These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

Forum Index

EVE Forums » EVE Information Center » EVE Information Portal » New dev blog: Hybrid weapon and Tech II ammo balancing

Topic is locked indefinitely.

First pagePrevious page5051525354Next pageLast page

New dev blog: Hybrid weapon and Tech II ammo balancing First post First post
Author

Previous Topic Next Topic

David Xavier

The Capsuleers of Unconscious Thought

Likes received: 29

#1021 - 2011-11-07 20:23:09 UTC | Edited by: David Xavier

Sydney Nelson wrote:

Maybe you don't mission much, maybe you do, I don't know.
Rail-range IS a virtue in PVE, I know because I'm "dumb" and missioned in a Rail Gun-boat for a long-time.
There are a high percentage of L4 missions where the rats are at 65+km.
Being able to do good dps at 65km helps quite a bit actually.
If you can start to apply good dps as you get into range, your target will be halfway-gone by the time a shorter-range weapon would even start to do good dps. This saves time, it's also a good tactic to minimize incoming dps.

If you take-away rails' range, then they are useless compared to ACs.
If you boost thier DPS to compensate, then they would be better than ACs.
We don't want to clone ACs with Blasters OR Rails!
Rails would work GREAT for PVP if you make the ships that use them faster. Simple.
Would they be easily countered by Arty? Maybe, but that's the POINT. Rock, Paper, Scissors, remember?
Large rails can't be fixed, because the're not broken. It's the probing mechanics that have made them useless.

The problem with your example Sydney is that using railguns is not a virtue, you use them for missions because you have no other choice if you want to have some range!

Railguns have to complement blasters just like how short and long range weapon systems of other races do, meaning they have to be useful and be able to project reliable damage from the range where blasters become useless.

In my opinion railgun "speciality" would be their extensive engagement envelope from ~28km to 100km, the current damage considering the +10% buff is about right, but improved tracking is needed.

I don't suffer from insanity.. I enjoy it !

Conquerors Undead Space 10
indicast Conquerors Undead Space Likes received: 10	#1022 - 2011-11-07 20:28:39 UTC 2 i just had a fight with tornado a few minutes ago while i was flying talos theres just no way hybrids are gonna be desirable,i mean gallente ships are slow,and hybrids have short range,so yeah.unless ccp does something drastic with em i cant see how people gonna want to use those lol

Keen Fallsword

Skyway Patrol

Likes received: 145

#1023 - 2011-11-07 20:33:24 UTC

indicast wrote:

i just had a fight with tornado a few minutes ago while i was flying talos

theres just no way hybrids are gonna be desirable,i mean gallente ships are slow,and hybrids have short range,so yeah.unless ccp does something drastic with em i cant see how people gonna want to use those lol

thats the point ! and CCP give us some feedback from your side. Hybrids are not working !!!! STILL

Motriek

The Scope

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 0

#1024 - 2011-11-07 21:06:48 UTC

For lulz, I worked up a Catalyst fit, which doesn't quite fit right now, but I think will fit after. Am I right in understanding that this thing will get an additional 33% boost to dps after the release, when the dessy ROF penalty is reduced?

I'm getting 514dps now with heat, and I believe that will go to 678 dps afterwards. zomg.

[Catalyst, Test]
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II

Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters
[empty med slot]

Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S

[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]

Hobgoblin II x1

Nimrod Nemesis

Doomheim

Likes received: 134

#1025 - 2011-11-07 21:20:33 UTC | Edited by: Nimrod Nemesis

Sydney Nelson wrote:

I'm sorry; I wasn't clear-enough in my post.
What I meant to say was, that I used the Hype for the MAJORITYof my PVE time.
The Mach and Nightmare are clearly head and shoulders above any Rail-platform.

Telling you how-much experience I have flying those two ships would be completely irrelevent because THEY DON'T USE RAILS.
Instead of trying to discredit me and indirectly insulting my inteligence by implying that I'm not smart-enough to choose the proper L4 mission ship, you SHOULD have taken the true point of my statement.

Who would be BETTER qualified to coment on the merits/demerits of Rails than someone who spent VAST ammounts of time using them?

As for me being dumb for using the Hype as a L4 boat, that's complete nonsence as well.
There are only 3 hybrid gun-boats that out-perform the Hype in L4 missions. They are the Navy Mega, Kronos, and Vindicator (even though it seems like an aweful waste of its web bonus), all-of-which are WAY more expensive. Once you have enough ISK for those ships, you have enough for a Mach or Nightmare.
If you dissagree, this is not the thread to argue about-it.
I would be happy to debate with you the useability of the Hype here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=26745

I'm not going to continue debating your poor decision to use a hype for pve. A dominix or mega both cost less and do the job better.

