|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
maralt
Minmatar The seers of truth
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 17:40:00 -
[1]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Best troll trick ever: Accuse the other person of doing what you are doing yourself before him so he can't accuse you of it.
You really do lack any rational argument or bring any valid points to any of the threads you actually troll do you?.
I mean is "no you" the best you can do to some very correct points made about your trolling and obvious bias to every other race than your own?.
|
maralt
Minmatar The seers of truth
|
Posted - 2008.11.29 20:05:00 -
[2]
Edited by: maralt on 29/11/2008 20:14:53
Originally by: Goumindong
I am saying that the math doesn't lie.
You do not use math you make uneducated and unqualified comments, without any knowledge to whether its possible with the game the way it is after the speed, web and mwd nerfs..
Originally by: Goumindong
For what is the reason that increasing transversal against laser ships does not work?
For what is the reason that decreasing transversal against smaller ships does not work?
For what is the reason that approaching smaller ships is optimal piloting?
NONE of this is math it is like a skilless noob (tbh that is you) saying "use tactics" to beat summat he has no idea how to deal with but giving nothing else and going no further into HOW to do it and what tactics to use, and most especially as in your case IF THE HOW/TACTICS ACTUALLY WORK with the new nerfs.
Originally by: Goumindong And you know what, i hate to do this because Killboards really don't mean ****[due to a number of reasons]
The main reason being that you have very little real in game experience in your own races pvp (amaar) let alone anybody else's race.
|
maralt
Minmatar The seers of truth
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 09:48:00 -
[3]
Edited by: maralt on 30/11/2008 09:47:43
Originally by: Goumindong
What is stopping you from clicking "Orbit 3000 or "keep at range 11000" or double clicking in space? What is stopping you from doing these things?
Nothing stops ppl from clicking those buttons but then your a eft warrior and know nothing about real time pvp and the fact that with the mwd and web nerf among others actually achieving those orbits and ranges are either not possible or take so long that your CAP, shields, Armour and hull would be gone if you ever got into those positions or even close.
Also if i wanna try matching my BS alignment to a BC i have got no chance, as the BC is much faster and nimble and unless it is flown by a moron who sits still will be orbiting anyway.
You are all theory and eft figures and no practice.
|
maralt
Minmatar The seers of truth
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 19:51:00 -
[4]
Edited by: maralt on 30/11/2008 19:53:10
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: maralt
Nothing stops ppl from clicking those buttons but then your a eft warrior and know nothing about real time pvp and the fact that with the mwd and web nerf among others actually achieving those orbits and ranges and holding them are either not possible or take so long that your CAP, shields, Armour and hull would be gone if you ever got into those positions or even close.
Also if i wanna try matching my BS alignment to a BC i have got no chance, as the BC is much faster and nimble and unless it is flown by a moron who sits still will be orbiting anyway, and that applies as you work down the ship classes.
You are all theory and eft figures and no practice.
No, it really is. "Any transversal" is not hard to achieve. You do not need to turn your MWD on, you just need to put in a direction[MWD would be counter productive even]
You don't need to stop shooting in order to achieve "any transversal".
You don't need to turn your MWD on to negate transversal, though it helps.
You don't need to stop shooting to negate transversal.
All of the actions discussed here can be taken with no cost to the blaster pilot. It is not anyones fault but their own when they do not take them.
You have no idea what you are talking about if you think any of it is effective in a real combat situation in a blaster ship while facing a non afk or moronic pilot.
|
maralt
Minmatar The seers of truth
|
Posted - 2008.11.30 20:23:00 -
[5]
Edited by: maralt on 30/11/2008 20:24:50
Originally by: Goumindong It works at short ranges for lasers... Blasters have higher tracking, there is no reason it should not work.
Ok understand this:
Originally by: Goumindong The other day, I was on Sisi and wanted to see how my harbinger fared. Now, medium lasers have a hard time tracking afterburning cruisers, I had scorch and conflag ready, but scorch loaded. A zealot appeared. He burned towards me. So i burned away from him. Transversal went to zero and i ripped him apart with -50% tracking ammo on the worst tracking medium guns in the game without a tracking module or tracking bonus.
