Ships & Modules

And even then, "sucky" eagle can do more dps at 100k than muninn - with 3x better tracking. If you had any idea about the problem, then you wouldnt post such stupid things.
You dont see any kiting rail ships, because they are slow and fat and thats why they cannot control range. Strange that you see alot of arty cynas, canes or machs around, how can this be?
Btw, ive seen one guy using kiting rail vigilant - with decent success. Yes, it involved double faction webs and skirmish bonus, but still, if you can control range...


And such guys post on forums and "offer advices" to fix broken things.

As A priamry BS pilot I say yes, a geddon will rip a cruiser apart at it optimal range if you do things right.

Same as how when I engage with null at a range of say, 20km I will track it with few issues (for a BS)

The problem is the geddon will apply its damage much better at its optimal range using multi than my mega will at its optimal range with antimatter because the tracking speed is so much lower at those longer ranges. THIS is the point I am trying to drill into you.

try to shoot a cruiser with large pulses and scorch at optimal.

now try to even scratch the paint of that cruiser with blasters at optimal.

This.

But Grim, you're loosing your time trying to explain this to someone who doesn't even knows how long/tedious is to train for hybrids, using them? -you're asking too much.

And if he can't or is incapable to blow up cruisers in his pulse optimal, then he's doing it very wrong, should start by acknowledge OP distance for large pulses with their diff ammo types, then blasters.

"Also get a vindi"

Cute, let me answer you: Also get a bhaalgorn. -dam you don't need it to be effective...burb.

which brings it back to where I was:

Projectiles have too good a combination of range (falloff is pushed out using TEs, making TEs a direct damage mod - minis have 2 damage mods for ACs), damage in th form of damage type selection and the long duration of constant damage that can be applied from way out in falloff down to optimal, and tracking (TEs again) which ACs have the best in game.

What Projectiles need to become is the lowest damage (even at optimal), highest tracking, highly flexible damage. Right now, the combination of tracking, damage type, and the way damage ramps up through falloff into optimal is too good. It does everything. To add to this, they have stupid low fitting requirements and take no cap.

It seems to me that there are some features that projectiles have that blasters should have gotten and not projectiles. I am think specifically the damage type/damage purity. The specific damage type ammo should have been given to blasters, and minmatar should continue to have their damage spread out of 2 or 3 damage types. This will reduce AC damage and make blasters more competitive. There are a few other things, overall damage, overall tracking, but blasters have the worst tracking, and that should not change.


Now remember, Lazers are supposed to be the best turret system in the game because Amarr ships tend to have only turrets as their main damage source. Minmatar ships often sport multiple weapon systems because they are not specialized, and the blasters, while effective at close range, are not supposed to be the primary weapon system either. So when you 'balance' remember that Lasers - Hybrid - Projectile is the quality ranking for turrets as they should be in-game. This little fact used to be very common knowledge when projectiles sucked (like really sucked way back when) and the answer to the mini crying was 'well, train missiles and drones and then you will have comparable dps. That was a source of pride for many aspiring mini pilots - that to break even (and even do a little less damage then the rest) you had to train 3 all weapon systems.

More tracking at close range means I get to apply the DPS I should be getting which would mean blasters would work as intended.

Also never use conflag.

How is that you never have your target tackled when you fly mega, and always have your target tackled /at 40k ofc/ when you fly laser bs? Anyway, you do realize, that you already have tracking significantly higher than laserships, which you can use to your benefit, right? And i hope you do realize too, that it wont help you against minmatar, because they just have mobilitiy and midslot advantage.


Alot of threads made by people, who had no intention in balance. Even in this thread we have 2 people, who openly admit, that they would prefer if blasters projected its dps as they did with 90% webs... i dont even... They are so desperate, that they compare their solo blasterships with laser ships "in gangs." I know, suddenly i have the cruiser tackled at 40k...

Other half of people is just trying to keep attention off obviously op projectiles. And rest of people simply dont understand what? why? how? and join the bandwagon.

No, its a waste of time to explain that to narrow minded people as you. You have no idea how pvp mechanics works, and you still post your words without ANY argument, why should have blasters more range or damage or anything. You dont even understand, what is broken about blasters, and thats why you are repeating same stuff again and again.

If you really think, its tracking, then there is no hope for you. Sorry. But you can always gc your buddies for posting another worthless ideas and in fact you might even get your tracking bonus - considering how ccp sucks at balancing. Sadly, only to see, it didnt change anything...

