Read the title of the topic and the first post. If no one else can say anything clever, it’s better to keep quiet. My post is an offer from CCP, not to you, food for discussion. Anyway, no one has written a single smart post on the topic.
That made the thread worth it. Thank you
3 Likes
Unironically, a shield pally works very well in a Pulsar.
Where can I get me one of these 10 gun Abbadons?
2 Likes
I did! How else did I know you were talking about the capacitor of a Nightmare when fitting a MWD onto it?
2 Likes
I mean, those are incursion standbys, and the shield paladin can 2 slot (+DPS) tank things like l4s so there’s viable use cases.
- The Abaddon fits 8 turrets.
- If you use meta pulses, or a less cap hungry ammo than conflag, you get more cap life than the t2 guns with t2 ammo you quoted.
- The base amarr hulls are all reasonably easy to make cap stable enough for sane uses.
- Armor’s usual resistance modules are coatings and membranes for the reason of cap use and fitting and lack of a multispectrum hardener, necessitating either the less efficient but eventually better reactive or multiple resists.
- Pulse Lasers have the longest effective range of any of the close range weapon systems, and DPS second only to blasters, with instant ammo switching to allow you to maximize the DPS as you change the engagement geometry.
- Beam lasers are the best balance of range and damage of the long range turret types, and Tachs fit a kind of “superheavy longrange battleship turret” missing in artillery or rails based on the overall range and DPS of it.
- Shield paladins are a massive pain to make work well because of how cap hungry and CPU intense the fits are.
- A well skilled nightmare with an AB will achieve similar speed with substantially less cap.
- Laser cap use is largely balanced, and while the hull and platform combos could use a little examination together, they work.
As to the abbadon, name a type of PVE content you want to run and I can almost certainly make it tank and clear it without nearly the cap issues you are claiming to have, since you appear to focus on pve in this.
bumped this into Player Features & Ideas - EVE Online Forums
1 Like
I’m in the same boat with my Kronos (though arguably not quite to the same extent).
I’m flying Kronus myself right now. Yes, I do not have a completely standard fit, which was originally conceived by CCP for this ship, but I had to sacrifice something to achieve capastability and I did it for a specific task. But I did not have such problems that arise when fitting Ammar ships, namely in terms of capacitor and armament. Here, 90% of the people who unsubscribed in this topic are either “alternatively gifted” or trolls. I don’t know if the translator translated badly or something else, but there was not a single normal statement about the problem at all.
3 Likes
Some Amarr battleships do have capacitor bonuses (ie: Paladin, etc.) - but you need to move away from the T1 hulls. Are you set on the Abaddon or would something like a Nightmare solve some of your capacitor issues?
I’ll try to explain what I mean.
In particular, with regard to the Paladin. As strange as it may sound, the problem with the capacitor on paladin is not as acute as on other Ammar ships. And it will not be difficult to achieve a stable capacitor on it. Here, after all, the issue is solved by a smaller number of turrets and, of course, its profile bonuses. Again, do not forget about the siege module.
The situation is almost similar with the Nightmare, there are 4 laser turrets, which, because of the bonus, shoot like 8. And the ship itself tanks with shields, not armor, which also has a positive effect on the supply of the capacitor. That’s why I gave an example of a Nightmare when I wrote that you can install MWD on it. Yes, I know that AB is put on it, but for me they are all MWD, I call the whole class of these modules MWD, otherwise some “experts” got involved here.
Now I’ll try to sort out what I’m offering in general, and most importantly why. Why did I take Abbadon as an example? Because Abbadon is a good example of this problem, the situation on other Ammar ships is better, but generally the same. As you can see, the usual installation of laser turrets, without installing other modules, the difference between the base value of the capacitor and the value of the capacitor with installed laser turrets is more than 100%. And if you put Tachyons on, they just won’t fit in the size of the power grid! In the original version, without other modules, they DO NOT FIT into the ship. To confirm my words, I have attached screenshots. I do not know a similar situation on ships of other nations, so that only the weapon itself, without other modules, does not fit into the ship, because it does not have enough power grid. This is not normal! Do not forget that the game gives you the opportunity to use lenses with maximum damage, which, in turn, further increase the consumption of the capacitor!