Sydney Nelson wrote:

Anyways....
I think we need to figure-out exactly what problem we're trying to solve here.
It seems to me you're trying to make ALL Rails (including large) viable in PVP.
That's not going to happen until the probing mechanics that made Sniping a thing of the past are fixed.
Large Rails don't need to be turned-into ACs.
You said it yourself, what would be the point of using Hybrids if ACs are there with the same role?

It seems to me I was crystal clear. Take your ADHD medication and read exactly what I typed. I specifically mentioned tuning rails based on OTHER LONG-RANGE WEAPONS. Autocannons are not long-range. If you want to equate a high-dps railgun that hits between artillery and beam range as an auto-cannon you're free to do so, but it's makes you sound like you failed to read (again).

Sydney Nelson wrote:

You're trying to duplicate ACs by decreasing Rail range, and increasing thier dmg.
What you're proposing wouldn't fix Rails for PVP, but it WOULD break them for PVE.

Maybe you don't mission much, maybe you do, I don't know.
Rail-range IS a virtue in PVE, I know because I'm "dumb" and missioned in a Rail Gun-boat for a long-time.
There are a high percentage of L4 missions where the rats are at 65+km.
Being able to do good dps at 65km helps quite a bit actually.
If you can start to apply good dps as you get into range, your target will be halfway-gone by the time a shorter-range weapon would even start to do good dps. This saves time, it's also a good tactic to minimize incoming dps.

If you take-away rails' range, then they are useless compared to ACs.
If you boost thier DPS to compensate, then they would be better than ACs.
We don't want to clone ACs with Blasters OR Rails!
Rails would work GREAT for PVP if you make the ships that use them faster. Simple.
Would they be easily countered by Arty? Probably, but that's the POINT. Rock, Paper, Scissors remember?
Large rails can't be fixed, because the're not broken. It's the probing mechanics that have made them useless.

You've got to be joking. Seriously, go read what I posted. Rails hitting between artilery and beam range would give them PLENTY of range for pve (is 75-100km not enough for your pve ships?!) and would have ZERO adverse effects on your prescious hyperion. I have a rail ship to pve with, btw, it's a kronos. I don't use it because it's sub-par compared to a mach, but if the hybrid buff isn't a diaster then it might see more use.

I can't tell if you just don't know there are other ammunition options than Anti-matter, or your too stubborn to consider the fact that I mentioned AMMO CHANGES would also be needed in conjunction with the hypothetical changed I proposed. Either way, it's clear you've spent no time reading and considering what i've posted so far.

Tiger's Spirit

Templars of the Shadows

Likes received: 141

#1026 - 2011-11-07 21:30:01 UTC | Edited by: Tiger's Spirit

Motriek wrote:

Too much DPS for a destro.
A coercer will be shot to 22km optimal+3.3km falloff with scorch over 4-500 dps.
I think this is OP for this ship class.

I know because i flew many times with them in FW. I killed easily ceptors without disruptor because 1 mid slot. (coercer need 1 mid+)

The Thrasher will be OP too. They can instapopping now a frig.

A fully fitted t1 cruiser class has this damage now with 3 gyro (rupture with 4x t2 220mm guns and two t2 HAM+5drone) 600DPS without overheat.

Gabriel Karade

Coreli Corporation

Pandemic Legion

Likes received: 328

#1027 - 2011-11-07 22:19:15 UTC | Edited by: Gabriel Karade

Motriek wrote:

It doesn't even come close to fitting, on either TQ or Sisi - and even if it did it would be about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

The highest damage, not totally useless setup you can get involves Light Ion II's which, with current Sisi build, at least has a DCU II and tops out at 471 [gun] dps before overheating... but at 2.1km.

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Sydney Nelson

Nelson Universal Aerospace

Likes received: 32

#1028 - 2011-11-07 22:25:10 UTC

Nimrod Nemesis wrote:

No, it does not make sense. First of all, the Brutix is a tier1 bc and the hurrican tier2. We may not like the tier system as it stands, but we cannot assume it's going to be gone just because we want it to go. Tier2 battlecruisers are going to anhillate t1 in almost every case except well-skilled cyclones with proper implants/pill.

