open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Blasters are fine. Buff webs!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic

Sean Faust
Gallente
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
Waterboard
Posted - 2010.12.27 15:45:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Sean Faust on 27/12/2010 15:52:20
So, I've recently started playing with Blaster ships again after a long hiatus due to the notorious imbalance issues they have and I've come to the conclusion by testing things out on Sisi that the Deimos and Astarte no longer suck once you throw a faction web on them. I've been experimenting with fits for both of these ships that use a combination of ECM drones + fed navy web, and I've discovered that virtually EVERY complaint I've ever had about flying these ships no longer applies now that I can web out to 18km (with heat).

Now I realize that Sisi isn't TQ and that you run into a different caliber of players on Sisi than on TQ, so more testing will be needed, but if it turns out to be as good on TQ as it does on Sisi then I think an overall change to webs should be in order: Give them staggered ranges based on meta level like with the scrams, with the base T1 webs having the current range of 10km and T2/best named being equivalent to current faction web ranges, and a buff to the range of faction webs. This change will benefit not just Gallente, but everyone who uses webs.

Opinions?

arbalesttom
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2010.12.27 16:47:00 - [2]
 

sisi pvp =/= tranq pvp so no.


Sean Faust
Gallente
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
Waterboard
Posted - 2010.12.27 16:51:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: arbalesttom
sisi pvp =/= tranq pvp so no.




That's kind of what I said. Further testing is needed on TQ.

Cambarus
Malicious Destruction
War Against the Manifest
Posted - 2010.12.27 17:03:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Cambarus on 27/12/2010 17:03:34
Hybrid imbalance scales with size, the biggest problem being the BS weapons (as I have pointed out many, many times, a geddon ODing a megathron at 7km is horrendously imbalanced).

It's also worth noting that the big issue with the diemost is that it's nothing more than an expensive, skill intensive brutix, and, like the astarte, it has no ability to disengage if things go south, so any time help arrives you can expect to lose your ship (which ties into the idea of sisi being a bad place to be testing this, especially since you're doing it by using faction mods on expensive, uninsurable ships with no ability to disengage and very little tank)

EDIT: as for changing webs:
Bad idea. If you can web at 18km with a t2 web, so can everything else, will further widen the gap between pulses and hybrids.

Zhim'Fufu
Posted - 2010.12.27 17:13:00 - [5]
 

Boost the agility and speed of gallente blaster ships but nerf the capacitor so all you can do with it is quickly run up and web them and apply dps. The nerf to capcitor will make sure you can't simply run away like a minnie ship or you will cap out. This would have to go along with a general reduction in cap use for blasters so you could keep shooting after you turn off the mwd. Oh and a boost to tracking. Razz

Sean Faust
Gallente
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
Waterboard
Posted - 2010.12.27 17:16:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Cambarus

If you can web at 18km with a t2 web, so can everything else, will further widen the gap between pulses and hybrids.



That imbalance would be kept in check by the fact that most laser ships don't have the mids to afford to be able to devote to a web. The Geddon, Zealot, and Abso don't, anyway. Harbinger and Abaddon would be an issue, however.

As far as having very little tank, FWIW, The astarte fit I use has a 900 DPS tank. Of course even that won't hold up THAT well in the face of being blobbed.

Zhim'Fufu
Posted - 2010.12.27 17:39:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Sean Faust
Originally by: Cambarus

If you can web at 18km with a t2 web, so can everything else, will further widen the gap between pulses and hybrids.



That imbalance would be kept in check by the fact that most laser ships don't have the mids to afford to be able to devote to a web. The Geddon, Zealot, and Abso don't, anyway. Harbinger and Abaddon would be an issue, however.
He is not talking about getting webbed by a pulse boat he is talking about getting webbed in particular by the other dedicated tackling ships those amarr ships should have along. Then everything kites out of your blaster range whilst the pulses melt you down to your pod.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.12.27 17:44:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Zhim'Fufu

He is not talking about getting webbed by a pulse boat he is talking about getting webbed in particular by the other dedicated tackling ships those amarr ships should have along. Then everything kites out of your blaster range whilst the pulses melt you down to your pod.



There are many ships which have the slots to fit the Holy Quad of PVP.

-Liang

Sean Faust
Gallente
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
Waterboard
Posted - 2010.12.27 17:46:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Zhim'Fufu
He is not talking about getting webbed by a pulse boat he is talking about getting webbed in particular by the other dedicated tackling ships those amarr ships should have along. Then everything kites out of your blaster range whilst the pulses melt you down to your pod.


