These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Pulse Lasers and Blasters should be balanced around Autocannons?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Deena Amaj
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2012-07-26 02:51:51 UTC
I'll stay out of the theorycrafting, but I think we can agree that ACs are "fixed" after all these ages.

I must agree that Projectile/ACs did receive a bit too much love.

Hybrids got some love over the course of the last months, but it was a bit more about eye candy.
T2 Projectile Ammo is imo too effective now.


As for Amarr, I'm guessing CCP will look into lasers once they approach the BC/BS bracket.

confirthisposmed

I'm probably typing on a Tablet too, which means the auto-correct is silly and fixing typos is a pain. I ain't fixing them.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2012-07-26 06:34:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
PinkKnife wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:


PS: the Heavy Pulse Laser is not the right turret to compare to a 425mm Autocannon, the Focused Medium Pulse Laser is the closest equivalent.


How do you figure that? What metric are you using to compare the two? Not all races have three of every turret.


The FMP is closest in terms of fitting requirements.
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
#23 - 2012-07-26 07:27:43 UTC
Serithin wrote:
yea as a minmatar pilot i will say yes with ACs i have great range and tracking but with even 800mmIIs on a Tempest full long range fit an AC will still have an optimal of about 6k and any minmatar pilot knows if you outside your optimal...... well nuff said your doing atleast half damage im sorry but amarr and gallente (i also fly gallente) have far superior fittings compared to minmatar.

All we have is speed and powergrid OVERALL of course I.E. not all ships having tanking bonuses and only the loki has resist bonuses.

We might be able to hit you and have an EFT of over 9000 DPS but unless we can get face to face with you were pretty screwed.

Again nuff said fly minmatar and youll realize were all about getting to a target ASAP or we die pretty fast.

As far as the calculations that were posted AF has nothing to do with optimal and since we already have a 0km optimal (atleast sometimes it feels like it) even 50% bonus to optimal on 3km is only 1.5km added.

This totals to 4.5km with modules like i said around 6km 8km max ( as far as ive seen even on my 425 IIs on my vagabond) and that the only range we can actually do any real damage and btw 50% negative range bonus applies to our falloff and optimal so quit whining you amarr guy easily got 30km to have long range ammo and pick us off and as far as gallente.

Its called a webb we use them you can too and ive seen blaster do full damage at 20km so yea stop it please unless your going to brawl face to face like we ARE FORCED TO.Pirate


I call your reply crap, if you knew turret mechanics then you know you are lying.

If you are in Optimal and 50% falloff, you do around 85% of your normal dps.

Optimal and 100% falloff you do 50% of your normal dps.

Now consider this: Autocannons are barely affected by the range penalties of short range ammo. (unless using tech 2). You only receive at most a 10% decrease in your range.

While Pulse lasers take a big 50% hit in their range.

When normal short range ammo shortens falloff, then we can talk about the range disadvantages of autocannons.
CrazySpaceHobo
Black Rose Inc.
Brotherhood of Spacers
#24 - 2012-07-26 07:28:37 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
PinkKnife wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:


PS: the Heavy Pulse Laser is not the right turret to compare to a 425mm Autocannon, the Focused Medium Pulse Laser is the closest equivalent.


How do you figure that? What metric are you using to compare the two? Not all races have three of every turret.


The FMP is closest in terms of fitting requirements.


Thats just differences in the weapon systems as a whole, the 425mm is the largest of the medium autocannons, and the heavy pulse is the largest of the medium pulse lazers. Easy comparison.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#25 - 2012-07-26 08:03:33 UTC
CrazySpaceHobo wrote:
[quote=Takeshi Yamato]
Thats just differences in the weapon systems as a whole, the 425mm is the largest of the medium autocannons, and the heavy pulse is the largest of the medium pulse lazers. Easy comparison.

Easy comparison, though 425mm are easier to fit than focused medium pulse or ion blasters. AC are plain easier to fit than blaster, and use only a little more CPU than pulse laser ; though, you can compensate for CPU with meta4 mods whereas you cannot do anything about PG. Worse : amarr boat have *very crapy* CPU, and are often short on it despite the low CPU requirements of pulse laser.

