|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 23:56:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Gamrikis on 20/10/2009 00:00:15 Why in the hell is anyone trying to promote 1200mm arties. Your chart tells me nothing about 1200mm. What does tell me that they are crap is my sp + testing on the test server. The 1200 will not do above crap damage or hit under 28 km if the target is not webbed. I have 12 mil sp in artillery alone so it is not my skills and a target (A tempest) moving towards you should be easy pray. HAHA guess again.
Oh ya I had three tracking computers for these 40 odd tests i put the 1200's through.
Charts are deceiving when the info used is not tested.
ps getting a solid hit at 35 is tough. Get on the test server and stop EFTing and charting.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 03:29:00 -
[2]
Ah i see what you were doing now. I may not agree that they are better than 800's but I will agree that CCP has made a bloody mess of Projo weapons as a whole.
Seriously 4 years to hear you guys are going to put forward a crap fix. While your at it fix 1200's, they just out right suck. Also how about that 3rd addition to Arties, give us 3 choices like every other gun system. The lack of caring on CCP's part makes me want to kick a dog and punch a small child.
I might have anger issues?
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 23:51:00 -
[3]
WOW really you compared EVE guns to six sided die??? Since you found the mean of a six sided die maybe you can show me the damage from 1000 shots of every gun type at 100m/s speed at the intended fall off distance. Oh and put it in a frequency chart, find me standard deviation so I can plunk in a number and figure out it Z score.
Thanks in advance for your stellar service to EVE,
Gam
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 00:35:00 -
[4]
Who said anything about a random hit? What I think is that this is as useless a argument as they get. The point is simple, The only way to get anything remotely close to a proper curve is to have the date CCP has on file, OR go to the test server and do a sample of 200 + hits with every gun on every ship type at every distance at different traversals. Only then will you have proper data to make a probability chart. Only then will you have even close to a believable unbiased info.
Stop making charts they show nothing but unrecorded data.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 01:19:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Gamrikis on 22/10/2009 01:19:40 Where was optimal on this Theory-craft gun? I am guessing 13?
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 18:53:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: Gamrikis Edited by: Gamrikis on 22/10/2009 01:40:17 If it not to much to ask, Can I get the equations used plus the accuracy falloff and optimal? Would like to play with this a bit.
Original Formula by Naughty Boy chance to hit = ((1.0/2.0) ** ((((Transv/(Range*Tracking))*(Sig_Res/Sig_Rad)) ** 2) +((max(0,Range-Optimal))/Falloff) ** 2))
Original hit quality formula by KzIg (http://www.scrapheap-challenge.com/viewtopic.php?p=114333#114333) Expected damage per shot = normal damage * [min(chance to hit, 1%)*3 + max(0,chance to hit - 1%)*(0.99+chance to hit)/2]
-Liang
Your the tops Liang, thanks for the the formulas and links to where they came from.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 00:33:00 -
[7]
Rabble Rabble Rabble.... Wait this is F****NG awsome.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.10.28 03:23:00 -
[8]
Why are you arguing with a person who is 99.9% sure he is right with out testing? I have nvr heard of this type of probability from untested data, are you able to see into the future and see tests? What do I get on my calculus midterm?
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.10.30 00:33:00 -
[9]
Can we please stop whining about something not a soul in here has tested. You people make me sick with "my god they will be over powered" and "pre nerf then back to the way they were cause that worked". No one in here can prove if it is good or not. WHY? because it was not tested making whining about it show what type of person you are, a none productive person. It is obvious that some people think they can tell 95% of eve how to play their game. To that person you know who you are.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.04 02:42:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Gamrikis on 04/11/2009 02:42:03
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Mashashige want a ticket out in a form of a "OMG PROJECTILES SUCK, THATS WHY I LOST" excuse when you get owned?
I think you should stop whining about getting owned because your guns suck, you know? Not everyone is that bad.
