These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Do auto-cannons have a point?

Author
Donbe Scurred
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2013-10-08 01:10:43 UTC
Paul Otichoda alt detected?

Just sayin' cause this is would be the next logical step to his whine threads about weapons not working.Lol
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#22 - 2013-10-08 01:16:52 UTC
ACs are fine, the ships they go on however have been seriously outclassed by the last year or so of changes.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#23 - 2013-10-08 02:18:31 UTC
Goldensaver wrote:
KeeganWaffle wrote:
From a PvP perspective it seams like there's no room for them anymore.

They have less DPS then blasters at point blank.

They have less DPS at medium ranges then scorch.




I think the whole "blasters track better" thing needs to be moved over to auto-cannons.

Gotta say, I really appreciate that he's at least honest and says "Scorch", as opposed to "Lasers".


Scorch need to be nerfed to the ground

Maybe then amarr laser boats can be properly balanced.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Blodhgarm Dethahal
8 Sins of Man
Stray Dogs.
#24 - 2013-10-08 03:09:49 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Goldensaver wrote:
KeeganWaffle wrote:
From a PvP perspective it seams like there's no room for them anymore.

They have less DPS then blasters at point blank.

They have less DPS at medium ranges then scorch.




I think the whole "blasters track better" thing needs to be moved over to auto-cannons.

Gotta say, I really appreciate that he's at least honest and says "Scorch", as opposed to "Lasers".


Scorch need to be nerfed to the ground

Maybe then amarr laser boats can be properly balanced.


Care to explain why Scorch needs a nerf?

They are the only ammo that pushes short range gun's optimal range to reasonable distances... they pay for it in limited damage types, heavier cap use, and the worst tracking out of all 3 short range guns.

I'm not seeing why they need to nerfed.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#25 - 2013-10-08 03:35:11 UTC
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Goldensaver wrote:
KeeganWaffle wrote:
From a PvP perspective it seams like there's no room for them anymore.

They have less DPS then blasters at point blank.

They have less DPS at medium ranges then scorch.




I think the whole "blasters track better" thing needs to be moved over to auto-cannons.

Gotta say, I really appreciate that he's at least honest and says "Scorch", as opposed to "Lasers".


Scorch need to be nerfed to the ground

Maybe then amarr laser boats can be properly balanced.


Care to explain why Scorch needs a nerf?

They are the only ammo that pushes short range gun's optimal range to reasonable distances... they pay for it in limited damage types, heavier cap use, and the worst tracking out of all 3 short range guns.

I'm not seeing why they need to nerfed.


Scorch needs to be nerfed so that amarr ships can be buffed.

Pretty sick of all amarr lasers boats only being used "because scorch"

Same applies to all t2 ammo, t2 ammo is supposed to be niche ****, not your god damn go too.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#26 - 2013-10-08 08:34:17 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:


Care to explain why Scorch needs a nerf?

They are the only ammo that pushes short range gun's optimal range to reasonable distances... they pay for it in limited damage types, heavier cap use, and the worst tracking out of all 3 short range guns.

I'm not seeing why they need to nerfed.


Scorch needs to be nerfed so that amarr ships can be buffed.

Pretty sick of all amarr lasers boats only being used "because scorch"

Same applies to all t2 ammo, t2 ammo is supposed to be niche ****, not your god damn go too.


As he said, it largely ends up being the reason to fly Amarr. I've got an Amarr character, I fly mostly Amarr on the character... but what it comes down to for ships is: scramkite Executioners, scramkite Tormentors, kiting Slicers, kiting Omens, kiting Coercers, kiting NOmens, kiting Oracles... you get the idea. What is it that makes this work? In every single case I listed, the answer is Scorch. If I didn't have Scorch would I fly any of that the way I am flying it now? No. Absolutely not. I probably wouldn't fly it... well, that's a lie. Amarr ships are very pretty. But I would feel bad about flying them.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#27 - 2013-10-08 08:35:34 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
They might have a point but t2 ammo rebalance is completely ******.