This has nothing to do with tiers!
I'm comparing the Brutix to the Cane because thier both gun-boats!
Should I compare a Myrmidon and a Cane? The Myrmidon is a Drone boat. There is no point in making that comparison because we're trying to compare guns.

Furthermore, on the case that rails are't the "REAL problem." I'm trying EVER SO HARD to be civil here, but this is absolute nonsense. Nobody with the first clue about med/large rails and their pvp applications thinks that the rail niche exists. It just doesn't. The weapon system as it stands is worse off than blasters and i've already mentioned why that is. Their range is much too long to utilize and when it can be utilized it is one on-grid warp from disaster. Coupled with the fact their dps is enemic and their tracking is abyssmal inside their giant range bubble and you have a failed weapon.

Making every rail ship insanely fast (able to out-run their class equivalents in minmatar while armor tanking? You're taking pre-nano-nerf speed) would do nothing but distort ship balance overall. You wouldn't be able to solo since you'd be well out of point range. You wouldn't be able to operate in logi range of a standard gang. Rail ships would still be a joke and fitting blasters (assuming they too get reasonable buffs) to them would probably be overpowered since they'd be easily capable of catching anything with their immense speed.

I don't think you've actually LOOKED at an EFT graph lately.
Do you actually know the optimal range of a medium rail-gun??
A 250mm Rail with anitmatter and L5 skills is 22km.

What's the range of a long point?
T2 disruptor with L5 skills is 24km.

That is within long point-range.
I think you're REALLY stuck-on large rails.
The real problem with those is the probing mechanics, not the guns themselves.

The dmg of Rails isn't enemic, and it's going to get better after the buff this winter.

I'm not talking about a HUGE speed increase, I'm talking about 30% ish.
If you passive armor-tank, Minmatar will still be faster. If you shield tank (works well on a Brutix), or active armor tank (have to use smaller guns), speed will be pretty-much even. If you fit minimal tank (dmg control, maybe an EANM), nanos, speed rigs, etc. then, and only then will you be faster than a Nano-Cane. I think it's a good balance.

http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e9/sydneyACE/EVE/RailBrutixvsACCane.jpg

Now you tell me, if that Brutix were 30% faster (50m/s speed advantage), that it wouldn't have a REALLY good chance of taking that Cane out.

The solution I'm proposing, mitigating rail range and adding a reasonable amount of dps, allows rails to have a viable niche. They could apply high-tracking effective dps at moderate range (relative to other long-range weapons, so don't compare to AC's or Pulses) and their drawbacks (cap and kin/therm only dmg) would be less of an issue because they'd provide more effective dps than projectiles and track better than beams.

Hull and Ammo solutions should also come into the mix IMO, but none of that fine-tuning can be done when you can't settle on a general niche for the weapon system and the ships themselves. Ultra-long-range no longer works and it hasn't worked for quite a long time. Shorter range and better tracking/dps at that moderate range is really the only solution.

Sydney Nelson wrote:

This is purely hypothetical of-course but...
If each medium hybrid turret gave a 4.25% boost to speed, then a Rail-Brutix would have enough speed to kite an AC Cane, and a Blaster-Brutix would have enough speed to get into-range before it's too late (sometimes).

An unusual fix? Yes.
Viable? Looks like it to me.
We're just brain-storming and discussing here, and I think this is worth discussing.

What is to prevent minmatar ships, with higher base speed/agi from fitting hybrids then?

Minmatar ships don't have a bonus for Hybrid dmg, optimal, rof, fall-off, etc.
I would have thought that would be rather obvious.
A Minmatar ship could fit them if they wanted, but they would do less dmg, range, etc. than a hybrid-bonused ship.
There's nothing wrong with an un-bonused ship fitting different guns, Myrmidons do it all the time and fit ACs.

Again I think the Brutix v Cane analog is silly, but i've been over that. Once more, I have to say, you're trying to treat symptoms rather than look at the disease itself.

It is a discussion worth having, but there are such things as bad proposals and we'd do well to consider more than just 'how can I beat a CANE?!' when we are talking about the overall problems with hybrids. There are deep-rooted problems with both blasters and espcially rails. If we cannot address those points, we're not going to lend them any feedback worth having.

I'm addressing exactly those points by giving the bonuses to the guns themselves and not the ships.
Again, I'm just using Brutix/Cane because the're both gun-boats, one uses hybrids, the other uses projectiles. It's a pretty logical comparison by my account.