In a gang situation all bets go out the window anyway. Your support can counter their support, etc... It introduces to many variables into the theory to even be an issue anymore. Nobody is going to argue that lasers outperform blasters when in gangs due to their superior range. And nothing you change will change that. Blaster ships make up for that however by having enough utility to be able to function without the support that a laser should would need to be effective. In other words, they're more for solo anyway.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.12.27 17:58:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Sean Faust
In a gang situation all bets go out the window anyway.


How big of a gang are we talking about here? The idea that my blaster ships would be more useless in gangs of size >= 2 is pretty annoying.

-Liang

Sean Faust
Gallente
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
Waterboard
Posted - 2010.12.27 18:07:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Sean Faust on 27/12/2010 18:09:00
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Sean Faust
In a gang situation all bets go out the window anyway.


How big of a gang are we talking about here? The idea that my blaster ships would be more useless in gangs of size >= 2 is pretty annoying.

-Liang


If you want to discuss duos then I can't think of much that would be deadlier (as a duo) than a Curse + Blaster ship. The only real downfall of a Curse is that it doesn't put out significant DPS no matter how you fit it. And considering it's neuted them to not being able to run an MWD/AB/active tank anymore, the best suitable partner for them IMO would be something that doubles as heavy tackle while offering up truckloads of DPS. Sounds more like a blaster ship than a laser ship to me.

Plated Curse support curse (meaning lots of TDs rather than shield tank)+ Plated blaster ship each with a wave of armor maintenance bots in the drone bay for repping in between fights would be pretty amazing IMO.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2010.12.27 18:14:00 - [12]
 

Dishonour drones and faction webs used as argument for blasters working as intended ..

Whatever will they think of next!

PS: Longer webs means godly Matari recons and obsoletes everything small, most already have to be in web range to even do anything.
PPS: What do you propose faction webs will look like in your new world? 30km with heat on non-bonus hulls? Very Happy

Zhim'Fufu
Posted - 2010.12.27 18:19:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Sean Faust
Originally by: Zhim'Fufu
He is not talking about getting webbed by a pulse boat he is talking about getting webbed in particular by the other dedicated tackling ships those amarr ships should have along. Then everything kites out of your blaster range whilst the pulses melt you down to your pod.


In a gang situation all bets go out the window anyway. Your support can counter their support, etc... It introduces to many variables into the theory to even be an issue anymore. Nobody is going to argue that lasers outperform blasters when in gangs due to their superior range. And nothing you change will change that. Blaster ships make up for that however by having enough utility to be able to function without the support that a laser should would need to be effective. In other words, they're more for solo anyway.
Why an 18km t2 web is a bad idea in any situation for a bc and lower blaster boat. You will be tackled out of med neut range and as you are slower than pretty much anything else you are going to run across you are not going to be able to get away from even a rifter. And don't talk to me about drones as they will be shot out of the sky by frigates long before they can drive one off and the loldps they do to cruisers won't matter before the gang finally arrives to collect the killmail.

Sean Faust
Gallente
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
Waterboard
Posted - 2010.12.27 18:20:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Dishonour drones and faction webs used as argument for blasters working as intended ..

Whatever will they think of next!

PS: Longer webs means godly Matari recons and obsoletes everything small, most already have to be in web range to even do anything.
PPS: What do you propose faction webs will look like in your new world? 30km with heat on non-bonus hulls? Very Happy


Dishonour drones? Is that what they're calling ECM drones now? Never heard that one before. I've always thought of ECM drones as being blasterboat fundamentals.

In any case, you do raise some good points. But the only other solution I can think of would be to give T2 Duvolle Labs ships such as the Deimos and Astarte a small (much smaller than the Minmatar recons/EAF) web range bonus. Perhaps 10% per level. This will give the T2 blaster ships the edge they need to perform like my faction webbed Astarte does without having to sink loads of isk into them. At the same time since they can only web out to 15km with a T2 web, they won't exactly be stepping on the toes of Minmatar webbing ships either.

Loradan Illstari
Posted - 2010.12.27 18:29:00 - [15]
 


Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.12.27 18:33:00 - [16]
 

This is an atrocious idea. Web range was never an issue. All you've done is make it possible to web blaster ships well outside of blaster range. Now blaster ships can't even shoot webbed targets, because they'll be webbed back before they even make range. Way to OP pulses and ACs MORE while having blasters continue to suck ass. No.

Tarn Reis
Posted - 2010.12.27 19:14:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
This is an atrocious idea. Web range was never an issue. All you've done is make it possible to web blaster ships well outside of blaster range. Now blaster ships can't even shoot webbed targets, because they'll be webbed back before they even make range. Way to OP pulses and ACs MORE while having blasters continue to suck ass. No.


