These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Lasers Need Love
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#101 - 2014-02-25 22:33:57 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:


Shooting high resist? No... Every T1 ship in the game and most T2 ships have 0% EM resist on shields, and 50% on armor. I will grant that this isnt great if it is an armor tanked ship, but every shield tanked ship other than Minmatar T2 ships are filling in the deepest resist hole possible with a module or rig or suffering withering damage with no resist. Thermal isn't much better, its low on both armor and shields except on a few T2 hulls. By no means are you always hitting high resist with lasers and unless they fit specifically against it you are tearing shields right off.

Nor is your tracking that bad. It is perfectly fine for you to pull a little range and actually use your weapons as designed. If you choose not to use them that way then that is pilot error and you probably should be looking at Caldari or Gallente hulls with bonuses to blasters. You know why blasters have such high tracking? Because the optimal on our longest range ammo is only 15k for battleship guns, and around 5k for high damage ammo... It would almost be easier to dock with the enemy ship and just stab the opposing pilot.


Well do don't have trouble using my lasers. I just fly both gallente and ammar and its much easier to apply dmg in PvP when using balsters. It's not a question if laser as good or bad. It's a question of if they are good or bad in comparison to other weapon systems. They are bad. Yes they need good piloting skills to get range/tracking right. That further reduces thier use.

I did ignore the fact the shields have 0 EM resist. Why? 1) amarr as armour ships will be fighting other armour ships. (exept oracle maybe). 2) When you heve 0 resists u will plug tha hole. All shield ships get em hardener or at least a rig. An armour ship will rearly get an explosive specific resist module unless its galletne.

Range in PvP does not matter (that much). All ships fit MWD, AB, MJD. You have scramblers and webs. Fights happen on strgates, wormholes, station udocks, PoSe. You don't fight in open space. So tell we when do you need renge advantege, execept in the process of flying from one primary to another?


So.... Your argument is that because lasers are not the absolute best weapon in every catagory and the perfect choice in every situation that they are bad?

Sorry, no. Blasters have huge paper dps, much less applied dps. At the ranges they can apply their dps they need those hull bonuses to tracking just to hit.... Kinda like that 'wasted' cap bonus that many Amarr hulls get. True, if you have enough support to set up the perfect environment blasters will do more damage... But that does not make them over all superior, and if you are commonly flying in fleets where that level of support exists, then I guess you should stick with the blasters.

The ships you face that filled in the EM hole that you choose to ignore.... You know what else you get to ignore? Whatever else they would have put in that slot.... like maybe a tracking disruptor, sensor dampener, any of several rigs that would have hurt you more... Who knows? You didnt have to face it because they had to fill the hole with an EM resist mod instead, or else you got to shoot into a deep resist hole and that is worth nothing to you somehow.

Every weapon has its drawback. If the drawback of lasers seems like too much, use something else you like better. Liking chocolate does not make vanilla bad, and liking hybrids does not make lasers bad.


I don't even want to comment on that. EFT warriors and theory fighters are better left ignored... I don't say I'm right, but I do talk from my experience. If u chose to ignore the fact that shield fleet will simply disengage form a from with a comparable armour fleet or that shield ships thx to invu filed have sometimes higher worst resists then armour ships best resists then be my guest. I'm talking about competetive PvP where +/- equal forces duke it out. Where you have a competent support and your main goal is to punch trough enemy rr. When someones PvP experience is limited to killing solo raters or indy pilots than ya, lasers are great...
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2014-02-25 22:41:22 UTC
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Seliah wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:

Range in PvP does not matter (that much). All ships fit MWD, AB, MJD. You have scramblers and webs. Fights happen on strgates, wormholes, station udocks, PoSe. You don't fight in open space. So tell we when do you need renge advantege, execept in the process of flying from one primary to another?


What ?


I almost spat out my tea when I read that. Range is about the single most defining factor in the outcome of an engagement is it not?


Maybe do something other than PvE....


That's right. Correct range is extremely important in PVP...

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#103 - 2014-02-25 22:48:51 UTC
This wouldn't be EVE if the thread didn't go completely awry… This was a straightforward proposal to adjust the damage type on T2 crystals only, but the consensus seems to be that the EM-Thermal bonus is fine. Which seems a bit odd, because I'm continually reading comments on how Amarr are pigeonholed to EM-Thermal, but I digress. I think this thread has run its course, so please lock. Thanks.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#104 - 2014-02-26 00:43:01 UTC
Cassius Invictus wrote:

I don't even want to comment on that. EFT warriors and theory fighters are better left ignored... I don't say I'm right, but I do talk from my experience. If u chose to ignore the fact that shield fleet will simply disengage form a from with a comparable armour fleet or that shield ships thx to invu filed have sometimes higher worst resists then armour ships best resists then be my guest. I'm talking about competetive PvP where +/- equal forces duke it out. Where you have a competent support and your main goal is to punch trough enemy rr. When someones PvP experience is limited to killing solo raters or indy pilots than ya, lasers are great...