Yes, you can, with the help of crutches, somehow level out the extremely overestimated consumption of the capacitor. But. At the same time, you lose a lot of other necessary modules, such as damage enhancement modules, the MWD or AB grid. Yes, of course you can put them on, but the energy of your capacitor will last for 1.5 minutes. Again, a screenshot of the fit, which is offered by Aisha Katalen. Yes, I even agree that you can use batteries, but this is the same crutch, because this very battery is not needed to survive when the energy of the capacitor is drained from you, but simply to close the huge hole in the capacitor simply because of the installed turrets. I’m not even talking about the fact that Ammar ships tank armor, and armor repair modules themselves are very voracious about the ship’s energy.
Now let’s look at it from the point of view of the GAME MECHANICS, and not the different options for ship repairs. What bonuses do we get for the extremely high energy consumption of the capacitor. Fast lens change and increased optimal? For the lack of ammunition costs, I am silent, because t2 and fractional lenses break and are also consumed. Well, to put it mildly, these are very mediocre bonuses, for the high energy consumption of the capacitor, which in no way compensate for it. And now let’s go through the features of laser turrets, compared to other guns.
- The lowest tracking score in the class;
- A sharp deterioration in the falloff index in the classroom. Where hybrid guns and artillery will deliver damage beyond the falloff indicator, laser guns are rigidly tied to the base value of falloff and the optimal;
- There are only 2 types of damage that cannot be changed. 4. Worse damage indicators compared to hybrid weapons, which also deals 2 types of damage, deals more damage, does not have as much energy of the capacitor and tracking is much better!
That’s why I propose to review the energy consumption of laser turrets. To revise it in the form of reducing the energy consumption of the laser turret capacitor either to the level of hybrid weapons, or increasing the base value of the energy recovery of the capacitor or its size. Because their huge consumption is in no way justified from the point of view of game mechanics, from the point of view of the fit of the ships. Such energy consumption figures are frankly stupid. A quick change of ammunition solely to adjust the range of damage and even an increase in capacitor energy consumption when using lenses with maximum damage indicators, as well as the lowest tracking indicators, fallof compared to other turrets, in no way compensate for the huge, unjustified capacitor energy consumption.
Then why are you the first one in like 10 years that I follow this forum pretty frequently who identify this big problem and yet still people who use these ships for ages in all kind of activities disagree with you? Are they just too stupid to realize what you have found out?
I mean, you use the ingame-fittingtool which is a strong sign you are in no way an experienced ship-fitting-nerd, because everyone who knows what he is doing is using PyFa (for good reasons). Second you keep talking about “capacitor problems” and “cap stability” which are both indicators for simply bad fits. And on top of that you don’t even want any help if offered.
Let me get this straight:
- The Paladin has absolutely zero cap issues. None. Not the slightest. It is the preferred Marauder for PvP and the undisputed king of PvE (very rare special cases like Anti-Drifter Golems or BrawlKronos for EventSites). It is even used in C5/C6 WHs where you face energy neutralizing of several hundred cap/s against you, and it works fine there.
- The Abaddon is a Fleet Battleship primarily designed for insane buffer, holding the field, breaking enemy lines and just survive until the rep (and cap if needed) from the Guardians is coming. It is no wonder you cannot fit it conveniently for active tanking PvE content. Well, it somehow works, I have done my first L4 missions in a Meta4 fitted Abaddon vs. BloodRaiders… but there are simply better Amarr ships for that.
- all Amarr ships that rely on Lasers fitting options to deal with the point that you basically use capacitor as ammo: Oversized Batteries or Capacitor Boosters (yes, that why you have free cargospace where other races have to carry ammo). These are no “crutches” but completely standard fitting modules to make sure you don’t end up helpless when being attacked with energy neutralizers.