Now if you had been flying a brutix in that situation burning away from the zealot to reduce the transversal would have been pointless due to the fact that even with 0 transversal and the longest range ammo loaded you would have never have reached him, and had you tried to turn and approached to get into range he would have just stayed out of range still.
Even if your situations did work they rely on the posing ships having the same range that you have or less and considering blasters have the worst range in the game you never have the options.....
|
maralt
Minmatar The seers of truth
|
Posted - 2008.12.05 11:10:00 -
[6]
Edited by: maralt on 05/12/2008 11:14:15
As with the other thread i think that the ranges of all BS platforms need adjusting to be more effective in their supposed "roles". And this can only be done by defining what we consider to be short, medium and long range for our "close" range weapon setups.
As i said max dmg for each race at certain ranges with a healthy fall off for going way outside those ranges.
Gallente 5-20 as nobody hits at 0 or even close, but still close range superiority, with a heavy fall off out to 35km and being unable to reach at all with blasters past 35km to the 50km mark.
Minimatar 20-35 superiority between the relative close and mid ranges and high reduction in dmg for mini at 5-20 using tracking penalties and 35-50 using ammo penalties.
Amaar 35-50 superiority a adjustment to tracking so it gets a reduction in dmg relative to the others at 20-35km and a virtually total reduction at 0-20.
Obviously amaar would still be at a bit of a advantage due to the fact that with webs lowering transversal speeds of targets and other items they would still be able to hit at the closer ranges while blasters relying on ammo for their range would not hit at the longer ranges at all.
Mini would be a interesting race due to its ability to do steady but lowish dmg at both extreme ranges and high in the center.
And blasters would go back to being king of close range and as they always have been useless at the longer ranges.
I personally think this is a very promising and balanced idea as it give each race their role back and fixes not only the big blaster issue but also the major imbalance and massively overpowered abilities of lasers.
|
maralt
Minmatar The seers of truth
|
Posted - 2008.12.05 13:37:00 -
[7]
Originally by: The Djego
Your design would only lead to worse small Scale\Solo gameplay, and this is what allready is gimped in QR with more handycaps for a single ship or a small group of more general fitted ships, leading to bigger Gangs. We already got all the tools in game for bigger gangs, small gang and solo players need hers back again.
I do not see how having each race of ship able to be more effective at its specific ranges would reduce solo or small gang pvp as the guys flying solo or in those gangs would be looking to engage or be fitted to get the most out of their optimum ranges allowing and encouraging them fly solo as they would be be more effective solo or in small groups.
Bigger gangs and blobs will always exist and ppl will always want to use them to win more than enjoy the actual combat, but the introduction of definitive and effective ranges per race would encourage small gang and solo combat more than reduce it i think.
|
maralt
Minmatar The seers of truth
|
Posted - 2008.12.15 20:20:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: maralt
Originally by: The Djego
Your design would only lead to worse small Scale\Solo gameplay, and this is what allready is gimped in QR with more handycaps for a single ship or a small group of more general fitted ships, leading to bigger Gangs. We already got all the tools in game for bigger gangs, small gang and solo players need hers back again.
I do not see how having each race of ship able to be more effective at its specific ranges would reduce solo or small gang pvp as the guys flying solo or in those gangs would be looking to engage or be fitted to get the most out of their optimum ranges allowing and encouraging them fly solo as they would be be more effective solo or in small groups.
Bigger gangs and blobs will always exist and ppl will always want to use them to win more than enjoy the actual combat, but the introduction of definitive and effective ranges per race would encourage small gang and solo combat more than reduce it i think.
So you will allows the 40km operating geddon to have a 40km point? Otherwise your statement doesn't add up.
BS need support to be effective so while fitting a point on them is possible its hardly necessary or required, that is why smaller blasters and pulse ratios are ok because smaller classes of ships are fast enough to tackle and have a good array of available targets but BS are the largest slowest and least nimble class of conventional ships in eve so support is always needed for them to be effective.
|
|
|
|