That is one situation. Try something other than Null-blob PvP. Lasers are perhaps not the best in *that* situation. As I said, if that is what you do, then choose the hull/weapon combo that best suits what you are doing.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#105 - 2014-02-26 00:53:28 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:

I don't even want to comment on that. EFT warriors and theory fighters are better left ignored... I don't say I'm right, but I do talk from my experience. If u chose to ignore the fact that shield fleet will simply disengage form a from with a comparable armour fleet or that shield ships thx to invu filed have sometimes higher worst resists then armour ships best resists then be my guest. I'm talking about competetive PvP where +/- equal forces duke it out. Where you have a competent support and your main goal is to punch trough enemy rr. When someones PvP experience is limited to killing solo raters or indy pilots than ya, lasers are great...



That is one situation. Try something other than Null-blob PvP. Lasers are perhaps not the best in *that* situation. As I said, if that is what you do, then choose the hull/weapon combo that best suits what you are doing.

Did someone say lasers arent good for null-blob pvp? I've been in multiple zealot fleets that have ripped through blaster rokhs. And apoc fleets that held their own against various opponents. Thats just from my experience.
Ronny Hugo
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#106 - 2014-02-26 00:59:51 UTC
I just wish the heatsinks came in two flavors like the damage rigs. Because once you have 3 heatsinks on the total gain from a damage rig is pretty poor. Because I like taking Vindis in a navy geddon, its like beating some carebear that drives a Ferrari, with a bicycle.
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#107 - 2014-02-26 06:51:14 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:

I don't even want to comment on that. EFT warriors and theory fighters are better left ignored... I don't say I'm right, but I do talk from my experience. If u chose to ignore the fact that shield fleet will simply disengage form a from with a comparable armour fleet or that shield ships thx to invu filed have sometimes higher worst resists then armour ships best resists then be my guest. I'm talking about competetive PvP where +/- equal forces duke it out. Where you have a competent support and your main goal is to punch trough enemy rr. When someones PvP experience is limited to killing solo raters or indy pilots than ya, lasers are great...



That is one situation. Try something other than Null-blob PvP. Lasers are perhaps not the best in *that* situation. As I said, if that is what you do, then choose the hull/weapon combo that best suits what you are doing.



LOL. I have little idea about blobs. I'm talking mostly about WH high end combat. By far blob promotes lasers as a blob is a mix of armor/shield ships, different races, different fittings, and due to that laser can easily find their niche. It's much more difficult in small/medium gangs with experienced pilots, logi support, falcons, etc.

In science when u compare something all other factors must be constant. In blobs or whatever numbers are the primary factor. In WH combat when you have +/- equal numbers, equal ships, equal support - then u can compare the true effectiveness of each weapon system.
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#108 - 2014-02-26 07:18:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Cassius Invictus wrote:


In science when u compare something all other factors must be constant. In blobs or whatever numbers are the primary factor. In WH combat when you have +/- equal numbers, equal ships, equal support - then u can compare the true effectiveness of each weapon system.


Really should be moving away from laser Legions you know.

HAM Legions get to pick damage type, still have excellent damage, OK range for the situations you use them in and don't have the same vulnerability to nuets.

The relatively small range is not a huge issue when nearly all fights are right on top of something.
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#109 - 2014-02-26 11:37:50 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:


In science when u compare something all other factors must be constant. In blobs or whatever numbers are the primary factor. In WH combat when you have +/- equal numbers, equal ships, equal support - then u can compare the true effectiveness of each weapon system.


Really should be moving away from laser Legions you know.

HAM Legions get to pick damage type, still have excellent damage, OK range for the situations you use them in and don't have the same vulnerability to nuets.

The relatively small range is not a huge issue when nearly all fights are right on top of something.


This is exactly what is happening. All legions use either HAM or neuts now. But that just proves my point. Despite few pluses (I still prefer to use laser over missiles) lasers are just an inferior weapon system.
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#110 - 2014-02-26 11:49:36 UTC
Cassius Invictus wrote:

This is exactly what is happening. All legions use either HAM or neuts now. But that just proves my point. Despite few pluses (I still prefer to use laser over missiles) lasers are just an inferior weapon system.


I'd take a laser legion over a HAM legion anywhere that's not completely dominated by close range brawls @ 20km or less in armor ships.

You know, like anywhere but WH on WH violence. WH's are great and all for a lot of things, but the meta is incredibly stagnate in regards to who fights who in what ship types where.

In a non Pulsar, it's nearly always armor t3's + Logi or Triage, +/- a few dreads if you feel like it. That sort of monoculture environment where all ships have naturally high resists towards EM is an absolutely terrible place to look exclusively at for determining game balance.

