Player Features and Ideas Discussion

The fact that they see just as much action as pulse lasers shows us that they are an effective weapon. Or are you saying pulse lasers are weak and need a buff too?

Pulse lasers are stong and part of the problem. They are also the primary weapon system that I use now. The issue here is damage projection, not damage types. The problem being that blasters overlap too much with auto cannons.

425's on an unbonussed hull loaded with barrage typically have a falloff of around 15km. Which means at 20km you are doing far less than 50% of your paper DPS. (Your paper DPS which is already lower than every other turret)

On most hulls with scorch using Heavy pulse lasers, your optimal is around 25km. Which means you are doing a big chunk of your DPS out to that range. Greater than 50%.

Heavy nuetrons, loaded with Null can typically have a falloff of around 12km, and have a huge advantage in base damage already.

The problem here is that your typical autocannon boat doesn't have a sweet spot. You would think that between 15-20km it would be able to outdamage other turrets, but it can't.

In fleets I'm sure that this isn't much of an issue, and maybe there your selectable damage type might be useful. However as a solo and small gang PVPer I hate the fact that my Kitey stabber, with its 400 Paper DPS, is still being outdamaged by your Thoraxes 5 Hammerhead II's at 20km.

Every ship should shine in it's role, and if flown properly have it's niche where its competetive. The Matari niche should not be that they are really good at killing frigs.

It's strange isn't it that two small gang and solo PVP mercs are being told whats what by a goon who barely has a killmail with less than 100 people on it. I guess we should just quit.

I'm not sure how much more subtance you really need. I've even posted several fits and stats that detail the problem. Your only counter was posting how well a PVE Loki can web sleepers and does 200 DPS.

I think I could use your exact argument against you and Baltec.

Odd. Werent you the guy who had no kills with acs ships in the past year. Infact, the only minny ship youve lost was that loki fit. Hard to take your opinions seriously when you dont even fly the ships in a pvp environment. We have provided data and fits and scenarios that validate our points. However, both you and Baltec seem to be purposely ignoring our points and try to derail the thread by posting things that are not relavent to the OP. Ac applied dps while kiting is pathetic and cant kill more than frigs and lightly tanked cruisers.

We want a 10-15% buff in base falloff of acs. As per numbers quoted by CCP Rise for a stabber in TE nerf thread. That is a 40 dps increase with faction, and a 20 dps increase with barrage @ 20km, and adds roughly 3-5km to falloff.

Autocannons base numbers are fine.


I feel the problem is the minnie/angle hulls are a bit lackluster and harder to fly, plus some non-AC ships got overbuffed.


Top weapon systems for the Gnosis since it launched. May '13-Dec '14 @ Zkill (Post TE Nerf)

1.425MM Autocannon
2.Heavy Neutron Blasters
3.720MM Arty
4.250MM Rail
5.220MM Autocannon
6.Heavy Pulse Lasers


If autocannon's base numbers were wrong , there is no way they would be rank # 1 and rank # 5 weapon system for the Gnosis.

I understand the point of this thread is to make AC's a better kiting platform but saying they don't have a role and don't fit the current meta is just disingenuous, as things stand autocannons are a viable weapon choice.

When you start calling into question people with infinatly more experience and reputation than yourself expect a beatdown. I did warn you many pages back not to try that tactic.

Case and point. You guys misrepresent the opposing argument at every turn. I may not be nice most of the time, but I never stoop so low as to tarnish my integrity and honesty. Normally I would tell you to refer back to my post and the post I was responding to to ascertain the precise point I was going for, but you're clearly not interested in having a reasoned and rational discussion, as such, it's not really fruitful or interesting to have a conversation when it is one sided.

Good. Now that the gents that have been derailing the thread for ten pages are gone, we can stop talking about whats viable and talk about what can be done to make Autocannons more a competetive weapon system.

From what I've read in and around the derailments, a 10-15% buff to Medium Auto Cannon falloff would help solved the problem, or a change to Projectile weapon ammo bonus'.

I would be for either one of these changes. Matari's ships strength and weakness is their flexibility, they require a lot of skill points in multiple disciplines and weapon systems to be effective. They should at least be given a fighting chance against the competition.

I see. Thanks for the clarification. In regards to the stabber though, its fast, but its engagement profile is mainly limited to frigs (which is fine), and will struggle against anything with range or with a 200dps or higher active tanked cruiser. Once you incorporate falloff, the 350ish dps drops in some cases as much as 50% at point range (depending on fit/ammo). Now with the stabber, thats fine. Its a t1 cruiser great for hunting frigs or acting as heavy tackle and using low sig/dual prop.

For the vagabond im not ok with this. Its a 200m hull that does about 100-150dps more than a stabber at point range. Mainly due to 5th turret and second damage bonus. Why would i spend that kind of isk when the stabber does it just as well for a fraction of the cost? Dps is still low at vaga engagement ranges and doesnt really allow it to kill anything bigger than frigs or lightly tanked cruisers.

The projection you mentioned on armor ruppy is the same problem on hurricane. They dont project and theyre both slow. Hurricane is often sitting on gate camps with support ships to apply its dps. Brawler ruppy will get killed by other blaster brawlers if theyre smart enough to fit cap booster(most do), due to the shear dps advantage blasters have.

However, this thread is about ac application at falloff/kite ranges though. im ok with acs in brawl range, mainly due to trade off for neuts and capless weapons. At least they can apply the majority of their dps there. At range, though, with it being drones, light missiles, rails and in some cases blasters flooding the meta, the poor application of ac at kite range is really unattractive in comparison. You dont have the application to use that speed to be worth it. And like you mentioned, orthus/gila are much more attractive. Orthus can apply 1.2k vollies at 50-60km. And gila can "kite" and let its drones do all the work from 50-75km.

In terms of gnosis, it also gets drone bonuses. Some may be using DDAs and supplementing drone dps with acs. Which is seen on many other drone hulls (tristan, myrm, strat, vexor etc). Also because this thread is mainly about ac application in falloff. Gnosis dont kite, they instalock and MWD towards target with help of support ships to hold the opponent. This isnt an environment that accurately shows poor ac application while kiting. Its closer to brawling. We do not want a damage or RoF buff, just a falloff buff so that acs can project into medium engagement ranges to kill more than frigs.

Otherwise, i may have been incorrect earlier on fitting. Thanks for actually sharing and providing solid info.