Says the man who whined like no other when a change was presented he did not like, even though he had no way to test it. You have posted enough crap and stalled things up enough. Let it hit the server and let the people who really want results test it. Till then go play with your hail.
|
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.05 05:11:00 -
[11]
It is as I feared, After spending 3 hours on the test server I believe this is yet another parallel move made by CCP. The devil is in the design and the design is that of CCP.
Anyone with some positive "this really made things better" info that I can try and be a little happy with?
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 23:54:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Gamrikis on 07/11/2009 23:55:37
Originally by: Haffrage
Remove rof bonus on all min BS, give all large projectiles +34% damage. Give better bonuses in place of rof bonus.
I just fixed min BS and gave min snipers even more alpha
Ya I can get behind this, I already have to un-group my weapons anyway, might as well make it worth my while to fire on multiple targets. This would give a minnie ship even with its sub par range a little more purpose to fly in a sniper fleet. The range is still an issue for RR but there are ways around this if you don't roll with the conventional sniper fleet.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 00:43:00 -
[13]
MY my Branko, You have done a complete 180. First you complain that the changes were to great with absolutely no input on what would be a good change. Do you know why you could not give a good counter offer? It is because you had no testing of the initial purposed change, we all never got that chance. The initial changes would have been a way better way to start this test and get a feel what would have been good. Now you are whining after you got your pre-nerfed change that you cried so hard for. Here is what you should do next time a change is purposed that looks half decent. Shut your hole! Yup it is just that simple. Let it hit the server and test it out then make an informative decision that we can all appreciate.
The new changes are not good we know this. There was a post to get rid of the rate of fire bonus for a damage bonus and I stand beside this. Imagine a fleet battle with 200+ people all slugging it out and this rouge bunch of tempest warping in and out ever 22 seconds taking hard hitting shots. It will add an element that we can all grow to love and fear.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 03:13:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Gamrikis on 09/11/2009 03:16:40
Originally by: Zarnak Wulf
To be fair the falloff per tier went from ridiculously OP to miniscule. I agree that the tiers should have a greater variance in falloff - not what was originally proposed. The TE I think should be tested.
I agree they looked overpowered according to charts but the total craziness displayed about it by said person was enough to degrade the features forum into a WoW forum. That to me is not a pretty sight or okay. They seemed overpowered yet we did not get to test just how overpowered they could be. We may have found a 40% falloff would be better or 35%. We may never know or get the right fix now, all we have is someones best guess with charts. Which I have to add are a clumsy interpretation of actual game play.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 13:59:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Selvacin I have been playtesting these changes in the actual test server, as most people will stat and it is true that minnys are gimped with shooing into falloff so often, but more potential falloff changes the damage calculations on a falloff ship because its % based off how deep of % of teh falloff your shoot to the % of dam lost due to falloff. So you may find that you do more damage in a vaga with emp now and be able to track just as good if not better and have the same range but you will find that you will still eb doing around the same damage as if you were still using barrage if not a negilable difference of an increese. But you shoudl notice a signigigant incresce in damage from barrage ammo at the same difference, i have noticed with barrage on a standerd 650mm ac setup for a tempest i am achiving more damage with barrage at the same range i normally shoot at with replacing a single gyro with a TE, as a extra bonus it helps my guns to track bc and smaller sized ships. Which i am normally fighting in Null and LS fights. BS slugfests only take place during pos warfare and gate/station camps, as BC and HAC type gangs are more popular at the moment so i like my enhanced tracking, it also gives a buff to a Mealstrom fit with teh additional range as the meal was already a decent mid range AC boat with 800's. The tiers are finnaly balanced and set up properly, and the ammos are set up to be potiential fairly effective.
You got all these people that play the game but do not actually test these changes and sit and argue the whole time. If your gonna argue with people in the forums at least have some experiance and proof to back it up. I
Oh my eye's.... I am not getting into this with you. You are testing the one ship that clearly has no issue and never did, Vaga really you tested this ship?
I have been on the test server for days now and I have found that projectiles still need love on BS size and some small ships (munnin for one). I did not test on platforms that were already well off. I tested the likes of the Mael, Tempest and yes I even put the guns on phoons to test that out.