If you were really interested in more balanced and competitive pvp enviroment /for other than kiting ships, that is/, then you would support changes like tracking enhancer falloff reduction, ac tracking reduction, speed/agility nerf for some ships, trimark nerf, increasing speed/agility of shortrange ships, balancing fittings of mods and ships, finding role for railguns, fixing completely worthless hulls or whole tiers, etc. But obviously, you dont care. Btw, more than half things i named here would help all blasterships 2x more than stupid tracking boost - that is only wish of nostalgic mega pilots anyway.

PS : Forums dont work as they should neither...
PPS : If im posting like im MAD sometimes , its because i really cant understand, how people dont see, that whole problem of blasterships is getting kited to hell with no chance of tackling properly flown nanoship. And i cant stand neither, when people insist, that blasterships should be good med gang or even fleet ships, when they were obviously designed as solo to very small gang boats.

Rant!

Did this baltec1 dude really say his Megathron cant track a battlecruiser or cruiser well? The level of retardedness in this game is unbelievable. Large turrets are not suppose to and none of the other turrets have a easy time doing so.

A Maelstrom has issues tracking battlecruisers and cruisers once they settle in orbit. Even with 2 tracking enhancers (same with a Machariel). A Hurricane, with 2 tracking enhancers has issues tracking a Navy Vexor orbiting close range with a afterburner (dual propulsion).

I only use a Hyperion for battleship v battleship engagements, because it's better @ dealing damage to battleships. The Megathron has far less of an issue with that, but you should use a Dominix for everything else, because you don't find alot of battleships fielded or at least you see more of a mix.

There is no significant difference, between Blaster and Auto-cannons tracking. They're essentially the same.

Also, what I find most ******** is the pilots who argue for keeping blasters close range, but wont even fly Serpentis ships above cruisers. If they do, you almost never see them flying those ships without a Federation Navy Stasis Webifier.

Serpentis ships have most of what is being asked for and are HELLA fast, even with plates. BUT! Many still get kited to death (more so without a fed web) and are almost useless in fleet engagements. Why pilots who only fly in fleets are arguing for ships that have no use in fleets combat is beyond me.

Also a 50% increase in blaster damage will never happen, not even a 25%. Even if it did these ships would still not be flown for the most part. I hope any suggested increase like that would be focus only on medium and large hybrids turrets, but with CCP and the retards in this game. You never know!


-proxyyyy

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=14433 Might as well read this thread too. Some of it it not crazy, but misguided.

I agree that small hybrids are fine from damage etc. But fitting is rediculous - you use more grid and more cpu than auto's and often lasers as well.

Check out this link:

http://evefng.blogspot.com/2011/09/everything-you-never-asked-to-know.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EVEFNG+%28EVE+FNG%29

Small blasters use four times as much power grid as auto's and a rediculous amount of cpu on top of that. Added to the fact that a rupture can fit a rack of largest medium auto's without much of a problem, same can't be said for a thorax or vexor trying to fit neutrons (nevermind rails - it's even worse for them). A reduction in fitting is needed. I'm just comparing small short range guns - I mean 1 PG for a auto cannon vs four for Blaster. CPU - Auto's 3, Blasters 9.

I'm not saying they should be even, but jeez you have to admit that's a pretty big difference (and auto's have some huge advantages already).

Apparently "forums were ganked" when i was writing my post...

But :

Completely wrong. They should learn to hit ctrl+space and "keep at range" at right time. Speed differences are so small when same amount of ewar is applied and when fighting similar ship class, that there is no way of "outtracking" blasters at their optimal. Ofc except some specific ships, that are "not op at all."

Though, i agree with you that fittings for acs are just out of the line. Add selectable damage type and no need for cap... Compare them with all small weapons and you will see, that problem is not in blasters...

Too many biased people here, but i will say it again : small adjustment of projectiles /and projectile hulls/ would help to balance weapon systems much more, than various tracking or damage bonuses for hybrids.

And its funny, but agree with proxy too in one thing - bigger ship classes should not be able to murder smaller ships easily.


Your point is still moot.
If target is not tackled, then all the dps is pointless. He will burn to scram range in no time and there you wont be able to hit him at all with laserboat.
And if its tackled, then you should compare both ships under same circumstances - with tackled targets! And its really beyond my knowledge how you are not able to project full dps with mega to tackled target "because of bad tracking." Only thing i can suggest you is train ctrl + space. Or ctrl + q.