I am really willing to help you out, because mastering Amarr ships is not that easy since cap management plays a very important role when flying them, but I somehow get the feeling you don’t really want help but rather convince us who mastered these ships for ages that you are somehow “right” and we “just don’t understand”. At which point I can only shrug and let it go.
5 Likes
Actually there are plenty of ships that can’t fit a full rack of artillery without fitting mods and even a few ships that can’t fit a full rack of railguns.
Only when talking pulse lasers, beam lasers have by far the best tracking of long range turrets.
Railguns also have quite poor falloff. Blasters have horrible optimal, pulse lasers easily out range blasters. A scorch pulse can safely sit outside of a null blaster optimal + (falloff x 2).
Artillery tracking is the worst of all turrets, also horrible DPS, only good alpha. Railgun DPS and alpha are both bad. Beam lasers have good DPS, resonable alpha, and best in class tracking. In fact, small and medium beam lasers out dps pulse lasers with all crystals except conflag.
Aside from locked damage types to EM/Thermal, I think energy turrets are generally fine. I don’t think they should receive any reduced cap costs or then they could become attractive for use on other nation’s ships potentially. Instead I wouldn’t be against Amarr ships with laser cap bonus getting that bonus changed to a role bonus so that they can get a more useful skill bonus instead.
That being said, overall, I don’t think any changes are absolutely necessary.
1 Like
From the point of view of Game Mechanics the lasers are balanced pretty well.
- Capacitor stability is not a God-given right.
- Capacitor stability does not mean it is a good fit.
- Capacitor instability does not mean it is a bad fit.
- Local active armor repairs are not a God-given right.
- Armor buffer tanks are some of the best buffers in the game, and receiving remote armor reps from logi is awesome.
- Not having to wait to reload ammo can be absolutely crucial in PvP. Ask anyone who has reloaded RLMLs.
- Lasers don’t have the tracking problems of artillery.
- Pulse lasers are very range flexible in ways that hybrids aren’t.
I could go on and on.
2 Likes
Imho the only change lasers need is either add “average” caliber turrets to existing medium and large pulses(like blasters which have Ion blasters filling this niche) or slight 5-10% dps buff to lower caliber turrets in same categories. Currently for me its hard to justify any but the heaviest turrets available for med and large ones.
1 Like
- I don’t see that in any of my posts on this forum thread, I would ask for someone’s help. You don’t need to help someone if you’re not being asked to help. If I need help, I will turn to anyone, but not to you.
- Did I write that there are problems with the Paladin? No, I didn’t write it! On the contrary, I said that there are no special problems with him. Read the message first, and then try to help someone. Especially if your help is not required.
- It is easy to explain that you have not seen such messages on the forum. Why, to offer something if trolls or alternatively gifted individuals come running, who are not that I can’t understand what is written, it’s difficult for them to read the message! I will not chew my suggestions 10 times. It’s pointless to do this if people can’t physically understand what’s written.
On the issue of tracking turrets, damage and fallof, open the simulation and look at the numbers. I won’t even comment on it. And I recommend once again to read the title of the topic and what exactly I propose and what problem I ask you to pay attention to.
Just a hand on your face! Once again, we read the title of the topic, my first message and try to turn on the brain for at least 5 minutes and understand what is written there! Did I write somewhere that you need to change the range, tracking, or something like that with a laser? No, I wrote that they need to reduce their energy consumption! Where is the change of other parameters!?? Did you guys fall off the moon? Can you give specific and well-founded arguments that it is not necessary to reduce the energy consumption of laser turrets or not?
I did. It’s exactly as you said: “game mechanics” and “game balance” Which is everything else that isn’t energy consumption. That’s how balance works: You trade in your “low energy consumption” and get “everything else that isn’t energy consumption” in turn. Range, tracking, damage. Hence my list.
It’s impossible to ONLY talk about energy consumption like you want to. THATS why it’s a good reason, you just refuse to listen.
2 Likes