This. Blaster boats already have a huge issue with with damage taken while closing, or with simply being kited to death. And you want to extend web range so that it takes even longer to get into blaster range?

Megan Maynard
Minmatar
Navigators of the Abyss
Posted - 2010.12.27 19:29:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Sean Faust
Nobody is going to argue that lasers outperform blasters when in gangs due to their superior range.


I'll argue that....

Megan Maynard
Minmatar
Navigators of the Abyss
Posted - 2010.12.27 19:32:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
This is an atrocious idea. Web range was never an issue. All you've done is make it possible to web blaster ships well outside of blaster range. Now blaster ships can't even shoot webbed targets, because they'll be webbed back before they even make range. Way to OP pulses and ACs MORE while having blasters continue to suck ass. No.


This I disagree with.
Half of what I do as a minmatar is avoid being webbed and scrammed.

How many times have you locked a ship only to have it skirt out of the 12.5 km range right when you lock it.

Think of it this way, sure they can web you, but you've also webbed them and are closing. (Most pilots don't think to overheat mwd for a pulse.)

Hamatitio
Caldari
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2010.12.27 19:41:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Hamatitio on 27/12/2010 19:41:15
Role bonus on blaster ships: 100% bonus (on top of any current bonus) to blaster damage.

Now there is a reason to fly a megathron over a geddon. And the ability to disengage isnt so bad, if you can melt everything before they chew through you :)

edit: also tracking wont be so terrible, you could fit ions and still outdamage current neutron fits by 80% or so of almighty eft numbers.

Lilith Velkor
Minmatar
Heretic Army
B A N E
Posted - 2010.12.27 19:44:00 - [21]
 

Problem is the turret with the most flexibility in range gets to change its ammo instantly. Turn that around. Problem solved.

Grimpak
Gallente
Midnight Elites
Echelon Rising
Posted - 2010.12.27 19:53:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Grimpak on 27/12/2010 19:54:31
Originally by: Hamatitio
Edited by: Hamatitio on 27/12/2010 19:41:15
Role bonus on blaster ships: 100% bonus (on top of any current bonus) to blaster damage.

Now there is a reason to fly a megathron over a geddon. And the ability to disengage isnt so bad, if you can melt everything before they chew through you :)

edit: also tracking wont be so terrible, you could fit ions and still outdamage current neutron fits by 80% or so of almighty eft numbers.
I would actually go farther:

reworking of buffer tanks so that they have better synergy with shield buffer tanks (rigs specially), and either shave mass off from blaster ships, make a tiny agility boost, or shave off some of the mass penalty from the plates.
I would also work about changing the armor rep bonus from many gallente blaster ships since most of the times it's useless (altho it does give some nice numbers). RoF bonus is a nice sorta self-balancing bonus, considering the cap-hungry nature of blasters...

as far as damage goes, small blasters don't have many problems due to inherent agility and speed of frigate-class ships that sport them. Problem lies, however, on the medium and large class where ships don't have that luxury and it's prefereable to buff the EHP they sport, making them pretty much the slowest ship with the shortest range weapon. Add the fact that blasters are only marginally more damaging than pulses and AC's but get vastly outperformed in every other field, would be nice to have a flat 20% increase on the med and large dmg multiplier, and to make it work without breaking balance reformulate both optimal and falloff so that a blaster ship becomes pretty much instant death dealer to ranges up to 10km. further than 10km they should be outdamaged by the other weapons.


I don't want blaster ships to outlast other ships. I want blaster ships to absolutely pulverize everything at spit range, and a return to the times where you can say that "I have a blaster ship, and DPS is my tank."

Artemis Rose
Clandestine Vector
THE SPACE P0LICE
Posted - 2010.12.27 20:11:00 - [23]
 

Ironically, web range increases would only hurt blaster boats more

You web him, he webs you at 18+km. Would you rather be shooting Scorch, Barrage or Null at that range?

TimMc
Brutal Deliverance
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2010.12.27 20:13:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Grimpak
Edited by: Grimpak on 27/12/2010 19:54:31
Originally by: Hamatitio
Edited by: Hamatitio on 27/12/2010 19:41:15
Role bonus on blaster ships: 100% bonus (on top of any current bonus) to blaster damage.