Then, saying that minmatar ship have some fitting problem is a joke at best. Minmatar ship are the easiest to fit by far, to the point minmatar pilot forgot we have to make sacrifices for a fit because they can fit anything they want on their ships. Beging the same for other ships have no sense, it's powercreep and not necessary. If ships have PG and CPU, that is by purpose, to limit their ability to fit anything they want. Minmatar are cheating with this.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2012-07-26 08:52:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
CrazySpaceHobo wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
PinkKnife wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:


PS: the Heavy Pulse Laser is not the right turret to compare to a 425mm Autocannon, the Focused Medium Pulse Laser is the closest equivalent.


How do you figure that? What metric are you using to compare the two? Not all races have three of every turret.


The FMP is closest in terms of fitting requirements.


Thats just differences in the weapon systems as a whole, the 425mm is the largest of the medium autocannons, and the heavy pulse is the largest of the medium pulse lazers. Easy comparison.


This difference in weapon systems is precisely that lasers are placed a tier or two higher than autocannons.

A Heavy Pulse Laser requires 40% more CPU and 50% more PG than a 425mm AC. Calling this a fair comparison is completely wrong. It needs to be compared to the Focused Medium Pulse which is designed with similar fitting requirements in mind. Or do you think that comparing Dual 180mm ACs to 425mm ACs is a fair comparison too?
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#27 - 2012-07-26 09:09:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
This dps graph illustrates very well how overpowered the combination of several tracking enhancers plus autocannons is. It shows how a 425mm AC II compares to a Focused Medium Pulse Laser II. Both fits have 3x Tracking Enhancer II and 3x damage mods and max skills.

http://imgur.com/eE2E7 (Scorch/Barrage)
http://imgur.com/ALdvo (Fleet EMP/Navy MF)

If you have trouble figuring out which is which, the AC has a gradual drop in damage whereas the laser has a sudden drop.

The two turrets are not equal in fitting, but are the closest match. The 425mm AC requires 16% more PG than the FMP which in turn requires 16% more CPU than the 425mm AC.
Gypsio III
State War Academy
Caldari State
#28 - 2012-07-26 13:08:10 UTC
Parsee789 wrote:


I believe that autocannons should be a model for short range weapons to be balanced around.


This will lead to homogenisation, producing weapons systems that are similarly effective in all situations. Easy weapon fitting is also bad (e.g. Hurricane, Drake, t3 BCs) as few compromises or decisions have to be made, you just slap on the usual top-tier weapons, leading to homogeneity of fits and predictable gameplay.

Nor is Pulse a good model for a weapon system, mainly because of Scorch, enabling effective engagement ranges that are simply too large for a single weapon system - like ACs, they're too good in too many situations. A better model is blasters, which come with some fitting challenges and have a relatively well-defined engagement window, making tactical positioning and mobility more important.
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
#29 - 2012-07-27 20:01:17 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Parsee789 wrote:


I believe that autocannons should be a model for short range weapons to be balanced around.


This will lead to homogenisation, producing weapons systems that are similarly effective in all situations. Easy weapon fitting is also bad (e.g. Hurricane, Drake, t3 BCs) as few compromises or decisions have to be made, you just slap on the usual top-tier weapons, leading to homogeneity of fits and predictable gameplay.

Nor is Pulse a good model for a weapon system, mainly because of Scorch, enabling effective engagement ranges that are simply too large for a single weapon system - like ACs, they're too good in too many situations. A better model is blasters, which come with some fitting challenges and have a relatively well-defined engagement window, making tactical positioning and mobility more important.


Autocannons is unbalance compared to other short range weapons.

Autocannon range is not an issue with 30% tracking enhancer falloff bonus and the fact that high damage ammo does not gimp the range compared to other short range ammo.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#30 - 2012-07-27 22:39:00 UTC
Still wondering why you would fit a TE, ratehr than a scripted TC, on an armor tanking laser boat.



Also, you don't compare guns on fittings. All lasers have higher fittings because Amarr have higher fittings.

Maybe compare based on damage, range, or rate of fire, but not fittings.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#31 - 2012-07-28 03:47:45 UTC
Lady Spank wrote:
AC optimal is very close and ships that fit AC are close range brawlers.

This is probably the dumbest thing I have ever seen you post.
Previous page12