These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Polarized weaponry (affectionately known as glass cannons)

First post First post First post
Author
Cahir Ceallach
Interstellar Expeditionary Unit
Polish Enterprises Inc.
#481 - 2014-11-07 15:30:26 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Looks like this thread is DOA.



Yeah,

But we need Polarized RHML and RLML.
Daniel Jackson
Universal Exos
#482 - 2014-11-08 02:05:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniel Jackson
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
Thanks to Sugar Kyle for transcribing the first announcement Q&A at EVE Vegas:
http://www.lowseclifestyle.com/2014/10/eve-vegas-2014-ship-and-module-round.html
Q: So sniping?
A: That is why we are starting with close range weapons first



well i got my manticore to do 912 dps at 74km using DG Ammo and t2 fit | 1027 dps 61km usign rage torps t2 fit

not counting overheating
overheating is like 1,200 something with rage


This is with using 6% implants and max skills, heres the fit:
( btw the no messageid: 297114 are the glass cannon torp launchers )

[Manticore, Manticore - Polar test 2]

Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II

1MN Microwarpdrive II
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron
Cap Recharger II

[no messageid: 297114]
[no messageid: 297114]
[no messageid: 297114]
[Empty High slot]
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II

Small Bay Loading Accelerator II
Small Hydraulic Bay Thrusters I
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#483 - 2014-11-08 20:40:12 UTC
I'm just curious when these weapons are going to start materializing in-game. Weren't the sites supposed to start appearing in Phoebe shortly after launch?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Circumstantial Evidence
#484 - 2014-11-09 13:46:33 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
I'm just curious when these weapons are going to start materializing in-game. Weren't the sites supposed to start appearing in Phoebe shortly after launch?
First they need to finish polishing the new exploration site where the BPC's will drop. See this thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=383417
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#485 - 2014-11-09 15:36:12 UTC
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
First they need to finish polishing the new exploration site where the BPC's will drop. See this thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=383417

So basically Rhea.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Jayden Thomas
The Filth Columnists
#486 - 2014-11-11 16:57:06 UTC
These sound like weapons you'd use on something that doesn't rely on tank to survive, such as ecm boats, snipers, or something fast and agile like interceptors relying on a sig tank. Perhaps even on throwaway gatecamping ships waiting to be pounced on by blops.

I see ecm boats using these to their maximum potential. Ecm cruisers can perhaps ditch that 1600mm plate in favor of a full rack of Polarized weapons, hoping that "ecm-tank" will keep them alive long enough to kill the target.
Challus Mercer
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#487 - 2014-11-11 23:03:12 UTC
Another usless set of modules. I don't belive that there will be an interesting use of such weapons.
Andrew Indy
Cleaning Crew
#488 - 2014-11-11 23:55:41 UTC
Challus Mercer wrote:
Another usless set of modules. I don't belive that there will be an interesting use of such weapons.


Not really useless if (big if) the pricing is not much more than T2.

Gankers will have a field day since tank means nothing to them anyway.
Challus Mercer
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#489 - 2014-11-12 18:55:09 UTC
Andrew Indy wrote:
Challus Mercer wrote:
Another usless set of modules. I don't belive that there will be an interesting use of such weapons.


Not really useless if (big if) the pricing is not much more than T2.

Gankers will have a field day since tank means nothing to them anyway.

Sure such ppl could use them, but is there a difference if they have more dps or not, from the gameplay perspective. Their victim would die anyway because of jamm, tackle and blob.
I just dont understand why add modules which cannot be used in cases where your enemy can shoot back.
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
#490 - 2014-11-12 21:08:55 UTC
Challus Mercer wrote:
Andrew Indy wrote:
Challus Mercer wrote:
Another usless set of modules. I don't belive that there will be an interesting use of such weapons.


Not really useless if (big if) the pricing is not much more than T2.

Gankers will have a field day since tank means nothing to them anyway.

Sure such ppl could use them, but is there a difference if they have more dps or not, from the gameplay perspective. Their victim would die anyway because of jamm, tackle and blob.
I just dont understand why add modules which cannot be used in cases where your enemy can shoot back.


if the price isnt to much they will be used on my FW lv4 bomber.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#491 - 2014-11-13 03:43:45 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:
if the price isnt to much they will be used on my FW lv4 bomber.

