Ships & Modules

The vagabond is really the only one that has decent range and dps on autos.. Excluding large autos of course.

I always wonder about this.

What does variable damage advantage bring against omni-tanked opponants?

Big Issues with different guns though is the ammo, and how (near ?) identical penalties to those t2-ammo sorts just render some useless, and some OP.

Just Scorch is strongly overpowered and is in desperate need of a rangenerf or damagenerf. Currently Scorch is to good. It's so good I dropped said-to-be-OP ACs a long time ago, even when they were still called OP, just to get dat scorch loaded.
Blasters using null are better on ALL accounts compared to autocannons (similiar tracking, more usable range, drastically higher damage output)
Rage/Javelin ammo are imo both good, javelins drastically increase your range, while the drawbacks of rage ammo are - in space - not noticable compared to navy, that though is my perception.

Hail is just ********, even with higher paper-dps it's still the WRONG choice over fusion. Barrage is way to weak compared to RF ammo on similiar ranges. It's nice though to tickle things beyond RF range, though that's about it. Both ammosorts wuold rather be fine if they were to be pure explosive, but with that kin/exp mix, they're just crap.

Autocannons are acceptable thanks to selectable damage type and capless guns, the huge magazine is wayne, as your RoF is crazy aswell, that's not a pro. So selectable damage, the one thing ACs don't suck terribly at, thankfully that trait is strong enough to equalize the disadvantages.




If you are just hitting him with autocannons, you could actually also hit him for real, actual damage, using scorch or certainly better using null on a similiar designed blasterboat.

I'm kind of confused now.

Are we talking about kiting with faction ammo (serious range penalty) or barrage (low dmg + non-selectable damage type) ?

you mean Torps missed their turn?

Deimost is there for...wait no it's not there so lets move on.

Proteus is there because :triple plated heavy tackle: rocks

We can go on and on with this kind of reasoning doesn't prove anything, just supports one or the other argument.

I can also use them all and I don't know how you can think that way, I have more auto canon fitted ships in my hangars then blasters but it's probably because I'm in null and probably because of specific area/rats etc I'm playing in (when I manage to)

Yes auto canons got a slight nerf to range and not only was well deserved but it's good to bring other races as choice instead of the "all matar or nothing".
Non the less in optimal (blasters op range) auto canons are deadly, if I don't want to commit fit then TEs instead of Gyros (kite) I still get a decent dps/application at nice ranges on top of the ability to disengage at will, well some better than others but many people have never fitted an autos cane in any other way then shield cookie cutter fits so tell them an armor version is a heavy tanker one with more than one option to get rid of their opponents because it works dam good its a waste of time. And so on.

What exactly does this list stand for?

They're also generally superior to blasters past the blasters' 1st falloff (assuming otherwise similar ships), which isn't very far.

It is more like a lot of changes to blasters where overall fairly bad.



Most blasters mechanics(mwd sig bloom, strong webs, peak dps at point blank) and game play(positioning in web range, keeping up with nano stuff at point blank, timing webs, mwd and ship slow down etc.) was thrown out of the game in 2008 and they get worse every time a dev touches them, because of horrible player feedback. They are still bad at point blank in pvp(on any hull that is bigger than a frig) and CCP should have addressed exactly this(by web strength or scram immunity, giving them back the ability stay mobile and pin stuff down at web range) to give them back her own old niche instead of watering them down into a minmatar copy by making everything super easy to fit and increasing the range.