These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Overheating tackle: A disparity in base values, bonuses and combat effectiveness.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#161 - 2013-01-16 11:13:54 UTC
Increased tackle range would be a very real and direct nerf to all lights (frigs/dessies) as their weapon ranges for the most part are below that of current tackle.

That said, adding 10% to the heated bonus on webs/points has merit provided heat damage for the modules is increased in the same manner .. personally think it is too low at present and one can heat tackle for the duration of most fights due to there not being much else being heated in the mids (I don't kite, so YMMV Smile).
Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#162 - 2013-01-16 12:20:33 UTC
Alticus C Bear wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Robert Lefcourt wrote:

Heavy Neutron blaster II + Null + one TE gives you 7,2+11,4 km. Hence only half damage at 18,5 km, this leaves you with about 15% of your initial damage at 24km. That's not what i call "good damage".


regards,

rob


I'm looking at a Thorax with 9+16 with my skills and no implants.

regards,

-Liang

Ed: The point stands: weapon ranges are high enough that even the closest range of the close range weapons are budging up against and exceeding (unlinked) tackle range. My proposal is to shift the benefit from the links to the base module - nothing more.


Liang are you trolling?

Shield Kiting Thorax with Neutrons, dual magstabs and dual TE does 350dps at 20km, this of course includes the damage from 5 hammerhead II’s. Null range with 2 TE is 8.2+14km.

Again I can certainly I understand a slight change in Tech 1 point range and boost in the overheating effects duration of long points but allowing ships to hold point at long ranges indefinitely is a nerf to armour brawlers who do not get that range, speed and dps projection and would have other consequences at the frigate level (where I would argue it is well balanced) and battleship level where small ships could kite indefinitely outside heavy neut range and still immune to BS weapons, would require adjustment of all point range bonused ships. I just do not see the benefit in giving every one link level points.

This thread is allegedly about dps projection of Kiters but it seems directly aimed at the Null changes that brought close range weapons systems such as Autocannons and Blasters closer together.

Thorax can do 457dps at 24km but that is with 200m rails and drones, that and the shield blaster thorax are kiting setups not brawlers and will lose in a brawl to proper brawlers. I have seen very few mentions of long range weapon systems and the effects point changes might have.



Firstly: Blasters have more base damage and generally more turret hardpoints. They do less % damage at 24k, but with higher base damage, it works out the same. Remember, kiting ships have lower dps/less bonuses hi-slots to offset their longer range. 50% of 400 dps is the same as 100% of 200 dps.

Next: Heavy neuts don't hurt tackling frigs. Small nos is a hard counter to heavy neut. In fact warrior II's are a better counter to frigs, which work up to 50km - no kiting really helps that. Also, MJD. Long Point invalid.

also: Null balsters are the shortest range weapon in the game with ranged ammo loaded. They are the absolute bottom end of the spectrum. We can show HAM's hitting to 30km or laser hitting to 35km if you like? Even the shoreest range cruiser gun in the game is hitting out to disruptor range...

Finally: This is a buff to long range weapons. at 30km-40km long ranges REAL dps outshines short range weapons with TE's/Range ammo. Artillery/rails/beams also have to worry about tracking issues less due to a greater distance and identical speed equating to lower angular velocity. So i don't see how that's a bad thing - rails would become more viable if anything.
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#163 - 2013-01-16 12:47:44 UTC
My DPS numbers quoted are at the specified range and take into account fall off.

My point is that there needs to be a cross over point between long range and short range weapons. Point range needs to allow short range weapons to out damage long range ones to a certain distance were the advantage changes in the case off blasters and rails this still takes place under 20km. Overheating tackle gives the long range ship a period of time where it has a further advantage but only for a limited period of time, allowing a kiting ship to point indefinitely while immune to damage due to range and possibly speed advantages is not balanced.

Again I support some change but your numbers especially combined with even nerfed links are way to high.
Robert Lefcourt
BigPoppaMonkeys
E.B.O.L.A.
#164 - 2013-01-16 13:55:54 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Templar Dane wrote:

Wouldn't a buff to warp disruptor range be a nerf to armor tanking?


No.

-Liang


It would sure as hell. In most cases armor means no TEs. Without TEs no small/med Blaster would have the range to fight tackle.


regards,

rob
Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#165 - 2013-01-16 14:08:29 UTC
Alticus C Bear wrote:
My DPS numbers quoted are at the specified range and take into account fall off.

My point is that there needs to be a cross over point between long range and short range weapons. Point range needs to allow short range weapons to out damage long range ones to a certain distance were the advantage changes in the case off blasters and rails this still takes place under 20km. Overheating tackle gives the long range ship a period of time where it has a further advantage but only for a limited period of time, allowing a kiting ship to point indefinitely while immune to damage due to range and possibly speed advantages is not balanced.

Again I support some change but your numbers especially combined with even nerfed links are way to high.


Long range weapons have lower tracking, higher fitting costs and lower base damage that close range weapons. That's the balance. by default you will have more slots/fitting left over if using short range guns. You also have the option to fit considerably more tank at that point.

