Looks like the nanonerf is coming

[Amarr HM]

...

Again it's not about blasters people keep focusing on that it's about the behaviour of large turrets at close range and the need now for three webs and yes I use a blaster mega to good effect versus other battleships solo sometimes.

[Slayerik]

One serious question - what are theoretical advantages of blaster/AC ships against gankgeddons and torp-ravens?

You can be Gallente or Matar and fly them? :P Not everyone has a 60 mil SP main hehe

The range on a standard T2 Neutron Mega that I run is solid. The tracking is good. The 5 T2 Gardes I run are nasty.

Optimal 4.5k , 13 falloff - 1250 DPS ....Good enough for rape. Plus the Gardes (or Curators) extend your effective range.

[Goumindong]

Uhm, fascinating. Matar and    blaster-fans in one thread.





Wasn't falloff range 50% miss rate?

Does anyone actually fit blaster/AC battleships outside of sisi?

One serious question - what are theoretical advantages of blaster/AC ships against gankgeddons and torp-ravens?

Yes, Optimal + Falloff your hit rate is 50%. You'll hit about 50% DPS at about 60% hit rate.

Using blaster/AC ships for gang work isn't efficient, they are more for solo/very small gang stuff where you want to take out ships your size or larger and are doing everything yourself, more or less. Drones help in killing smaller stuff and as just plain DPS support. ECM drones are always a strong option in this type of play.

In short, the smaller your gang is the better they are. If you fly with lots of ships when you fly then they will be useless.

Funny fact - I actually considered fitting AC Hurricane (as a damage support) a while ago, in between contemplating 5DD proof BS and using bombs to kill Titans, but then I realized it would have like 1.9km optimal, which kind of made the whole exercise pointless.

Auto-canes are very good light combat support in small gangs. They can serve as both primary DPS in a nano-gank fit[i think they can still do this, haven't checked, but pre patch you were at about 2000m/s, and 800 DPS] and can run a generalist tank and still be maneuverable enough.

Barrage is your friend, with it, your falloff will reach about 15km which is plenty to kill cruisers and get outside the range of blasters.

If your gang is larger than 10 people you will probably be better off with an arty cane. If its bigger than 20 you're definitely better off with an Arty cane

It's moot cause I wasn't discussing falloff you're the one who brought it up, it doesn't fit into the equation. I'm talking about angular velocity at close range and not being able to web smaller ships so you can at least hit them at all with large turrets

And I am saying that it takes them time to get to that close range and that because of that, falloff is always important. Its never a moot point. If you're fighting something smaller than you, you will usually want to be in falloff. When its smaller than you[the BC for instance], you have a massive DPS and EHP advantage. They will universally have a lower range than you[E.G. a Neutron Mega does more damage than a gank harbinger at 20km] and the only way they are going to be a threat is getting very close.

Your assessment that there is a problem ignores every mitigating factor that is there simply to complain about these types of situations. Battleships are not here to wtf pwn everything and if a BC gets in on you to 500m and you don't have anything to deal with it[like maneuvering, or med slots, or ECM drones] you're going to have some problems and there is no problem with that.

Null doesn't even do 80% of the damage of say multifrequency, has 80% the range and half the tracking why would anyone settle for this crapola as a short gap is beyond me.

This is just a flat out lie. That being said, yes, lasers do more damage at longer range than blasters. If you want to fly ships that are designed to be primary gang DPS, don't train for the solo/small gang DPS ships.

Also, the idiom you are looking for is "stop gap", and yes, that is exactly what this seems like.

On the second point, as a BS blaster user you don't want to forfeit your DPS by orbiting this is how you deal with active tankers & missile users you need to strike them down fast and hard so they can't keep repping up, therefore wetting down your DPS negates your abilities more than theirs.

It depends entirely on the ship you are dealing with, getting transversal is advantageous against missile ships now[since its the only way you can maintain that speed if he stops as he should], but yes, sometimes you want to reduce transversal and sometimes you want to increase transversal.

Sometimes you don't have to get to 500m you are already there eg. dropins and waiting at undock points I said that already.

Yes, and sometimes you land at 800km and sometimes you land at 15km. This is just the luck of the draw. You can wait at undocks just as easily as they can

[Predator Irl]

Wooooshhhhhh!

[Amarr HM]

And I am saying that it takes them time to get to that close range and that because of that, falloff is always important. Its never a moot point. If you're fighting something smaller than you, you will usually want to be in falloff. When its smaller than you[the BC for instance], you have a massive DPS and EHP advantage. They will universally have a lower range than you[E.G. a Neutron Mega does more damage than a gank harbinger at 20km] and the only way they are going to be a threat is getting very close.

Your assessment that there is a problem ignores every mitigating factor that is there simply to complain about these types of situations. Battleships are not here to wtf pwn everything and if a BC gets in on you to 500m and you don't have anything to deal with it[like maneuvering, or med slots, or ECM drones] you're going to have some problems and there is no problem with that.

Well if you don't have a problem with it fine good for you but don't throw the same futile arguments over and over to deter from the main point, no it's not hard for a BC to get up close to a BS it's piss easy especially now webs only work at 60%.

Null doesn't even do 80% of the damage of say multifrequency, has 80% the range and half the tracking why would anyone settle for this crapola as a short gap is beyond me.

This is just a flat out lie. That being said, yes, lasers do more damage at longer range than blasters. If you want to fly ships that are designed to be primary gang DPS, don't train for the solo/small gang DPS ships.

Also, the idiom you are looking for is "stop gap", and yes, that is exactly what this seems like.

