Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hakaimono
Seekers of a Silent Paradise
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 09:39:00 -
[1] - Quote
I only open this for discussion. My personal belief is that it should stay the same because you know....physics and stuff.
Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
3715
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 09:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
You mean apart from Drones and Missiles, I presume? Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Whiteknight03
Trilon Industries and Exploration
60
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 09:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
You know, I have heard vague mention of this amazing concept called "Missiles". In an even more nebulous fashion, whisperings of "Drones" have also come to my attention.
Real Life physics really have no place in EVE. If you think Lasers or Hybrids are unbalanced, come up with a good idea. Giving Hybrids an explosive/therm T2 ammo might be interesting. Lasers could get a Heat Damage crystal (Which would probably be somewhat ridiculous, but hey, crippling ships instead of killing them could lead into some new style of pvp which actually makes a profit). |
Tor Gungnir
Agenda Industries
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 09:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
Hakaimono wrote:I only open this for discussion. My personal belief is that it should stay the same because you know....physics and stuff.
Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage?
How does a projectile round deal EM damage? Or thermal?
Because it is sci-fi.
In my opinion, lore does not stand in the way for kinetic/explosive laz0rs. |
Hakaimono
Seekers of a Silent Paradise
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 09:57:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tor Gungnir wrote:Hakaimono wrote:I only open this for discussion. My personal belief is that it should stay the same because you know....physics and stuff.
Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage? How does a projectile round deal EM damage? Or thermal? Because it is sci-fi. I see no reason why they can't invent a lore explanation how lasers do explosive and kinetic damage.
Just about anything can be loaded into a projectile. Thermal projectiles actually exist in real life.
Also, I should have mentioned before to disregard missiles and drones btw. Gunnery relevant munitions solely. |
Copine Callmeknau
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
131
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 10:01:00 -
[6] - Quote
Tor Gungnir wrote:Hakaimono wrote:I only open this for discussion. My personal belief is that it should stay the same because you know....physics and stuff.
Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage? How does a projectile round deal EM damage? Or thermal? You could read the item description of those ammo's? Not even very sci-fi There should be a rather awesome pic here |
Teinyhr
A Club for Reputable Gentlemen
18
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 10:44:00 -
[7] - Quote
Hakaimono wrote: Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage?
Particle lasers would do both. And in fact quite a lot of the explosivey kind considering it's miniscule particles hitting something at near-light-speed. |
Tor Gungnir
Agenda Industries
12
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 10:45:00 -
[8] - Quote
Copine Callmeknau wrote:Tor Gungnir wrote:Hakaimono wrote:I only open this for discussion. My personal belief is that it should stay the same because you know....physics and stuff.
Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage? How does a projectile round deal EM damage? Or thermal? You could read the item description of those ammo's? Not even very sci-fi
Minmatar is the Conan of EVE Online.
Conan's setting is "low fantasy" and Minmatar's tech "low sci-fi".
If you get my drift. And when you can find me an EM round in reality, then you can make the argument that they are not "very sci-fi". |
Hakaimono
Seekers of a Silent Paradise
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 10:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tor Gungnir wrote:Copine Callmeknau wrote:Tor Gungnir wrote:Hakaimono wrote:I only open this for discussion. My personal belief is that it should stay the same because you know....physics and stuff.
Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage? How does a projectile round deal EM damage? Or thermal? You could read the item description of those ammo's? Not even very sci-fi Minmatar is the Conan of EVE Online. Conan's setting is "low fantasy" and Minmatar's tech "low sci-fi". If you get my drift. And when you can find me an EM round in reality, then you can make the argument that they are not "very sci-fi".
And EM projectile would be reality if it was at all cost-effective. Although I do agree with Minmatar being low-sci-fi compared to the rest.
|
Hakaimono
Seekers of a Silent Paradise
1
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 10:57:00 -
[10] - Quote
Teinyhr wrote:Hakaimono wrote: Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage?
Particle lasers would do both. And in fact quite a lot of the explosivey kind considering it's miniscule particles hitting something at near-light-speed.