This discussion is getting nowhere because you don't fly these ships and you cannot understand the fundamental problem surrounding tackle ranges. De-aggress and jump out, re-dock, w/e. 90% of fighting happens on gates/stations so this is a big advantage for brawlers. If you meet a ship with no scram or web and it's sitting on a gate - what stops you from re-approaching? nothing. Kiting ships cant afford to get close enough to tackle, that means they don't get to fight most engagements. In fact most of the time you need someone else to commit to the fight before you get a kill when flying a kiting ship.

here's a battle report from last night: http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/engagement.php?id=18531201#involvedPilots

Took us 3 hours to get that fight. They where sitting 100km from a station and literally sat in a big death ball (more ships where in their gang, that's just the kills really). Our gang didn't have links because we moved about 12 jumps fast as possible based on a loss of one of our ships. We got 1 or 2 frig kills, but more than once they warped off and we couldn't stop it. Why? Because when you look at that list of ships and add a few more tackle frigs and imagine what happens when a vagabond gets within 24km of a target. They all overheat webs/scrams/mwd's and suddenly you start loosing vagabonds. Overheat isn't enough to kill any one of those targets with a 24k point, especially when you factor in some remote rep.

In the end we had to bring in 2x link t3's and a bait-plate ship to force them to aggress on a gate within web/scram range of the bait ship. At that point Half of them escaped and we killed the other half. But they field about 300million of ships. We field a few BILLION.

Now revisiting the 100km from station thing. A gang with no speed (other than a few t1 frigs) warps 100km from any celestial for no reason. This is the height of stupidity. We have the perfect small gang to take advantage of this mistake... except we cant. We can't point any of these guys to get a kil without taking massive damage. They keep warping out in structure, warping to random object in space and not communicating with each other. All these mistakes and we kill 2 frigates in a 15 minute fight. now imagine i am 3-4 seconds late in pulsing my MWD - once - during that 15 minute period. I'm scrammed by a frig and dead. 15 minutes of stupidity un-punished versus me delaying 1 module activation by 4 seconds. Result? They loose a t1 frig VS me loosing a vagabond. All because i can't put a point on anything without dieing to close range ships with no range bonuses.

So no, i don't think long points for unlinked kiting ships is imbalanced - in the REAL world.

p.s. weren't you arguing that drone dps on a brawler doesn't count since a kiting ship will kill them?
Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#166 - 2013-01-16 14:09:15 UTC
Robert Lefcourt wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Templar Dane wrote:

Wouldn't a buff to warp disruptor range be a nerf to armor tanking?


No.

-Liang


It would sure as hell. In most cases armor means no TEs. Without TEs no small/med Blaster would have the range to fight tackle.


regards,

rob


Tracking computers. That is all.
Robert Lefcourt
BigPoppaMonkeys
E.B.O.L.A.
#167 - 2013-01-16 14:20:48 UTC
Maeltstome wrote:
Robert Lefcourt wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Templar Dane wrote:

Wouldn't a buff to warp disruptor range be a nerf to armor tanking?


No.

-Liang


It would sure as hell. In most cases armor means no TEs. Without TEs no small/med Blaster would have the range to fight tackle.


regards,

rob


Tracking computers. That is all.


You don't have to spare medslots on most ships. Especially not on those supposed to armortank. QED: It's a nerf to armor.


regards,

rob
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#168 - 2013-01-16 16:15:16 UTC
Alticus C Bear wrote:
My DPS numbers quoted are at the specified range and take into account fall off.

My point is that there needs to be a cross over point between long range and short range weapons. Point range needs to allow short range weapons to out damage long range ones to a certain distance were the advantage changes in the case off blasters and rails this still takes place under 20km. Overheating tackle gives the long range ship a period of time where it has a further advantage but only for a limited period of time, allowing a kiting ship to point indefinitely while immune to damage due to range and possibly speed advantages is not balanced.

Again I support some change but your numbers especially combined with even nerfed links are way to high.


You don't seem to understand that I'm not suggesting a net change at all. I'm suggesting rearranging what is currently the case much of the time so that it doesn't benefit only old players with link alts.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#169 - 2013-01-16 16:15:30 UTC
Robert Lefcourt wrote:
Maeltstome wrote:
Robert Lefcourt wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Templar Dane wrote:

Wouldn't a buff to warp disruptor range be a nerf to armor tanking?


No.

-Liang


It would sure as hell. In most cases armor means no TEs. Without TEs no small/med Blaster would have the range to fight tackle.


regards,

rob


Tracking computers. That is all.


You don't have to spare medslots on most ships. Especially not on those supposed to armortank. QED: It's a nerf to armor.


regards,

rob


No.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Maeltstome
Ten Thousand Days
#170 - 2013-01-16 17:08:39 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Robert Lefcourt wrote:
Maeltstome wrote:
Robert Lefcourt wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:


No.

-Liang


It would sure as hell. In most cases armor means no TEs. Without TEs no small/med Blaster would have the range to fight tackle.


regards,

rob


Tracking computers. That is all.


You don't have to spare medslots on most ships. Especially not on those supposed to armortank. QED: It's a nerf to armor.


regards,

rob


No.

-Liang


"but, but, but, i need a web to stop that bad ship who is 30km away from me"

If you have a scram you are fine, 99% of kiting ships dont have a web or a scram. Either 1 will get you in range, so a TE most of the time is better than a web.