These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Are railguns really that bad?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#81 - 2013-05-18 01:43:14 UTC
Actually, loss of dps in falloff is not linear, and the dps at optimale+falloff is not 50% but 40%.
Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#82 - 2013-05-18 05:10:17 UTC
Tried again with a slightly different fit for the ferox for C1 sleeper sites. Still can't hit orbiting frigs, at all. Drake, on the other hand, can still switch to precision missiles and hit them quite well.

Weapon systems conclusion: Missiles > rails if there are more small non-stationary targets on the field than your drones can take out before you've taken out the bigger things. Of course, in that case an RLML Caracal would probably be a better choice anyway...

As for tank...let's think about this logically. Ferox has 5 mids and 4 lows, and uses a weapon system that requires capacitor. Drake has 6 mids and 4 lows and doesn't need cap for its weapons. Their base tanking stats are virtually the same, and they both have the 25% resist bonus.

So why is the drake's tank related to the ferox even in question? Obviously the drake could fit an equivalent tank and still have a mid left over for either more tank or some utility (painter/web).

As for rat damage types...sure the drake loses a ton of dps switching to non-kinetic. Remind me how much the ferox loses when it switches damage types? Oh right, it can't, so there will be rats against which the ferox's damage goes way down.

Drake (and missiles) > ferox (and rails).

Is the ferox usable, if for some reason you only use guns and want a shield-tanked ship? Sure. But all else being equal, you're probably better off with the drake.
Tsukino Stareine
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#83 - 2013-07-05 01:38:11 UTC
buff med rails pleaaaaaaaaaaase

Art of Explosions
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#84 - 2013-07-05 04:09:12 UTC
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
buff med rails pleaaaaaaaaaaase



This, medium rails are unmitigated crap.
Tsukino Stareine
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#85 - 2013-07-05 04:10:30 UTC
You know one thing that could be a slight buff depending on how you look at it:

Making t2 rail ammo pure thermal damage.

Art of Explosions
Whitehound
#86 - 2013-07-05 04:42:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Long range turrets are best used with afterburners.

Why? Because afterburner give a speed bonus, which puts a ship's speed in between the speeds of similar-sized hulls with MWD and those without any propulsion.

As a consequence need others either fit an AB, too, or have to turn on their MWD to catch up. And this helps long range turrets, because then they can hit the faster ships easier, because of the MWD bloom. A 5x larger hull is also 5x times easier to track!!

What is either as fast as, or slower, presents no tracking problem and is a piloting problem.

What is smaller and faster both at the same time requires drones, neuts, webs, tank, TCs/TEs ... before it can be killed.

Further do ABs use less PG/CPU and cap than MWDs and allow one to fit larger turrets with more range and more DPS, which further closes the gap.

Once this is understood become most issues with long range turrets less scary and it also seems to be balanced to use ABs together with long range turrets, when MWDs are being used together with short range turrets.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#87 - 2013-07-05 05:41:33 UTC
Cipher7 wrote:

Currently I fly Minmatar for PvE and use mostly Arty, but I hate the long refire and not really feeling the aesthetics. I am more of a gun person than a missile or drone person.

Got it in my mind that I'd like to fly railboats, but everyone swears up and down they're horrible.

My support skills are excellent, and I'm willing to take a couple months and skillup rails to t2 to make them shine. Is this worth it?

Also secondary question, which race is better for rails, Caldari or Gallente?

As I said I'm not much of a drone/missile person, please don't suggest a Drake or Raven. Thinking more like Ferox, Rokh, Rail Mega, Moa (eww ugly), rail Thorax, etc.

I would then, ostensibly, continue with rails for PvP and fleet work.

Please advise, thanks.


Rails are horrible. Pulse lasers with scorch are the best (turret based) med / long range weapon available. Pulse lasers will do more DPS every time, they have better tracking, and are easier to fit. The only worthwhile kiting ship that uses rails is the Rail Devil. Other than that, rails are simply outclassed by arty wolf or Pulse slicer. To answer your question, no tech 2 rails are not worth it.

Which race is better for rails? The only viable rail boats are the fleet naga / rokh - however both ships are horrible outside of those two extremely specific roles. So if you trained rails- your pvp ships are the following: Rail devil, Naga, Rokh. Not a very large selection.

The rail thorax does not exist, because it is **** and is outclassed by many other ships. The rail mega.... Mega should never use rails, unless its in some horrible pve setup. But hell if you are really intent on running missions, grab a Mach. Nothing else will do.

Out of some of the ships you have suggested:

Ferox: Completely worthless ship no matter how you look at it, out classed by the Tier 3 BC's (IE. Talos)

Moa: Is horrible, never fly it- as it has no use.

Which race is better for rails? (Ideally don't use rails- but if you must, caldari.)
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#88 - 2013-07-05 05:45:27 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Tyrozan
Whitehound wrote:
Long range turrets are best used with afterburners.

Why? Because afterburner give a speed bonus, which puts a ship's speed in between the speeds of similar-sized hulls with MWD and those without any propulsion.

As a consequence need others either fit an AB, too, or have to turn on their MWD to catch up. And this helps long range turrets, because then they can hit the faster ships easier, because of the MWD bloom. A 5x larger hull is also 5x times easier to track!!

What is either as fast as, or slower, presents no tracking problem and is a piloting problem.

What is smaller and faster both at the same time requires drones, neuts, webs, tank, TCs/TEs ... before it can be killed.

Further do ABs use less PG/CPU and cap than MWDs and allow one to fit larger turrets with more range and more DPS, which further closes the gap.

Once this is understood become most issues with long range turrets less scary and it also seems to be balanced to use ABs together with long range turrets, when MWDs are being used together with short range turrets.



