Player Features and Ideas Discussion

No.
Lasers were balanced 3-4 years ago,before Dominion. Since then they are comparatively getting worse and worse with every expansion and at the moment they are worst weapon system in eve. Subpar weapons with worst tracking, worst cap requirements, worst fittings and bad damage types, mounted on slowest and fattest ships in the universe with lowest number of mids, lacking in fittings, drones and utility.

It has gone so far, that people are fitting other races weapon system on a hull, that has one of the best available bonuses (damage bonus and resist bonus - latter one apparently being so good it deserves a nerf)...


Well, you are free to choose between subpar performance and training other race then. Apparently enough freedom of choice by ccp.

I never mentioned, talked about, or even referred to.... a Kronos. If that was what you were originally comparing, you made excellent leeway into not mentioning it. Seeing as how I had just previously made a comparison with a ultra-low tanked Mach, which you directly referenced in the same post, I made the reasonable conclusion you were referring to that comparison.

Perhaps you should actually mention what you're talking about.
But I guess your mental capacity isnt high enough


Rented - with a high mobility gank tank boat
I was referring to how an AB PVE Mach doesn't use sentries or heavies, and thus uses the same amount of drones as the Abaddon does. But then again you were apparently referring to things entirely separate from what you were specifically mentioning.



Do you need a hug?

No the reason why you never fit CPUs on amarr hulls has nothing to do with low skills, it is because you fit ANPs if you have cpu problems. Christ I did this with my first punisher, 20 minutes after char creation.

Pulse laser project damage FAR BETTER than AC.

In fact, the Abaddon should outdps the Machariel at 7km up to its max pulse range (70km).


Thank you for once again proving what I think about the whiners mindset in this thread : "we are persecuted, nobody ever flown amarr and yet they come here to say they are good enough".

You can like whatever you want, but don't come here to say that amarr pilots don't have anything to do lvl4 missions or pve.

Again, when I'm talking about the Armageddon, it's only as a *good* way to do lvl4 mission, should you like it or not, it's available. The premice of this argument, in fact, is that pve should not be an argument for game balance, because pvp have a lot more constraints and modifying something for pve *will* alter pvp balance.

Accepting 1 perforce we accept 3.1. Thank you for keeping up. Try not to add words though. Doing so leads you off-piste. I'll summarise...

I concede that the high cap use of lasers is not a single or even the only drawback of lasers. I focussed on one drawback, but of course that cap could also have been used by other systems. Translating into SP into cap skills and slots deducted to fit cap modules. So two additional drawbacks. A fourth is extra vulnerability to e-war. Etc...

The drawback I focussed on takes it that lasers are guns, and the point of guns is to project damage. Damage ranges all the way from alpha to aoes to dots. Each a factor that modifies the perceived benefits. If a gun cannot fire for very long, then in order to have DPS parity with other weapons it needs some of those other factors ramped.

Thus I essentially said that if lasers can't sustain fire then we need to consider their DPS-parity with comparatives. Luckily you acknowledge this in introducing your artillery example. So we see a capless weapon with insane alpha. That weapon becomes a member of the economy in which laser balance is found. Given that the benefits of artillery are available for the costs of artillery, lasers need competing benefits at price-parity. Price-parity is a complex concept because units of cost come in diverse rates and forms. But fundamentally we need the damage of lasers to have parity in an eco-system that includes artillery. So what choices do we have to balance a limited firing duration?

Lasers could have incredible range. But rails and artillery have about that same benefit and artie is as you say capless. So range alone cannot balance lasers.

Lasers could be AoE!? Not really. They could inflict DoTs? Srsly? Their damage could be irreparable. Hmm...

Or they could track better?! For extra DPS against specific targets at specific ranges. Which entails that the battleships that use lasers are able to maintain those ranges. Drat.

Or they could be more resistant to e-war! Only they aren't. They're extra-vulnerable to e-war for shiggles.

We can walk through more options yet always end back at some hook-or-by-crook extra DPS idea. To produce DPS parity over a truncated firing period naturally requires the DPS be higher for each second of that firing period. Such a curve front-loads the damage. Front-loaded damage, or alpha as it is often called, turns out to be the corner lasers get painted into.

So balancing just that one drawback of high cap use - truncated duration of fire - foreseeably pushes lasers toward having higher alphas. It may be there is some other applicable benefit out there, just waiting to be discovered. But the known benefit to give would just be to let lasers fire a bit longer. That way the damage value per second needn't be as high for parity. Also, it would be more in line with at least one conceptual benefit of lasers - no ammo - to allow sustained fire. It may indeed be that lasers should be further away from alpha than they are now... but to get there cap must be fixed.


Are able to. Words replete with excitement.

Ok after nearly 3 years I decided to do a bit L4 today, flying the Abaddon for like 6h and trying to get some interesting material, but every mission looked so painful easy in it, if I looked at the fraps footage.

I think the most funny thing would be to make a video out of the last Recon 1/3, not because it is super easy on the tank and cap if you not blitz it(it isn't), but because I was completely drunk at this point showcasing horrible module management and still had no issues at all.

The fit is exactly the one I posted a few pages ago. You don't need all 5, hell I had to do it completely drunk, to get some footage that looks kind of challenging.

Your sir just pointed out all of the major problems with amarr ships/weapon systems. Lasers are so bad i acctually can't hit a bs with a bs while orbiting me at 5km, that's how bad things are atm. Currently you can only fly non laser amarr ships and get some results.
They need to fix tracking, scale damage with cap requirement (that would be fun), and tweak fitting. EM/Therm is oke atm but CCP have you ever tried to fight Minmatar T2 armor tanked ship? imposibru...

Ofc they dont, they dont fly amarr ships. In their eyes amarr role is to be a slow, fat brick with zero utility, terrible tracking, terrible cap, terrible fitting and layouts - perfect target that just sits still and waits for death. And their dying apparently took to long so they decided to nerf their resist bonus.

Just to be complete - caldari is considered noobrace that gets "easymode" noobships by ccp (easymode means that ship doesnt benefit from piloting effort), while minmatar is master race with hardmode ships (hardmode means that ship rewards piloting effort and experience).

So now you should have idea what kind of people are behind designing phoon, fleet phoon or hyperion (perfect layouts, alot of utility and drones, high speed etc.) and on the other hand abaddon (lets take its resist bonus and leave it brick that has to fit howitzers to be useful), apoc (that ship doesnt cap out fast enough for being amarr) or even navy slicer (we wont give you any other mid slot because, well because you are amarr, be happy you can fit prop mod and point and stfu) "balancing."

Actually, the changes by Rise (and his subsequent fingers in ears to our concerns) are terrible

The only ship I accept here that works is the Abaddon. The reason? its lost 5% of its overall tank. Nothing else has changed.