Nimrod Nemesis Doomheim Likes received: 134	#1029 - 2011-11-07 22:29:33 UTC Never. Stop. Posting.

Nimrod Nemesis

Doomheim

Likes received: 134

#1030 - 2011-11-07 22:38:05 UTC

Sydney Nelson wrote:

I don't think you've actually LOOKED at an EFT graph lately.
Do you actually know the optimal range of a medium rail-gun??
A 250mm Rail with anitmatter and L5 skills is 22km.

We were talking about your fail-hype, and I certainly hope you done fit med. raild on it too. You really should try reading better.

Sydney Nelson wrote:

Minmatar ships don't have a bonus for Hybrid dmg, optimal, rof, fall-off, etc.
I would have thought that would be rather obvious.
A Minmatar ship could fit them if they wanted, but they would do less dmg, range, etc. than a hybrid-bonused ship.
There's nothing wrong with an un-bonused ship fitting different guns, Myrmidons do it all the time and fit ACs.

So your argument is, it'll **** up the game, but the game's already ****** up so who cares? Brilliant.

Sydney Nelson wrote:

I'm addressing exactly those points by giving the bonuses to the guns themselves and not the ships.
Again, I'm just using Brutix/Cane because the're both gun-boats, one uses hybrids, the other uses projectiles. It's a pretty logical comparison by my account.

You're trying to cure the disease with band-aids and vap-o-rub. Not only have you begun and stuck to a poor premise, but you refuse to read and understand my arguments. I can't be sure why this is, but you need to start from square one, clean up your fallacious assumptions, or stop posting.


indicast Conquerors Undead Space Likes received: 10	#1031 - 2011-11-07 23:05:14 UTC solution is simple,and its in the name of the thread "Hybrid weapon and Tech II ammo balancing" its not balanced on tranquility,and its not balanced on test server.period. ccp,keep on working

Phoenix Torp

Almost Absolute

Likes received: 16

#1032 - 2011-11-07 23:26:19 UTC

I make auto-quote sent to all that people who say that blasters have high damage. I don't see where is that high damage...

Phoenix Torp wrote:

Mini toons are the best because they don't need a lot of support for weapons modules. Tempest can "waste" 3 slots in Gyroestabilizer and even with that win whatever. And can kite his enemy since is faster. Gallente would need Tracking Enhancer, Trackin Computer... and then, to be competitive with the rest of races DPS, should fit the Magnetic Stabilizer.
It's either the master failing philosophy of Gallente or the master overpowered philosopy of Minmatar what makes this. And Amarr is the middle-term with large optimals and cap issues, that needs his pilots to have "a bit" of intelligence and strategy.
Right now, would appreciate more a succesfull Gallente pirate than another one.

http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp

indicast

Conquerors Undead Space

Likes received: 10

#1033 - 2011-11-07 23:31:09 UTC

Phoenix Torp wrote:

I make auto-quote sent to all that people who say that blasters have high damage. I don't see where is that high damage...

Phoenix Torp wrote:

eft shows one thing,real gameplay shows how much hybrids suck.

+1

Sydney Nelson

Nelson Universal Aerospace

Likes received: 32

#1034 - 2011-11-07 23:45:51 UTC

Nimrod Nemesis wrote:

I'm not going to continue debating your poor decision to use a hype for pve. A dominix or mega both cost less and do the job better.

You're wrong, a Mega isn't better than a Hype. That's a myth, go to the thread and you will see what I mean.
The Domi is a drone-boat. It's great, but it's not a gun-boat. I'm talking about gun-boats.
The problem is people don't fit thier Hypes correctly. Just go to the thread, you can debate it there.
You also seem to think I don't recognize that there are better mission-ships out-there. I know there are, and I use them.

Nimrod Nemesis wrote:

I read you post thouroughly.
Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I didn't read it.
Also the insults about me being ADHD are completely un-called for.
It can be very difficult to understand exactly what people are trying to comunicate when dealing strictly in textual form.
I try to be pretty clear when I post, but that doesn't mean people understand easily, I think you might be missunderstanding what I'm trying to say. I will try to rephrase:

I'm pretty-sure I understand your proposal just-fine

What you're proposing is just moving the "hybrid ammo dmg/range scale" down a few notches for rails.

So basically Uranium would have the same dmg profile as Anti currently does.
Lead would have the same dmg profile as Uranium currently does.
Tungsten same as Lead currently, etc... etc...