Frankly, before the rise of the Ishtar and the magnificence that is sentry drones, I considered lasers to be the best weapon system. High damage, ridiculous range using Scorch M on pulse lasers, and excellent damage types against any non minny t2 shield ship, with decent thermal damage against armor ships.

I still do. Sentry drones make pulse lasers look like the short fat kid on the playground, but it's still the best turret/missile medium weapon system imo. Just not when you need to kill 30 guys in supertanked armor ships at point blank range who brought nuets along.
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#111 - 2014-02-26 12:52:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Cassius Invictus
Anhenka wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:

This is exactly what is happening. All legions use either HAM or neuts now. But that just proves my point. Despite few pluses (I still prefer to use laser over missiles) lasers are just an inferior weapon system.


I'd take a laser legion over a HAM legion anywhere that's not completely dominated by close range brawls @ 20km or less in armor ships.

You know, like anywhere but WH on WH violence. WH's are great and all for a lot of things, but the meta is incredibly stagnate in regards to who fights who in what ship types where.

In a non Pulsar, it's nearly always armor t3's + Logi or Triage, +/- a few dreads if you feel like it. That sort of monoculture environment where all ships have naturally high resists towards EM is an absolutely terrible place to look exclusively at for determining game balance.

Frankly, before the rise of the Ishtar and the magnificence that is sentry drones, I considered lasers to be the best weapon system. High damage, ridiculous range using Scorch M on pulse lasers, and excellent damage types against any non minny t2 shield ship, with decent thermal damage against armor ships.

I still do. Sentry drones make pulse lasers look like the short fat kid on the playground, but it's still the best turret/missile medium weapon system imo. Just not when you need to kill 30 guys in supertanked armor ships at point blank range who brought nuets along.



With that I can agree. WH is a very specific are. With EM resists its not that simple as Proteus has a rather low EM resists, as well as Legions themselves. Still raw dps of Proteus is much better that pulse laser fire. As for Blobs I cannot say. What I know is that despite all you wrote in recent years meta game was rather focused on gallente and minmatar ships, which does not directly prove that laser are bad, but that weapon system (ship + turret) was considered rather inferior.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#112 - 2014-02-26 12:57:30 UTC
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:

This is exactly what is happening. All legions use either HAM or neuts now. But that just proves my point. Despite few pluses (I still prefer to use laser over missiles) lasers are just an inferior weapon system.


I'd take a laser legion over a HAM legion anywhere that's not completely dominated by close range brawls @ 20km or less in armor ships.

You know, like anywhere but WH on WH violence. WH's are great and all for a lot of things, but the meta is incredibly stagnate in regards to who fights who in what ship types where.

In a non Pulsar, it's nearly always armor t3's + Logi or Triage, +/- a few dreads if you feel like it. That sort of monoculture environment where all ships have naturally high resists towards EM is an absolutely terrible place to look exclusively at for determining game balance.

Frankly, before the rise of the Ishtar and the magnificence that is sentry drones, I considered lasers to be the best weapon system. High damage, ridiculous range using Scorch M on pulse lasers, and excellent damage types against any non minny t2 shield ship, with decent thermal damage against armor ships.

I still do. Sentry drones make pulse lasers look like the short fat kid on the playground, but it's still the best turret/missile medium weapon system imo. Just not when you need to kill 30 guys in supertanked armor ships at point blank range who brought nuets along.



With that I can agree. WH is a very specific are. With EM resists its not that simple as Proteus has a rather low EM resists, as well as Legions themselves. Still raw dps of Proteus is much better that pulse laser fire. As for Blobs I cannot say. What I know is that despite all you wrote in recent years meta game was rather focused on gallente and minmatar ships, which does not directly prove that laser are bad, but that weapon system (ship + turret) was considered rather inferior.


This is because of sentry drone bonuses and ogre tracking bonuses on the ishtar/vexor navy. It has nothing to do with blasters, which although reasonably powerful, put the user in a precarious position and are very vulnerable to web immobilisiation.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#113 - 2014-02-26 20:17:26 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
This wouldn't be EVE if the thread didn't go completely awry… This was a straightforward proposal to adjust the damage type on T2 crystals only, but the consensus seems to be that the EM-Thermal bonus is fine. Which seems a bit odd, because I'm continually reading comments on how Amarr are pigeonholed to EM-Thermal, but I digress. I think this thread has run its course, so please lock. Thanks.

EM-Thermal bonus is fine-ish imho.

But that doesn't mean that lasers don't have their own problems.
Some of T1 crystals are underpowered compared to T2 so they need a little buff,
hull bonus for firing your weapons are a bit silly and so on.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#114 - 2014-02-26 20:32:08 UTC
The cap reduction bonus on laser hulls is no more wasted than the tracking bonus on blaster hulls. Lasers need cap to fire more, Blasters need tracking to miss less because their optimal is only 5k on a battleship. This is also why Guardians get bonuses to cap transfer and Onerios get bonuses to remote Tracking links.