Go back and read this thread and pin point the problem areas. Coming on here like you did some awesome testing with your vaga and thinking that applies to all tiers and ships is something I will not be acknowledging as real input.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.15 21:14:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 15/11/2009 01:36:52 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 15/11/2009 01:34:57
Originally by: BearCare Autos stay crap. Though they do a little bit more damage than lasers now, they only do it at point blank range, where they can't actually track anything.
You are simply doing something horribly wrong if you're having tracking problems. Really.
Originally by: BearCare
Basically identical to blasters, but with much more falloff, and choosable damage types.
So you mean, much better then blasters, and better then pulses up close? I can live with that.
Originally by: BearCare
If it weren't for the crappiness of minmatar BS, blasters would be obsoleted by this.
1) other ship classes except BS exist. 2) Typhoon exists. 3) Wait, Tempest sucks? Yeah, but you can't fix that by projectile boosts ever. It's just a failed ship which needs a specific ship change.
Not to mention how horrendously OP everything else would become if you boosted Tempest by boosting ACs and then carried over the same boost to everything which is not a Tempest.
Originally by: BearCare
Artillery DPS heavily nerfed thanks to balancing ammo around autocannons, though BS artillery got a nice alpha boost.[/*]
Artillery DPS got nicely boosted. If you do not see that you're blind. 10% flat out boost to highest tier arty, 9% boost when using any short range ammo on top, translating into a 10% DPS boost for Tremor users and 19.9% boost to people who use short range ammo (not to mention horrendous clipsizes fixed), boost to effective range due to falloff-enhancing TEs/TCs (and arties do get more falloff then any other gun). Sorry, what are you smoking?
Hey look who it is, it is that guy that throws out random crap numbers, is never on test server and changes his stances on this topic 3 times. First you complained it was to much of a boost, then you said it was not enough. Now you have changed your opinion again say the linear movement present by CCP is awesome and nothing has been changed for you to form a new opinion. Not only do you say it is awesome but you back it up with some random numbers and more insults for the community.
Really are you going to approach it like this again? In every post you make some general degrading comments like "I don't know what you are smoking", "Your the problem", "If you do not see that you're blind" etc. Take a hint, we see you, we know you post to argue, and we don't need that kind of input from anyone.
Notice how I don't do this to anyone but you? That is because no one else post to just fight with people like you do. Go ahead look up every thread you have ever made through eve search. You will see how you just come off as an angry person with more insults than an angry hobo. Cool your jets, the community is not agreeing with you yet again and you should just accept it.
The changes are not enough and it stands. The Nag is a complete waist of time again thanks to the reintroduced 5%,5% split weapons system that we all fought for months to have removed. The Mael, Tempest And the Phoon do not benefit nearly enough from the changes to stop a mass exodus of Minmatar training. It needs more fall off to make it more viable the 0,20,40 is the best place to start and I would not be surprised if it is were it will be left if tested. If you say the Phoon should never have guns on it, That is a matter of opinion and it is capable of that load out so it must be tested.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.24 23:55:00 -
[17]
Yup they win, It seems they wanted to phase out Minmatar. It worked on me, training Amarr.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 00:52:00 -
[18]
Find a bs you would like to bring up against a gallente or any amarr ship that is of the minnie kind. I don't even care if you do it solo or in a group it is going to melt or do nothing. Even a well fit raven is going to melt your A$$ and you know it. The changes are solid for everything below a bs except the munnin. Get out of your BC and t2 cruisers and fly a minnie bs and compare to any other race (if you can, which I am not sure you can because you seem pro these changes). The difference is large.
Calling anyone anything just shows you are not listening and are just trolling, trolling for emotions. Stop, think, post. No one is just crying over nothing, this is a long thread if not one of the longest and it is full of problems with the changes. Bs size ships and caps are the problem and that is where the rage starts and ends. Changing these size hulls with weapons or through the hulls will change the style of fight and change the outcome, it is not hard. As is there is not one minnie bs that makes anyone fear it alone or in a group. You will get targeted based on the fact you drop like a rock however.