Anti would have lower range and higher damage than normal.
Basically by doing this, you're forcing people to use higher-range ammo for the same effect as they used to get with Anti.
The only thing that changes, is you would have more selection of ammos for shorter-range/higher-damage.
So I could load Anti and have AC/Pulse damage profile (minus a little tracking), or load Uranium and have current Rail (with Anti) damage.

Once again, as I said before this isn't a bad fix, but you will still end-up with a dmg profile that treads all-over ACs and T2 Pulses when pilots choose to load Anti. (Which they will.)

I'm pretty-sure this would make rails OP for medium-range use, and still not-work for use at long-point range and beyond. Fit enough Tracking Enhancers/Computers, or Webs, and you will have a weapon that does more dmg than ACs and Pulses, and tracks well-enough to hit stuff without a super-high angular. For engagements at long-point range however, a faster ship would STILL be-able to burn in-close and out-damage you before you could pop them or burn away and completely dissengage. Rails are a kiting weapon, in-order to kite effectively, you have to be as-fast-as or faster than your opponent.
Rails cannot be viable on a slow ship without a dedicated tackler to help them. If you have a dedicated tackler, it makes more sense to use Blasters most of the time. This is why nobody uses Rails. Giving them higher-damage potential at close-range is nice and-all but will probably cause some issues with them being OP.

Don't take-it personal that we're dissagreeing. Just because something seems like a good idea to you doesn't mean everyone else will agree right-away. Maybe having other points-of-view from other "dumb@sses" like me will help you to refine your idea.

Sydney Nelson

Nelson Universal Aerospace

Likes received: 32

#1035 - 2011-11-08 00:47:34 UTC

Wow! Slow Down! I can barely keep-up.
Take your time when you post about how dumb I am.
You are making grave errors in you comprehension of my posts.

Nimrod Nemesis wrote:

Sydney Nelson wrote:

I don't think you've actually LOOKED at an EFT graph lately.
Do you actually know the optimal range of a medium rail-gun??
A 250mm Rail with anitmatter and L5 skills is 22km.

We were talking about your fail-hype, and I certainly hope you done fit med. raild on it too. You really should try reading better.

Why would I post a graph and stats for Battlecruisers and Medium guns if I was talking about a Hype?!

I've said it before, a few times, I will say-it again. You can't fix large rails becaus the're not broken. Probing mechanics have made sniping obsolete.

I wouldn't fit a Hype for PVP with large rails. I don't fit-it with Mediums either, I can't seem to find anywhere in ANY of my posts where I said anything of the kind.

You specifically stated "Nobody with the first clue about med/large rails and their pvp applications thinks that the rail niche exists."
See where you said "med" there?
I posted that part about optimals and the graph for you, because you seem to think Med Rails are worthless in thier current-form.
They have a VERY good dmg profile, the just lack the speedy-ships needed to dictate range properly.

As for my "fail-hype" I don't recal posting a Hype-fit anywhere on this thread. You can drop the bagging-on-the-Hype thing. It's not really related to this thread. If you feel like expaining to me how worthless the Hype is, link a new thread, or post-it in the thread I offered.

Sydney Nelson wrote:

So your argument is, it'll **** up the game, but the game's already ****** up so who cares? Brilliant.

That's not my argument at-all. Like I said, you need to slow-down and quit jumping to conclusions.

My argument is that, If a Minmatar ship fit Hybrids, it would get a speed-buff at the EXPENCE of not having the same damage, range, rof, fall-off, etc.
It would be like how Myrmidons sometimes fit ACs. It's not really better, it's just different. When a Myrmidon pilot fits ACs on his ship, he is getting more cap-time and selectable dmg-type at the expence of range.
It's a trade-off get-it?

A Minmatar ship could fit Hybrids and get his WTFPWNMOBILE speed advantage back, but he would be wasting all of his ship-bonuses, and the Hybrids wouldn't work to thier full-potential because his ship has no bonuses for THEM.

Sydney Nelson wrote:

The premise isn't poor. Read through this thread, you will see people saying over and over and OVER again, that Hybrid ships need more speed or more agility.
Just because it seems unusual to put a speed boost on a gun doesn't automatically make-it a "band-aid".
The term "band-aid" is used to describe a temporary or incomplete fix. If this was done right, I would be neither.

I pretty-sure I understand your arguments fine. Your automatically assuming that everyone will just agree with-you, and if they don't agree then, they must not understand.