Care to elaborate or link an article? I'm really curious about how that would work. |
|
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
22
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 11:00:00 -
[11] - Quote
Hakaimono wrote:I only open this for discussion. My personal belief is that it should stay the same because you know....physics and stuff.
Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage?
Projectiles already have great damage, range, tracking, and use no capacitor. They don't need a variety of damage types as well, although there's not much I can do about it. |
Darthewok
Perkone Caldari State
65
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 11:23:00 -
[12] - Quote
The way to do it is to reduce the proportion of damage that can be varied by ammo types for Minmatar. For example EMP ammo is 10.35 EM 2.3 Kinetic 1.15 Explosive That is 75% EM damage
Change it to something like 8 EM 5.8 Explosive Something like 58% EM damage
So let Projectiles continue to be able to switch a lower portion damage types, but not to such a large degree. For example 60% not 75% and tie the damage more to explosive. CAVEAT RICHARDUS VOLVERE - YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0 |
Verity Sovereign
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
185
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 12:26:00 -
[13] - Quote
When a laser vaporizes a tiny point, an explosive shockwave is generated at the surface of the enemy hull. I don't see how a laser would do kinetic damage, for that you'd need a particle beam, which lore wise, is sort of what blasters are.
Therre is no reason hybrids can't fire the same shells as projectiles. In fact AM rounds should do mainly EM and explosive.
Antimatter would make big explosions, and give off lots of gamma rays (which are EM radiation) |
Tauranon
Weeesearch
59
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 12:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
Tor Gungnir wrote:Hakaimono wrote:I only open this for discussion. My personal belief is that it should stay the same because you know....physics and stuff.
Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage? How does a projectile round deal EM damage? Or thermal?
nuclear artillery EM and thermal damage from a 280mm projectile.
Kinetic and explosive is easy enough to understand, a typical capped shell with a burster fits that bill.
|
Tauranon
Weeesearch
59
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 12:49:00 -
[15] - Quote
Darthewok wrote:The way to do it is to reduce the proportion of damage that can be varied by ammo types for Minmatar. For example EMP ammo is 10.35 EM 2.3 Kinetic 1.15 Explosive That is 75% EM damage
Change it to something like 8 EM 5.8 Explosive Something like 58% EM damage
So let Projectiles continue to be able to switch a lower portion damage types, but not to such a large degree. For example 60% not 75% and tie the damage more to explosive.
Nuclear shells don't actually do explosive damage in space. They are just a circular blob of energy with the casing and non fissioned materials being ejected in all directions.
I presume the game implementation is intended to represent a proximity fused shell that goes off at or about the "shield" and doesn't risk direct contact with armor plate which might shatter the mechanism.
|
Tor Gungnir
Agenda Industries
15
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 12:50:00 -
[16] - Quote
Interesting. But I'm fairly sure it isn't EM damage in the way EVE utilizes it? |
Salo Aldeland
Luma Operations
30
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 13:01:00 -
[17] - Quote
I think I read somewhere that an EM shell uses a minor nuclear event to 'pump' a photonic blast. Basically a flash-bang grenade powered by a suitcase nuke. The bulk of the energy is converted directly to EM radiation. Same with missiles. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
128
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 13:30:00 -
[18] - Quote
My only concern with projectiles is all projectile ammunition should have at least 25-50% explosive damage... I do not mind projectile ammunition being able to use all other damage types too.
What I would ALSO like to see was tracking enhancer fall-off bonus being reduced to 15% like their optimal bonus. The medium ACs are slaughtering frigates due to having the best tracking around with a huge fall-off projecting the damage way out where frigates are supposed to kite...
Pinky |
Meditril
T.R.I.A.D Defiant Legacy
63
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 13:38:00 -
[19] - Quote
The simple answer is: Yes. Why? Because projectiles have the worst unbonused DPS of all turret weapons. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1199
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 13:46:00 -
[20] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:You mean apart from Drones and Missiles, I presume?
I'd put missiles for sure but never drones. Those being a very poor man choice because of all their drawbacks due to coding, lag, and a lot of funky stuff you already know.