Yes my idiom was wrong it was late, glad you felt the need to point that out. But the point stands and no I'm not lying (what a strange thing to say) a geddon fitted with Amarr Navy Multi does 855 w/guns and with same skills & similar fit a mega does 745 w/null now range is similar though optimal range is 20% less. Tracking is half that of Multifrequency so it's pretty gimped by comparison as a short range ammo choice, it's not lies it's de facts.

It depends entirely on the ship you are dealing with, getting transversal is advantageous against missile ships now[since its the only way you can maintain that speed if he stops as he should], but yes, sometimes you want to reduce transversal and sometimes you want to increase transversal.

You don't want to fight tranversal wars if you are using large blasters unless you don't give a crap about winning the fight. I would like to see the mega get a web power bonus, similar to marauders, instead of tracking bonus that would be sweet.

Sometimes you don't have to get to 500m you are already there eg. dropins and waiting at undock points I said that already.
Yes, and sometimes you land at 800km and sometimes you land at 15km. This is just the luck of the draw. You can wait at undocks just as easily as they can

There is no luck the undock point is the same every time you watch the ship and follow him you will be 500m from him everytime if your covops is landing 800km from a target you got some serious shit skills. And yes of course I can take advantage of this I think you are mistaking me for complaining as opposed to someone who just opened a discussion on something I deem to be flawed and will most likely partake in exploiting it myself. Look at the facts everything else is extraneous to this... large turret tracking at close ranges now needs multi webs to hit. I didn't bring this up as a whine so your arguments and nitpicking are a bit silly though I did enjoy reading the part about excel sheets, in conclusion try and least understand where the person you are arguing against is coming from.

[Phildo]

This is some of the finest Sir Bruceing I've ever seen.

[Goumindong]

Yes my idiom was wrong it was late, glad you felt the need to point that out. But the point stands and no I'm not lying (what a strange thing to say) a geddon fitted with Amarr Navy Multi does 855 w/guns and with same skills & similar fit a mega does 745 now range is similar though optimal range is 20% less for null. Tracking is half that of Multifrequency so it's pretty gimped by comparison as a short range ammo choice, it's not lies it's de facts.

You keep saying this and it keeps being wrong.

Let me spell it out for you.

T h e   t r a c k i n g   i s   n o t   w o r s e   f o r   t h e   b l a s t e r s.
[quote
You don't want to fight tranversal wars if you are using large blasters unless you don't give a crap about winning the fight. I would like to see the mega get a web power bonus, similar to marauders, instead of tracking bonus that would be sweet.[/quote]

Yes, you do. Its everything you want to do in a ship with a tracking bonus on the best tracking guns in the game. Good lord the ship might as well be called "transversalwarthron" because of the amount that it screams to use transversal. Now, they are some times when you do not want to use transversal, like when you're fighting smaller ships, when you're fighting smaller ships you use your falloff to allow you to reduce transversal.

Before QR fighting for transversal was pointless, but that was because webs were 90% and two webbed BS were stopped in their tracks.[2 webbed bs will have roughly 16 times more transversal against each other than they did pre patch]

There is no luck the undock point is the same every time you watch the ship and follow him you will be 500m

Then don't sit 500m off the undock. Or when you undock into him, coast and make him follow, this perfectly sets up the kite that you want against a smaller ship.

What is "Sir Bruceing"?

[Amarr HM]

T h e   t r a c k i n g   i s   n o t   w o r s e   f o r   t h e   b l a s t e r s.

Jesus christ dude you never listen, it's not the turret that has the tracking problem it's the ammo Null has a 25% tracking penalty learn how to play and come back with an argument.

[Goumindong]

T h e   t r a c k i n g   i s   n o t   w o r s e   f o r   t h e   b l a s t e r s.

Jesus christ dude you never listen, it's not the turret that has the tracking problem it's the ammo Null has a 25% tracking penalty learn how to play and come back with an argument.

Yes, and blasters have >25% advantage in tracking over lasers. As well, at those ranges, tracking is not such a big deal, it isn't bad until you get in close.

E.G. Tracking at 5km is 3 times harder than tracking at 15km. Such if you're at 15-20km, the 25% tracking penalty on null is more or less irrelevant. It doesn't start hurting till you come in closer [where you should be using anti-matter].

E.G. Neutron blasters without a tracking bonus[I.E. not a megathron] have a .0405 rad track with null. Megapulses without a tracking bonus[I.E. anything] have a .042 rad track with multifrequency. Now, call me foolish if you will, but .042/.0405 =/= 2 But that is just me, in fact, its only 3.7%, which is when dealing with tracking, almost nothing. A megathron with neutrons and null will track at .0556 rads. A full 32.5% better than megapulses.

If you're downsizing guns to ions or electrons the gap gets even bigger. Even if you downsize to dual heavy pulses, since they get a relatively low tracking boost compared to megapulses.

Look, the issue is simply that you're wrong. Null has a use, its stop gap to be used against ships at range. Its useful in that regard, the tracking penalty is not significant and you shouldn't have issues tracking ships at those ranges if you're flying smart. You should use null every time you get >15km and intend to keep the target it there[except for maybe against frigates].

[Amarr HM]

Well using Null nerfs your DPS < lasers and not to mention operating inside your falloff so this is a horrible solution to the blaster problem no matter which way you look at it. Only on the mega does null actually track better than faction ammo lasers and jaysus you got me back talking about blasters again stop that.

[Goumindong]

Well using Null nerfs your DPS < lasers and not to mention operating inside your falloff so this is a horrible solution to the blaster problem no matter which way you look at it. Only on the mega does null actually track better than faction ammo lasers and jaysus you got me back talking about blasters again stop that.

No, it is a perfect solution for what you are complaining about. Fighting in falloff is not "a horrible solution to the blaster problem" its the solution that should have been happening for 5 years. Just get a little bit more range when shooting small targets, exploit transversal against larger ships. Yes, you have to maneuver blaster ships now.