EDIT: Personal attacks are against forum rules. - ISD Tyrozan

Other than Fleet fights- Long range turrets are almost always the wrong way to fit your ship. There are some examples in regards to arty vs AC use- however any other turret based weapon system, should be using either Pulse / Blaster.

*Frigates is a slightly different story, where sometimes rails can be acceptable
Whitehound
#89 - 2013-07-05 08:58:01 UTC
Chessur wrote:
Also OP, disregard this and 99% of the things that come out of this mans mouth.

Do not go on the Internet and post when you are butthurt. Best advice you will get today.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#90 - 2013-07-05 09:05:33 UTC
He's right though, you posted complete nonsense in that post.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Whitehound
#91 - 2013-07-05 09:20:24 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
He's right though, you posted complete nonsense in that post.

We all sometimes turn away from things we do not understand, because we have too little time to go into it. That is normal. But then one does not take the time to make a comment that shows one's ignorance.

Why not start with what you do not understand? It is what this forum is here for.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#92 - 2013-07-05 09:38:03 UTC
It only takes one MWD cycle for faster ship to close on your AB/LR fit from long point range, get hard tackle on you and establish a close orbit, after that you won't get a single hit and just die.

LR guns are for larger fleets and niche instasnipe applications, and medium LR guns for PVE, and even there only as supplementary damage.


.
Whitehound
#93 - 2013-07-05 10:11:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Roime wrote:
It only takes one MWD cycle for faster ship to close on your AB/LR fit from long point range, get hard tackle on you and establish a close orbit, after that you won't get a single hit and just die.

There is no "hard tackle" here.

You can web the AB-fitted ship, but not turn off its AB. A scram has no effect on it. All that happens is that both ships web one another and the MWD-fitted ship has to keep its MWD running and with it keep its increased signature and increased cap usage.

Do not just assume that one ship has a means for making a tackle and the other does not have the means to counter it. Rather realize that the "hard tackle" is a very old technique to overcome a problem and that the extensive use of MWDs+web+scram lets many forget about it.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#94 - 2013-07-05 10:42:46 UTC
Of course it doesn't keep MWD running, in the worst case if the AB ship is a rail Thorax (AB BCs webbed down aren't faster than webbed frigs with MWD turned off), your rails with Javelin and all Vs won't do any more damage during the MWD cycle than the frigate does continuously.

But by all means link something that proves rail fits work. I've got all V's relevant to a Thorax and found the hit quality absolutely terrible even at optimal ranges against all moving targets. Not being able to control range wouldn't improve performance.



.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#95 - 2013-07-05 10:50:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
To address topic:

Are they that bad? No.

Problem is, though, they're still not good enough when compared to counterparts. As a result not being that bad is semantics, because there are invariably better options (some exceptions exist to prove the rule).
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#96 - 2013-07-05 10:53:13 UTC
My navy exequror gets 600 dps at 20 km with medium rails... Suck on that >_>



But yea they could use a slight buff.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#97 - 2013-07-05 10:55:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Chessur
Whitehound wrote:
Roime wrote:
It only takes one MWD cycle for faster ship to close on your AB/LR fit from long point range, get hard tackle on you and establish a close orbit, after that you won't get a single hit and just die.

There is no "hard tackle" here.

You can web the AB-fitted ship, but not turn off its AB. A scram has no effect on it. All that happens is that both ships web one another and the MWD-fitted ship has to keep its MWD running and with it keep its increased signature and increased cap usage.

Do not just assume that one ship has a means for making a tackle and the other does not have the means to counter it. Rather realize that the "hard tackle" is a very old technique to overcome a problem and that the extensive use of MWDs+web+scram lets many forget about it.


I have asked you multiple times for a 1v1 or 2v1 arranged fight. Every single time you dodge the question, and refuse to fight me. If you have such a complete understanding of PvP I really do want to learn form your superior skill. And certainly if you are so gifted in the art of PvP than certainly, a mere mortal like me will be no match for your prowess.

My only conclusion as to why you refuse to fight me is this:

Deep down you know your wrong. You know that you are talking out of your ass, you know that you have never killed a single ship in your pathetic excuse for a PvP career in this game. You think that if you can talk long, and loud enough while making off handed remarks / wordy statements about PvP you will somehow show your intellectual dominance.

At the end of the day you need to realize that you are wrong, and you need to stop posting. Learn to play the game before you have an opinion. If you don't, you will never stop embarrassing your self on the forums. Stop being pathetic and trying to agrue a position that is illogical. If you will refuse to stop arguing- fight me, and prove your point. But if your not willing to at least give me some hilarious kill mails + FRAPS, then do everyone (and especially the newbros a favor) and stop wasting all of our time.
Whitehound
#98 - 2013-07-05 11:04:04 UTC
Chessur wrote:
I have asked you multiple times for a 1v1 or 2v1 arranged fight.

I guess I owe you an explanation.

You have been trolling me for a while now, trying to antagonize me, to ridicule me, to provoke me and what not, always seeking my attention.

Please understand that I do not care for your kind and that I am not going to start now.

Have a nice day Big smile

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#99 - 2013-07-05 11:05:27 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
My navy exequror gets 600 dps at 20 km with medium rails... Suck on that >_>



But yea they could use a slight buff.


Yah.....

no.

http://i.imgur.com/TTmhCin.jpg

That fit does indeed give you 600 DPS at 20k. however you have no speed, no tank, and your tracking is a joke. Ship would not work in a real pvp or pve environment.
Whitehound
#100 - 2013-07-05 11:12:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Roime wrote:
Of course it doesn't keep MWD running ...

When it turns off the MWD do you then stay at close range or do you move out of range again?

Just to be clear, I am not implying one can always win with long range turrets at close range. It would mean one can win at any range with them and short range turrets would require a buff!!

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.