Ac's basically have the same engagement range as blasters and half the dps + worse tracking.

Selectable damage types can be awesome but missiles have that too and well

Just all in all AC's, as much as i like seeing minmatar being nerfed to hell. Are in a pretty bad spot atm, there are not many AC ships i'd consider using.

this
null vs barrage make AC useless


but the wheel keep spinning one day ccp will buff AC again or nerf blaster
Robert Lefcourt
BigPoppaMonkeys
E.B.O.L.A.
#28 - 2013-10-08 09:26:38 UTC
KeeganWaffle wrote:
From a PvP perspective it seams like there's no room for them anymore.

They have less DPS then blasters at point blank.

They have less DPS at medium ranges then scorch.




I think the whole "blasters track better" thing needs to be moved over to auto-cannons.


Just no. Think of adjustable damagetype, think of zero energy consumption. I'm pretty much pleased with where they are now.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#29 - 2013-10-08 10:44:47 UTC
yes all the people that dont use AC are pleased with them
Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
#30 - 2013-10-08 10:50:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Bertrand Butler
To mare wrote:
yes all the people that dont use AC are pleased with them


Why aren't you pleased then?

The fact that short range weapons are more balanced now than in the winmatar days does not mean that ACs are bad. It means they are balanced (or to put it another way, less imbalanced).

Want to talk about balance issues? Lets talk about how HMLs fare now, or how medium rails did before Odyssey.

Quote:
null vs barrage make AC useless


Stop whining, learn where and how each weapon is used, adjust your flying/loadout to compensate and play the game.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2013-10-08 10:54:44 UTC
Taoist Dragon wrote:
KeeganWaffle wrote:
From a PvP perspective it seams like there's no room for them anymore.

They have less DPS then blasters at point blank.

They have less DPS at medium ranges then scorch.




I think the whole "blasters track better" thing needs to be moved over to auto-cannons.


LOL

Lets compare the worst case scenarios for a weapon system then complain that they are crap eh? Good logic there.

Don.'t think about their lack of cap requirement or damage selection or rediculasly low fitting requirements or their looooooong falloffs or anything....

just pick on their couple of weakness and summize they are worthless.....I do hope you don't do company analysis for a living.



I dont agree that AC do not have apoint, but your points are not so strong. Large falloff? yes but at the cost of basically ZERO range.

Check Large AC for example. they deal LESS damage than large blasters up to 24 km.. (edge of poitn range). So at least on the large scale they are VERY weak damage projection unless on a ship with falloff bonus (machariel).


The damage selection that so many talk about is.. lol just an excuse. When was last time you stopped to change ammo durign a fight? Rare times you can recover from the time loading the ammo. So the damage selection helps, but its nto a magical tool that allows you to exploit always the resit hole on the other ship.


At end, AC role is being less bad than the other 2 at their weak spots. Close range with mobility they defeat pulses, long range they can defeat blasters (altough on the large guns that is meaningless because you need to go out of point range to have such scenario, but it is still a valid advantage on the medium guns)


Their low fittings are not so low when you consider minamtar ships (with exceptoin on maelstrom) have less fittigns thatn equivalent turret ships from other races.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2013-10-08 10:56:17 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Goldensaver wrote:
KeeganWaffle wrote:
From a PvP perspective it seams like there's no room for them anymore.

They have less DPS then blasters at point blank.

They have less DPS at medium ranges then scorch.




I think the whole "blasters track better" thing needs to be moved over to auto-cannons.

Gotta say, I really appreciate that he's at least honest and says "Scorch", as opposed to "Lasers".


Scorch need to be nerfed to the ground

Maybe then amarr laser boats can be properly balanced.


Care to explain why Scorch needs a nerf?

They are the only ammo that pushes short range gun's optimal range to reasonable distances... they pay for it in limited damage types, heavier cap use, and the worst tracking out of all 3 short range guns.

I'm not seeing why they need to nerfed.


Scorch needs to be nerfed so that amarr ships can be buffed.