Time will tell, but not based on current market prices.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
#492 - 2014-11-13 06:45:44 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
if the price isnt to much they will be used on my FW lv4 bomber.

Time will tell, but not based on current market prices.


are large weapons even out yet?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#493 - 2014-11-13 13:38:14 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:
are large weapons even out yet?

Yes, all of them have appeared on the market. I expect you'll start to see prices drop on a daily basis.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
#494 - 2014-11-13 15:12:18 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
are large weapons even out yet?

Yes, all of them have appeared on the market. I expect you'll start to see prices drop on a daily basis.


nice, I haven't been on to look for a while. And they would need to fall in price to at max 2-3 times t2 price for me to use them.
Challus Mercer
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#495 - 2014-11-14 12:33:07 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
are large weapons even out yet?

Yes, all of them have appeared on the market. I expect you'll start to see prices drop on a daily basis.


nice, I haven't been on to look for a while. And they would need to fall in price to at max 2-3 times t2 price for me to use them.

GL with that. Current prices are 500kk for one 200mm ac Big smile
Thegasp Cupcakes
CareBears Gone Dark
#496 - 2014-11-14 22:44:44 UTC
Ravcharas wrote:
Doesn't want argument about numbers. Instead gets argument about word connotations.


Thats basically the backbone of eve :D
http://images.sodahead.com/polls/003961401/5849732104_Sales_Argument_xlarge.gif
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#497 - 2014-11-15 02:12:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Even though I know they've been released, I really think Polarized weapons need to go back to the drawing board.

1. For starters, while the "Polarized" name is an improvement, there are other 'Polarized' modules and as they're "Sleeper" weapons I don't know why they just don't use that instead.
2. While the removal of resistances sounds great in theory, in practice it's borderline useless outside of shooting structures - and even then I'm not sure how practical that is. I won't even comment on how PvP and PvE won't touch these weapons with a 10-foot pole.

So something else is definitely needed as a counter to the officer-grade capability of these weapons, I'm just not 100% sure what. But it isn't the complete and total loss of all resistances.

Addendum: Further to my original post, here's the suggestion I posted under "Features & Ideas".
.....

During the testing phase for Phoebe there wasn't much of an opportunity to provide feedback on the 'Polarized' weapons (the bulk of the discussion related to the previous two iterations of the name for these weapons). As it now stands, the complete and total negation of all resistances basically relegates these weapons to structure grinding - and I'm not entirely sure how realistic even that scenario is. As short-range weapons, this effectively rules out every form of PvE - and the lack of resistances also rules out most forms of PvP. In essence, this 'tactical niche' is non-existent.

For starters, while 'Polarized' is an improvement over the original term ('Blighted', if I recall correctly), these are effectively Sleeper weapons - so why not just call them that? Sleeper drones have zero shields/resistances and zero hull resistances, so instead of 'Sleeper' weapons rendering all resistances null and void - why not instead just have them eliminate shields, shield resistances, hull resistances and disable any shield or hull-related modules (such as Shield Booster, Damage Control or Bastion modules).

Yes, this basically relegates any effective use of 'Sleeper' weapons to armor tanks. But Sleeper-equipped ships also lose their shield buffer/passive shield recharge as well as the ability to augment resistances and prolong survivability through Damage Control. Comments welcome.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Ooiittee
Just Five Minutes Peace
#498 - 2014-11-30 21:55:09 UTC
So I am going to be "that guy"

This weapon doesn't make any sense, a mounted unit on a ships hard point could possible prevent shield function (power drain, engineering limitation so the shields just don't turn on) but to disrupt the physical properties of the hull material, turning titanium into mercury?

Also, these are all short range, sure long range are coming but from a tactical positioning these weapons long range variants would make more sense. Using range as defence.

Reduced resists, sure, but zero. Just make the ship a flying bomb that you can detonate for a 10km blast radius and be done with it.
S3ND3TH
Czerka.
What Could Possibly Go Wr0ng
#499 - 2014-12-02 03:10:24 UTC
so...... no large rails?