This said, I don't see any valid reason why a third dmg type can't be added to lasers or hybrids, this doesn't have to be on top of existent ones but should be a possible choice.
Like add Explosive dmg to lasers and Em to hybrids. If we start thinking about for a while this is something absolutely possible but, bringing reality in a game it's not the good thing to go. Then the question remains, why projectiles can do it all when only missiles should be able to? |
|
Rel'k Bloodlor
Mecha Enterprises Fleet Villore Accords
181
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 14:00:00 -
[21] - Quote
In the spirit of the hybrid weapons type being a fusion of projectile and energy weapons it think some changes need to be made. For one the mix of therm and ken should very more between ammo types some doing more therm than ken in some. Also I think hybrid weapon T2 ammo should have a little of a 3ed type thrown in, EM for one or both of the blaster ammo(s) and Explosive for one or both of the rail T2 ammo(s) this would give more of a projectile feel to the weapons. As it is now the only projectile like thing about hybrids is there larger per unit ammo. The energy side of things using 1/2 the cap as a lasor, reloading 2X faster, and being restricted to just 2 types of damage is fine. The reasoning on the T2 ammo adding a little of a 3ed is that none of the others do that as of yet so this could then be given to hybrid weapons as kind there thing. I am in Factional Warfare. Have been from day one.-á-áI will never work for a mega corp in null-sec. Do not make FW like null-sec.-áMake FW worth our time. Reword us for what we already do.Give us some more activities to do. |
Ayeshah Volfield
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 14:17:00 -
[22] - Quote
Isn't explosive energy just a combination of thermal and kinetic energy though ?
Never understood why it exists as a separate kind of energy in this game. |
Tauranon
Weeesearch
59
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 14:33:00 -
[23] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Malcanis wrote:You mean apart from Drones and Missiles, I presume? I'd put missiles for sure but never drones. Those being a very poor man choice because of all their drawbacks due to coding, lag, and a lot of funky stuff you already know. This said, I don't see any valid reason why a third dmg type can't be added to lasers or hybrids, this doesn't have to be on top of existent ones but should be a possible choice. Like add Explosive dmg to lasers and Em to hybrids. If we start thinking about for a while this is something absolutely possible but, bringing reality in a game it's not the good thing to go. Then the question remains, why projectiles can do it all when only missiles should be able to?
Its intended to be done with drones, and no if I am flying a megathron in a situation where my damage type matters, lag is not an issue, nor is the travel time of berserkers. I can get a megathron to do roughly 500kin, 500 therm and 300 explosive dps, and thats good enough. For fleet engagements, I don't believe damage type is that important, most targets will be spectrum tanked.
|
Tor Gungnir
Agenda Industries
17
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 16:30:00 -
[24] - Quote
Ayeshah Volfield wrote:Isn't explosive energy just a combination of thermal and kinetic energy though ?
Never understood why it exists as a separate kind of energy in this game.
I like to imagine a Kinetic missile not actually exploding, but just pounding into the bulk of the enemy ship.
"KAPLOFF!"
Maybe we should mold a metallic fist at the front of those missiles! |
Micheal Dietrich
Standards and Practices
406
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 17:03:00 -
[25] - Quote
Hakaimono wrote:
Just about anything can be loaded into a projectile.
So why should hybrids be restricted, they are firing projectiles after all. |
bubble trout
Terra Corporation
7
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 17:55:00 -
[26] - Quote
Darthewok wrote:The way to do it is to reduce the proportion of damage that can be varied by ammo types for Minmatar. For example EMP ammo is 10.35 EM 2.3 Kinetic 1.15 Explosive That is 75% EM damage
This is a downside that people tend to forget, projectiles don't have "pure" damage types. I'm not shooting 300 DPS at your EM hole, I'm shooting 275 DPS at it, and 75 at your 1st and 2nd highest. Still best to shoot EMP, but not as OP as people tend to believe.
Quote:Change it to something like 8 EM 5.8 Explosive Something like 58% EM damage
So let Projectiles continue to be able to switch a lower portion damage types, but not to such a large degree. For example 60% not 75% and tie the damage more to explosive.