Now there is a reason to fly a megathron over a geddon. And the ability to disengage isnt so bad, if you can melt everything before they chew through you :)

edit: also tracking wont be so terrible, you could fit ions and still outdamage current neutron fits by 80% or so of almighty eft numbers.
I would actually go farther:

reworking of buffer tanks so that they have better synergy with shield buffer tanks (rigs specially), and either shave mass off from blaster ships, make a tiny agility boost, or shave off some of the mass penalty from the plates.
I would also work about changing the armor rep bonus from many gallente blaster ships since most of the times it's useless (altho it does give some nice numbers). RoF bonus is a nice sorta self-balancing bonus, considering the cap-hungry nature of blasters...

as far as damage goes, small blasters don't have many problems due to inherent agility and speed of frigate-class ships that sport them. Problem lies, however, on the medium and large class where ships don't have that luxury and it's prefereable to buff the EHP they sport, making them pretty much the slowest ship with the shortest range weapon. Add the fact that blasters are only marginally more damaging than pulses and AC's but get vastly outperformed in every other field, would be nice to have a flat 20% increase on the med and large dmg multiplier, and to make it work without breaking balance reformulate both optimal and falloff so that a blaster ship becomes pretty much instant death dealer to ranges up to 10km. further than 10km they should be outdamaged by the other weapons.


I don't want blaster ships to outlast other ships. I want blaster ships to absolutely pulverize everything at spit range, and a return to the times where you can say that "I have a blaster ship, and DPS is my tank."


This for the love of god this. Blaster ships should spell death for anyone in scram range, so need more damage and tracking.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.12.27 21:03:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Grimpak

I would also work about changing the armor rep bonus from many gallente blaster ships since most of the times it's useless (altho it does give some nice numbers).



I can agree with all of it but this. Active tanking and blasters actually go hand in hand fairly well - they're both useful only in smallish gangs. I would be more inclined to make use of my active tanking bonus if it didn't interfere so heavily with my ability to deal damage - both because of mobility and damage vs tank mods.

So I might propose finding some way to give 1 more low to the tank bonused ships without damaging DPS and removing the velocity penalty on active armor tanking rigs.

-Liang

Main ForumAlt
Posted - 2010.12.27 21:06:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Grimpak

I would also work about changing the armor rep bonus from many gallente blaster ships since most of the times it's useless (altho it does give some nice numbers).



I can agree with all of it but this. Active tanking and blasters actually go hand in hand fairly well - they're both useful only in smallish gangs. I would be more inclined to make use of my active tanking bonus if it didn't interfere so heavily with my ability to deal damage - both because of mobility and damage vs tank mods.

So I might propose finding some way to give 1 more low to the tank bonused ships without damaging DPS and removing the velocity penalty on active armor tanking rigs.

-Liang


+1

Grimpak
Gallente
Midnight Elites
Echelon Rising
Posted - 2010.12.27 21:32:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Grimpak

I would also work about changing the armor rep bonus from many gallente blaster ships since most of the times it's useless (altho it does give some nice numbers).



I can agree with all of it but this. Active tanking and blasters actually go hand in hand fairly well - they're both useful only in smallish gangs. I would be more inclined to make use of my active tanking bonus if it didn't interfere so heavily with my ability to deal damage - both because of mobility and damage vs tank mods.

So I might propose finding some way to give 1 more low to the tank bonused ships without damaging DPS and removing the velocity penalty on active armor tanking rigs.

-Liang


I can actually concede on this point.



...a hype with 5%dmg + 5% rof bonuses would be quite interesting thoCool

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.12.27 21:36:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Grimpak
...a hype with 5%dmg + 5% rof bonuses would be quite interesting thoCool


-1 low, +1 mid. Increase agility/speed a bit. Twisted Evil

-Liang

Grimpak
Gallente
Midnight Elites
Echelon Rising
Posted - 2010.12.27 21:40:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Grimpak
...a hype with 5%dmg + 5% rof bonuses would be quite interesting thoCool


-1 low, +1 mid. Increase agility/speed a bit. Twisted Evil

-Liang
Twisted Evil

Meeko Atari
Posted - 2010.12.27 21:59:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Grimpak

I would also work about changing the armor rep bonus from many gallente blaster ships since most of the times it's useless (altho it does give some nice numbers).



I can agree with all of it but this. Active tanking and blasters actually go hand in hand fairly well - they're both useful only in smallish gangs. I would be more inclined to make use of my active tanking bonus if it didn't interfere so heavily with my ability to deal damage - both because of mobility and damage vs tank mods.

So I might propose finding some way to give 1 more low to the tank bonused ships without damaging DPS and removing the velocity penalty on active armor tanking rigs.

-Liang


So what would be the down side to installing Armor Rigs?
Bigger sig?
Sounds like you want all benefits with no penalty's, totally balanced Rolling Eyes


Pages: [1] 2 3

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


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only