your comment is so low effort that i can’t even understand the exact manner you misunderstood what i said, to quote myself “i can’t even”
it’s nbd really, there’s a pile of arguments and evidence in this thread to go through before you get to my own response to some random comment
edit: edited because i don’t want isd to tell me to keep it civil or whatever over some casual remark on the cognitive capabilities of the person i am responding to
I’m almost exclusively using auto cannons for a couple years, small (Svipul), medium (Loki), large (Machariel) and I’m happy what I get out of this capless, damage variable close to mid range platform. I do see them all in a good spot IMO.
The problem I have is that there is no reason to use ACs if I can get better results with rockets, hams and torps resepctively.
Ok, torps are just bad - not much capability in killing “small” targets so at least here ACs are better.
Funny when I look at your killboard, you use ships with autocannons surprisingly little. If you like them so much then why are you using ships with medium and large blasters more than ships with autocannons of the same size?
The problem with autocannons is you are more or less forced to fight at falloff, which means the guns do less than 50% of their posted DPS. And at that range there are several better choices that are more consistent and effective. Like Blasters, Pulse lasers and even Beams.
The issues for me is the fact that autocannons are supposed to be the most versatile weapon system in the game yet, they have the slowest reload and are often the lowest DPS option when placed on ships without buffs towards them. Even with ships with buffs towards projectiles I can fit a hybrid fit on the same ship and do just as much DPS on paper… and have half the reload time.
Ahh, you mean the kill whoring on suspects in the Perimeter wars? This was just because I had a cheap Mega fitted at hand.
The ACs give more flexibility than blasters, they work in PvE and PvP. Also my Loki has better fitting with ACs compared to the HAM version.
EDIT: before you find my Hecate experiments. 
I would be happy to use the Svipul like I used it before the last nerf, but the Hecate is now the only platform which can roam freely in lowsec without getting stuck in every decent gatecamp, and can dish out some DPS (I was very close to get that Gila down :p).
I totally agree with you.
Your analysis and graph compares Heavy Missiles with Short range turrets, you should be comparing HAMs with short range turrets. Can you replace Heavy missile data with HAM data please?
Sorry, I have to ask but what is a heavy missile?
Kind of a gray area. As technically HAMs arent a mid range platform. Maybe on something like a cerb with double range bonuses, less so on something like a drake. If i have time ill see what i can throw together for HAMs (on mobile atm). Although id expect with the dps hit with javelin being mandatory to be close to mid-range itll be pretty comparable to faction HML (404 dps with HML and 414 dps with HAM javelin on a drake).
I also had a rigor rig and precision scripted TC on the drake in the graph, so its better than normal heavy missile application, which will be somewhat close to HAM application.
Edit: plugging in a triple BCU HAM drake with javelin gives you an applied 203 dps out to 38km. So, worse than the HML fit listed. Add in a missile comp (precision) and its 273 dps.
Stitch, just to move things along, the damage of javelin HAM missiles = t1 HAM missiles just with more range.
Best way to compare is use same missile Rage HM vs Rage HAM.
You’ll find HAM will out damage HM, but HM will out range HAM.
Sure you can use rigs and scripts to increase ranges for HAM to match that of the HM, but those rigs and modules using scripts for the HAM fit can be used for other things on an HM fit.
Key thing to remember max damage for missiles is that listed for that missile when fitted on your fit. It’ll never get better, unless you add more damage mod modules. Damage will decrease depending of target speeds and size.
But you need to decide if you want to engage at range or close.
As for DPS use the one that takes into account reload times. As this will your true DPS over time with missiles.
Alpha strike is only the combined damage of your first fire of missiles, not drones and follow-up missile launchers.
Note: missiles will hit target before drones can reach optimal firing range.
Give autocanons More T2 ammo options, in line with but not perfectly mirroring faction ammo. Something like a high damage low range thermal centric and a low range high damage em centric ammo types.
There is some dps overlap between short range missiles and long range missiles of the same class depending on the type of ammo used. e.g. Navy Torps do more dps than Fury Cruises, but Javelin Torps do less dps than Fury Cruises and Navy Cruises (I think). That does scale across all missile sizes I believe, but someone would have to confirm. So Javelin HAMs will also do less dps than Fury & Navy Heavies, but Navy & Rage HAMs will completely own all Heavies. I would expect to see the same rule with Rockets v Light Missiles too.
DPS (In order of damage)
Rage HAMs
Navy HAMs
Fury Heavies
Navy Heavies
Javelin HAMs
Precision Heavies
I suppose my original response was more about saying that we should be comparing similar sized and similar ranged versions of weapons i.e. the graph looks like it is comparing short range turrets (Pulse/Blasters/Autos) and so we should be using the short range medium sized missile to compare with them, which is HAMs.
This is interesting - it would be good if T2 Autocannon ammo had an EM/Thermal damage ammo type to complement the Exp/Kin ammo it already has, or spread the existing ammo to cover all damage types i.e. omni damage ammo.
So I’ve given some thought to this topic. Having played minmatar since 2005,i can say I’ve always known autos were a little lacking.
Everyone has some valid points and some nice ideas, but I would like to put forth my own.
It would sadly be the hardest to implement however, but could lead to the best of both worlds outcome. Now, I haven’t worked out the math for all the variants, but what I’m proposing is a new module. (insert collective groan here)
This would be a direct replacement of the 200mm auto gun l. I say replacement, but the auto would still be in the game as far as I can see. But, here is what I have:
Long Barreled Autocannon (LBA)
Size: 200mm
RoF: 5500
Optimal Range: 5500m
Damage mod: 2.923
Charge: small
Falloff: 4500
Accuracy: 435
Charge group: 115
Fitting-
Powergrid: 12
CPU: 18
I feel like this could be a good starting point for some discussion on the topic at least. So… Thoughts…?
If you actually look at the Autocannon model it is a multibarrel setup. No need for a LONG barrel version… as this is EVE physics so a long barrel makes no difference.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