Every weapon has issues and ways of solving them.
Kai'tan Adrastia
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#115 - 2014-02-26 21:55:39 UTC
As a dedicated Amarr pilot I would have to say that the only significant concerns that I harbor regarding this weapon system is the cap use. Even with Amarr Cruiser skill to 5 the caplife of a ship like an Omen is shockingly poor. I am just getting into ratting with an Apoc and I'm also surprised at how quickly the cap runs down. My cap and gunnery skills are all at least 4 with a smattering of 5s so I'm not terribly underskilled. I would love to see further cap use reduction through a buff to the ship skill percentages, and through role bonuses to ships that don't have the related ship skill instead of a blanket reduction in cap use. That said, I won't hold my breath waiting for further changes.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#116 - 2014-02-26 22:04:11 UTC
The cap reduction that happened to Large Lasers needs to come down to Medium & Small lasers also.
Certain Amarr boats can then keep their cap reduction in order to be able to fire their lasers for ever pretty much.
But it is currently a terrible state of cap use. Other Laser stats are ok, but Lasers have highest equal PG useage with Arty, and massively higher cap useage, meaning that simply firing guns requires cap mods on any Amarr ship without a cap use bonus. So..... No Cap bonus = no laser use in most cases.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#117 - 2014-02-27 14:32:54 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
The cap reduction bonus on laser hulls is no more wasted than the tracking bonus on blaster hulls. Lasers need cap to fire more, Blasters need tracking to miss less because their optimal is only 5k on a battleship. This is also why Guardians get bonuses to cap transfer and Onerios get bonuses to remote Tracking links.

Every weapon has issues and ways of solving them.

Fair enough.

One thing though.

With tracking and falloff bonuses you are solving problems that are relevant only to those weapons systems nothing more, but with cap bonus it impacts your ship as a whole. You need your cap for propulsion, webs, points, reps if you have them, well pretty much everything and that makes you even more susceptible to neuts.

So, that is one hefty issues/drawback that other non laser ships don't have to deal with for the most part.
Don't get me wrong I'm not suggesting to make lasers capless, but making them a little bit less cap hungry would not hurt. Same with t1 crystals don't make another Scorch or Aurora out of Radio but at least make it viable.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#118 - 2014-02-27 14:41:39 UTC
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
The cap reduction bonus on laser hulls is no more wasted than the tracking bonus on blaster hulls. Lasers need cap to fire more, Blasters need tracking to miss less because their optimal is only 5k on a battleship. This is also why Guardians get bonuses to cap transfer and Onerios get bonuses to remote Tracking links.

Every weapon has issues and ways of solving them.

Fair enough.

One thing though.

With tracking and falloff bonuses you are solving problems that are relevant only to those weapons systems nothing more, but with cap bonus it impacts your ship as a whole. You need your cap for propulsion, webs, points, reps if you have them, well pretty much everything and that makes you even more susceptible to neuts.

So, that is one hefty issues/drawback that other non laser ships don't have to deal with for the most part.
Don't get me wrong I'm not suggesting to make lasers capless, but making them a little bit less cap hungry would not hurt. Same with t1 crystals don't make another Scorch or Aurora out of Radio but at least make it viable.


The thing about cap use for lasers is that it's a substitute for ammo use. All that ammo you don't carry means you can carry an extra cap booster - which is essentially ammo.

You wouldn't fit an apoc without a cap booster (at least without cap logi in fleet) in the same way you wouldn't undock a megathron without another clip of ammo in the hold.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#119 - 2014-02-27 14:46:40 UTC
I do not deny that lasers have a strong drawback. I do not accept that it makes them bad, unbalanced, or otherwise unuseable or useless.

You can draw similar comparisons to blasters. Their short range makes them more susceptible to being kited, even with long range ammo you may as well cut paper dps in half anytime a blaster battleship cant get within 15k of its target, or inside about 8k with the high damaging ammo. Anything with a faction web, web range hull bonus, links, etc... Is going to be nearly immune to that much touted highest dps.

None of that makes them useless. You simply fit and fly them to compensate. In the case of lasers there are all sorts of ways to accomodate that cap drain-- boostes, batteries, crystals, cap recharger, power relay, diagnostic and even remote assistance with transfer arrays. Amarr ships benefit more from fleet composition than any other race.
Mascha Tzash
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#120 - 2014-02-27 14:52:39 UTC
I seem to recall that someone suggested making 1 crystal pure EM an at 1 pure therm and have the others shift between these values. I think it was argumented that longer waves tend to dissipate slower and therefore reach further. So the short crystals would be EM emphasised and the long ones would be pumping out mostly therm damage.
I somehow liked the idea.