ishkur, and wow you can web and kite the enyo. Amazingly enough, the enyo is not a frigate I'm particularly concerned about. Wow, you neuted out his tackle. What are you gonna do now? Run away? Drone boats and capless gun frigs couldn't give a damn, and you can't keep them neuted out for long. Stability is less than 1 minute and it takes very little cap to turn a scram on. You've successfully created a "fail tank so I have to neut and GTFO" boat. Not particularly useful, unless you're an idiot.

You've missed the point of my original post entirely. You had to gripe about something that never came up in my testing. I killed all of my targets fine webless, save a select few. The point was "active hawk = fail". Fitting a web on a buffer hawk is gimp enough, let alone an active hawk that needs a cap booster to function. The shield boost bonus is useless. It doesn't enhance the hawk's tank enough to keep it in tact, nor does it balance out the massive cap amount it takes to power a shield booster in the first place, forcing you to fit a cap booster. The gripe about webs is beside the point. It's not even an issue, only personal taste.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.11.19 08:54:00 - [412]
 

Laughing

Ok, I'm outa here. HF dying then blaming CCP for your terrible fits.

Lugalzagezi666
Posted - 2010.11.20 19:17:00 - [413]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
Ok, I'm outa here. HF dying then blaming CCP for your terrible fits.

Trolled out of discussion lol.

Originally by: Tsubutai
...

I dont think that hawk damage was that good /were there any recent changes?/.

I used gank jag vs mse hawk and comfortably win in around 20% shield /maybe 230dps with rf fusion overheated/. No orbiting to mitigate rocket damage, just burned to him and used keep at 1,5k. If i remember i still got some damage mitigation when i was closing in but not for long as i was in point blank very fast. Then i just won dps/ehp race.

It was almost same with ishkur /250-260 dps/ - even despite bad bad damage type from blasters /but unbonused damagetype from hawk too/. If hawk is willing to fight - not burning away from you - you dont have that range advantage of rockets for a long time anyway...

Also tracking penalty on lr ammo - when you are kiting does it really matter that much? If you choose bad ammo, its problem, yes, but javs with its speed penalty are just bad - for example on abing male it will cut your speed by 350m/s.

Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
Posted - 2010.11.22 15:01:00 - [414]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
Originally by: Gypsio III
Oh man I'm being trolled silly here... Laughing

I gave you a buffer fit because you wanted a buffer fit, Einstein.
No, applying rocket damage is still an issue, which is one of the reasons for the web.
That fit does not have an EM hole. Its lowest EHP is to explosive.
Neuting an opponent causes him to lose tackle, not you. Unless you're an idiot. Laughing


Oh man I'm being trolled silly here... Laughing

No, you gave me a buffer fit because only buffer works. I never asked for any of your fits, Einstein. Applying rocket damage was only an issue with dual prop ships, and they pwn your face outside of web range anyways, so the web won't save you. That fit still doesn't have the passive tank required to bring down the wolf or ishkur, and wow you can web and kite the enyo. Amazingly enough, the enyo is not a frigate I'm particularly concerned about. Wow, you neuted out his tackle. What are you gonna do now? Run away? Drone boats and capless gun frigs couldn't give a damn, and you can't keep them neuted out for long. Stability is less than 1 minute and it takes very little cap to turn a scram on. You've successfully created a "fail tank so I have to neut and GTFO" boat. Not particularly useful, unless you're an idiot.

You've missed the point of my original post entirely. You had to gripe about something that never came up in my testing. I killed all of my targets fine webless, save a select few. The point was "active hawk = fail". Fitting a web on a buffer hawk is gimp enough, let alone an active hawk that needs a cap booster to function. The shield boost bonus is useless. It doesn't enhance the hawk's tank enough to keep it in tact, nor does it balance out the massive cap amount it takes to power a shield booster in the first place, forcing you to fit a cap booster. The gripe about webs is beside the point. It's not even an issue, only personal taste.


Have you ever flown a ship in real PVP?

Because Gypsio is quite right.

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.11.23 00:56:00 - [415]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
Laughing

Ok, I'm outa here. HF dying then blaming CCP for your terrible fits.