Sydney Nelson

Nelson Universal Aerospace

Likes received: 32

#1036 - 2011-11-08 01:08:19 UTC

David Xavier wrote:

Thankyou for explaining yourself clearly without attempting to sound smart by trying to insult me.

I understand EXACTLY what you're saying.

However;
Saying Rails need to pick-up right where Blasters leave-off is an opinion, and not a fact.
I see nothing wrong with having a small gap between the two.

Having said that:
The gap that exists now is much smaller than you think, maybe even non-existant.

Let's get this out of the way right off the bat.
Large rails aren't supposed to be-able to hit cruiser-sized ships orbiting up-close. (Artys DEFINATELY can't. Beams are the only-ones who might have a chance.)
Mediums aren't supposed to do the same to frigs, etc.
Agreed?

As for Large Rails hitting BS sized targets, and Mediums hitting Cruiser-sized etc. orbiting up-close...
They already can.
A large blaster can hit well out-to 15+km.
A large rail has little trouble hitting things down-to 15km.
The KEY to fitting Rails (for PVE primarily), is fitting at least 1 scripted Tracking Computer.
By swapping the scripts, you can use large rails succefully from 15km - 75+km.

Not trying to be rude, I appreciate your position.
The 10% buff is well-needed, I wouldn't mind some extra tracking either, but if you use TCs effectively you don't need-it.

Motriek

The Scope

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 0

#1037 - 2011-11-08 01:53:29 UTC

Gabriel Karade wrote:

I'm pretty sure it will be close, but I don't have a point fitted on my test fit. The dev blog is currently quoting -1 CPU per turret, and -12% (rounded) PG.

If you incorporate the sisi changes to destroyers that remove the 25% ROF penalty, you should come up with the same overheated void numbers as mine.

The Scope Gallente Federation 38
Rawls Canardly The Scope Gallente Federation Likes received: 38	#1038 - 2011-11-08 01:57:17 UTC someone should lock this turd of a thread.

Rip Minner

ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries

Likes received: 100

#1039 - 2011-11-08 05:45:05 UTC

Sydney Nelson wrote:

Dunmur wrote:

Sydney Nelson wrote:

Nimrod Nemesis wrote:

Stuff

LOL a rail brutix beating a ac cane now ive seen it all.

Wait is that a pig flying over there...

Slow down.
Engage your mind.
Think about what people post before making a conclusion.

Why is it so LOL?

Go ahead, answer the question...

A Rail-Brutix could never kite an AC Cane because the AC Cane is so much faster, and more agile, that it makes it impossible for the Brutix to maintain range.

There's the problem.
Ok, so how do you fix it?

Change rails?
That would probably work, but the rails themselves aren't the REAL problem.
The real problem is that the ship you're fitting them to isn't fast enough or agile enough to kite much of anything.

So what's the REAL solution?
Make rails viable by making the ships that fit them fast-enough or agile-enough to kite.

Does that make sense?

This is purely hypothetical of-course but...
If each medium hybrid turret gave a 4.25% boost to speed, then a Rail-Brutix would have enough speed to kite an AC Cane, and a Blaster-Brutix would have enough speed to get into-range before it's too late (sometimes).

An unusual fix? Yes.
Viable? Looks like it to me.
We're just brain-storming and discussing here, and I think this is worth discussing.

Just wondering if you also know that if your that fast and agile-enough to kite with rails you can also finaly catch and pin someone with blasters too right?

Is it a rock point a lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship point a lazer at it and profit. I dont see any problems here.

Rip Minner

ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries

Likes received: 100

#1040 - 2011-11-08 05:58:20 UTC

David Xavier wrote:

Sydney Nelson wrote:

I agree with what your saying now think of the new Tech 2 Javilin there not only removing the -25% tracking bounses but there replacing it with a +25% tracking bounses. Now if they do that rails just mite beable to pick up were blasters leave off. But I dont think a tracking boost for rails at this point is in order just right now till it gets in game and we can see how they do from a 20km to 100km. Ya I realy dont feel blasters even with null realy dont kick in till at least 20km but thats just how I feel about that.

As a totaly unrrelated side note under the same guidelines Beams would have to have there tracking nerfted into the ground with the range and dmg one gets on Tech 2 Pulses at least. But that is the only hole in your line of thinking that I see.

Is it a rock point a lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship point a lazer at it and profit. I dont see any problems here.

First pagePrevious page5051525354Next pageLast page