Pretty sick of all amarr lasers boats only being used "because scorch"

Same applies to all t2 ammo, t2 ammo is supposed to be niche ****, not your god damn go too.



nope.. t2 ammo was suppose dto be main ammo for pvp. WHen they cheapened faction ammo by putting it at LP store that peopel ran for that option). But several years ago was t2 or go home.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#33 - 2013-10-08 11:27:26 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:

nope.. t2 ammo was suppose dto be main ammo for pvp. WHen they cheapened faction ammo by putting it at LP store that peopel ran for that option). But several years ago was t2 or go home.


It was not, it was supposed to be ammo with a big strength and a big weakness that the ships could compensate for their lack of range or dps with using in special situations

Also to that other guy i don't quite understand how you made that graph... My graphs all show null having more damage and more tracking than barrage.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
#34 - 2013-10-08 11:51:31 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Also to that other guy i don't quite understand how you made that graph... My graphs all show null having more damage and more tracking than barrage.


Use Pyfa. Take a hull that is not bonused for either (an amarrian frigate will do), make two copies, fill one with an AC, the other with a neutron and then put them in a graph. The numbers set are for an AB frigate target with a web applied.
Caitlyn Tufy
Perkone
Caldari State
#35 - 2013-10-08 12:08:00 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
At end, AC role is being less bad than the other 2 at their weak spots. Close range with mobility they defeat pulses, long range they can defeat blasters (altough on the large guns that is meaningless because you need to go out of point range to have such scenario, but it is still a valid advantage on the medium guns)


Jack of all trades, master of none. Versatility is the name of the minmatar game since like forever, there must be sacrifices for that. ACs are balanced, though some of the hulls should be looked at.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#36 - 2013-10-08 14:34:34 UTC
To mare wrote:
yes all the people that dont use AC are pleased with them



No, you were used to play with autocanons that were better than blasters at blasters job. Autocanons ships are not meant to play at optimal but in falloff, and as the pretty graphic shows you, those are better than blasters for a reason: minmatar are a speedy/kiting race, not a brick brawl in tha face one.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#37 - 2013-10-08 14:35:25 UTC
Caitlyn Tufy wrote:
[ACs are balanced, though some of the hulls should be looked at.



This I can agree, indeed.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Alaric Faelen
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2013-10-08 17:46:46 UTC
Been well said already but can be summed up as -EFT warrioring is for amateurs. Just cooking up a fitting to spit out the highest numbers is rarely going to translate into a useful ship.

There is an amazing amount of thought that goes into ship/module design and balance, and literally none that goes into comparing two numbers on EFT.
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#39 - 2013-10-09 14:00:36 UTC
I pretty much fly amarr / minnie ships nowadays and can honestly say that weapons systems are probably the most balanced they have every been. And I have been playing since eve was released.( Bloody hell I probably need a break.) ( And no it wasn't one this toon before all you forum tossers start bleeting on about the age of Taoist!)

I have also started using small/medium beams instead of pulse w/scorch as beams actually give me way more flexibility and if you don't fall into the trap of plating the heck out of the amarr ships they can still be agile enough for most applications.

As for engaging null/blasters with my autos. easily.....at the edge of null range (approx 7-8km) I'll still hit way more consistently as my effective range (optimal + falloff) is often 10-11km+). But then again if I know I'm gonna go against blasters I often just shut them down with a boosted nuet or such.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.

Urkhan Law
Black Rebel Rifter Club
The Devil's Tattoo
#40 - 2013-10-09 14:10:58 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
and as the pretty graphic shows you, those are better than blasters for a reason: minmatar are a speedy/kiting race, not a brick brawl in tha face one.

Then why the brick brawl frigates have less mass than the speed kiting race?
Or why do you need a TD to have a better chance to win the fight in that falloff scenario?
Things are much better at a frigate level for sure, but they aren't perfect and never will be.
"But they are looking into it and will do changes in case it's necessary." Roll
Previous page123Next page