Bai

Originally by: Lugalzagezi666

Trolled out of discussion lol.



There's no QQing in baseball.

Originally by: Lugalzagezi666

I dont think that hawk damage was that good /were there any recent changes?/.

I used gank jag vs mse hawk and comfortably win in around 20% shield /maybe 230dps with rf fusion overheated/. No orbiting to mitigate rocket damage, just burned to him and used keep at 1,5k. If i remember i still got some damage mitigation when i was closing in but not for long as i was in point blank very fast. Then i just won dps/ehp race.



The only real dps change of interest was changing the 5% kinetic bonus to 10% on the hawk. The rest was more or less insignificant. Explosion velocity just made applying DPS a little easier. Buffer hawk still the way to go. Shield boost bonus still meaningless.

Originally by: Sidus Isaacs

Have you ever flown a ship in real PVP?

Because Gypsio is quite right.


Oh please, the dude needs his lackies to come defend him? Go back to FW.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.11.23 16:05:00 - [416]
 

Edited by: Gypsio III on 23/11/2010 16:05:38

No, rockets got a 5.6% raw DPS increase, with the larger clip size and lower ROF increasing this further in practice. If that's insignificant to you, then you probably can't be bother to train many skills either, and would similarly regard a 5% cut in DPS as "insignificant".

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2010.11.23 17:27:00 - [417]
 

Not that i play anymore (this account got ressurected only thx to 5-days-for-free thingy) but damn, Kai Yuen you are pretty dumb and use pretty crap fits thanks to your stupid arguments. No web on your fits? You even heard about range control? Or heard about AB frigs? Have fun trying to kill them without webifier. Using kinetic ammo against gallente t2? Lol. Next time use EM missiles against minmatar t2 armor tanks please and cry how EM damage is useless.

And yea Gypsio is right, you are not. Go back to learning basics about missile combat (especially short range missile combat which rockets belong to) and combat in general. Chapter 11: damage types and Chapter 12: range control.

Vokradacka
Posted - 2010.11.23 18:02:00 - [418]
 

Hmm... rockets ill be maybe better than before, but still subpar vs guns in every category...

Hawk vs jaguar/wolf ?Razz no chance...
fly vs sabre??? omg why...?
crow?I flew crow as combat inty last time.....maybe before nanonerf as "anti-inty sniper" with Precision Lights...

But....i have easy solution for almost every rocket ship..
change CPU usage of T2 rockets " 17 -> 9 " (+ maybe PG 4->3 and lower CPU/PG for standard launchers ) ..... "end of story"

bay

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2010.11.23 18:23:00 - [419]
 

Actually flycatcher can kill sabre, there are multiple ways of doing it. For example dual MSE catcher can kill sabres pretty OK. But i do agree with fittings especially with CPU on them. Tad too high (or too low CPU output on some of khanid boats like heretic).

Shaemell Buttleson
Posted - 2010.11.23 21:56:00 - [420]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
Originally by: Gypsio III
Laughing

Ok, I'm outa here. HF dying then blaming CCP for your terrible fits.


Bai

Originally by: Lugalzagezi666

Trolled out of discussion lol.



There's no QQing in baseball.

Originally by: Lugalzagezi666

I dont think that hawk damage was that good /were there any recent changes?/.

I used gank jag vs mse hawk and comfortably win in around 20% shield /maybe 230dps with rf fusion overheated/. No orbiting to mitigate rocket damage, just burned to him and used keep at 1,5k. If i remember i still got some damage mitigation when i was closing in but not for long as i was in point blank very fast. Then i just won dps/ehp race.



The only real dps change of interest was changing the 5% kinetic bonus to 10% on the hawk. The rest was more or less insignificant. Explosion velocity just made applying DPS a little easier. Buffer hawk still the way to go. Shield boost bonus still meaningless.

Originally by: Sidus Isaacs

Have you ever flown a ship in real PVP?

Because Gypsio is quite right.


Oh please, the dude needs his lackies to come defend him? Go back to FW.



Gypsio doesn't need defending. Whats he's forgotton about missile based systems is more than you'll ever know!



Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 : last (15)

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