Notice the absence of insults and closed mindedness?
P.S. phoon is good but not that good, it is kind of like a weak Domi.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.25 01:54:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Seriously Bored
Juxtaposition is the best.
Beyond that, thank you for explaining in full why you feel these changes fall short. What I've been getting sick of are the single line "These changes suck/do nothing/train Amarr/fire Nozh."
I'd argue that the Typhoon is an excellent BS, but you mentioned that, and the real buff for that ship isn't really coming from anything in this thread.
I'd also argue that the Maelstrom is still going to be good at Kessah-style combat and only gets better after Dominion, but very few people fly that way, so it isn't useful for them.
And of course the Tempest is still sub-par.
The source of the complaints then, really, is that these changes don't give Minmatar BSs any new roles to be good at. Specifically, RR and sniping. The TE/TC changes let the Maelstrom snipe at ranges that it couldn't dream of before, but it ends up finishing in last place now as opposed to not finishing at all.
I think the Tempest could be changed to fit the RR/sniper role easily with some grid and bonus changes, but sadly that isn't in the scope of this thread.
I guarantee you that I have been listening and listening carefully, and I've read every one of these 79 pages and posted on most of them. The changes aren't perfect, but they are a very large improvement over what is on TQ and it completely baffles me how anyone could deny that.
The changes are weak in the areas where it was needed. It is not that they are terrible, for the most part it has been the a wait of years for most of us. To wait as long as some have and still come in with sub par change that place us last in many areas is just not acceptable to most who have a problem.
The maelstrom fits no role. If you go active tank it melts so fast (I personally wanted to make this work without the use of officer mods, no luck yet), if you go passive it is of no use, if you snipe you have no buffer cause it is taken by mods not to mention a shorter range then all other races.
Tempest (see above fix thread) not even worth commenting on this thing.
Typhoon is the best we have and it is not the best in its category of support BS. It is good and I fly so many different ways but the Domi owns it.
On all of these ships fitting Projo will see you come in under the other races for damage. The mix of poor tracking (or forced use of a slot on mods), lower damage do to fall off, and poor layout is going to get you lower damage results.
I noticed you did not venture into the caps, I don't blame you that is a mess no one wants to explain. Not even the devs. P.S. I wish they would make the temp feel like a small mach.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 08:37:00 -
[20]
Good thing I own only the Typhoon BPO, since the other two bs lick donkey sack I will make a killing off the new typhoon changes.
|
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.28 19:12:00 -
[21]
Ya know it is hard to put forth ideas, there are just so many damn idea's on what should be done in here. If we could just get behind one concept I am sure myself and others could work on numbers. I wish CCP gave us the ability to survey with graphs.
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.29 00:40:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Meeko Atari Edited by: Meeko Atari on 29/11/2009 00:26:20
And one more thing...there wasn't a buff to projectile turrets
This, It was an ammo change and it was completely about auto cannons.
Tell me how this was a gun buff again?
|
Gamrikis
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 06:52:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Alfred vonBoring
Originally by: Yankunytjatjara
I fly only in a very niche situation that perfectly matches Minmatar's strengths and have never flown in the overwhelmingly more common situations outside of that niche where those strengths are extremely marginal. I don't realise that in every field outside of T1 frigs, destroyers and cruisers that the Minmatar lineup ranges from average to terrible while the Amarr put in a strong showing in nearly every category. But hey guys I'm really knowledgeable and Amarr are no good and Minmatar are great and you shouldn't train cap skills and the Bellicose and Stabber are excellent and I've derailed this thread now yay.
Yank you have derailed nothing, we pretty much unanimously agree the changes (not a boost) did nothing to significant. You just provide much needed entertainment and LOLZ with little hard evidence of any of your claims.
Amarr need a nurf, there I said it. I am going to wash my mouth out with soap for stabbing my own toon in the back.
|
|
|
|