I don't know about THAT much, but small changes of the percentages is a good thing to be looked at by the devs for balancing purposes. If needed that is. EMP is also the odd man out for the close range ammos, having three damage types instead of 2 like fusion/plasma.
Beyond that, projectiles don't have a kinetic heavy high damage round. Do they really need it though? I guess for T2 minmatar ships that are shield tanked, or sheild/armor tankers that plug their threm/em and exp holes (respectively) it would be "nice" to have. Then again ACs having a larger optimal would be "nice" also :P.
For hybrids I think the layout of the ammo variants should be reconsidered. Is it really useful to have ammo that has -25% optimal and one with -37% optimal with a small cap usage and damage difference? Or would it be better game-play-wise to have 2 types of ammo with only the damage types switched by 20-30%? That would allow for going a bit heavy with threm shooting most shield tanks, and kinetic for armor.
I don't think that would be good for lasers though. Maybe for each tier of optimal range have one with less cap/damage, and one higher powered crystal and more cap useage? IDK, probably a bad idea.
Drones are all about more damage or faster flights(or ecm), and you can't (on non drone boats) choose which to use during a fight, short of battleship class.
Missiles are sort of weird, with some caldari ships receiving that kinetic damage bonus, even though they can choose to use a "pure" damage type against a resit hole a lot of the time it's just better to use kinetic. Pure dps bonuses would help, but it might remove their race's "flavor".
In the end though of the 5 weapon systems the 3 that have "selectable damage types"(projectiles, drones, and missiles) have the longest switch times(drones flight time back to ship and relaunch, missiles and projectiles 10 seconds reload). The 2 that don't really they have lower reload times (0 for lasers, 5 for hybrids).
/rambling of someone who probably doesn't know what he is talking about.
@op, real life physics and roleplaying should never come before gameplay. Ever. If the devs think that the game would be better off if lasers shot exp, or omni damage, or pink unicorns then that should be done. |
Copine Callmeknau
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
133
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 18:15:00 -
[27] - Quote
Tor Gungnir wrote:Copine Callmeknau wrote:Tor Gungnir wrote:Hakaimono wrote:I only open this for discussion. My personal belief is that it should stay the same because you know....physics and stuff.
Think about it in real life for a moment. How would a laser deal kinetic or explosive damage? How does a projectile round deal EM damage? Or thermal? You could read the item description of those ammo's? Not even very sci-fi Minmatar is the Conan of EVE Online. Conan's setting is "low fantasy" and Minmatar's tech "low sci-fi". If you get my drift. And when you can find me an EM round in reality, then you can make the argument that they are not "very sci-fi". Ya definitely low sci-fi, I'll agree there
As far as EM round, uhhh for complex examples I believe there are some artillery shells that are capable of having a tactical nuke as a warhead. But if you want a real simple example, all you'd need to do is make your projectile out of any radioisotope. It'll emit EM radiation until it decays.
I don't really think you want a situation where I pump so much radioisotopes into your ship that you continue to lose health after the fight is over though, do you? Best not let too much reality in the game There should be a rather awesome pic here |
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
25
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 20:58:00 -
[28] - Quote
Projectiles doing EM damage = photon torpedoes |
Airto TLA
Puppeteers of Doom Real Life Rejects
4
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 21:05:00 -
[29] - Quote
In any Eve discussion that mentions physics I think it is important to remember that CCP ignores physics at a whim and if they did not projectiles would be absolutley worthless outside small blaster range, think about it. The rather inpressive 16 inch (~400mm) navy guns of World War II fires a 1 metric ton shell at 825 m/s, pretty impressive in the real world. In space all MW BCs and some MW BS could fly along aside the shell. SO lets suppose the Minnies got really cool propellant from the Jovians and superior metalurgy and were able to quadruple that velocity, so 3300 m/s, this means at 13km you would have close to a 4 second delay to dodge that shell which would continue to move in a straight line. This is far from istaneous damage and make the complaints of missles having a hard time hiting fast moving ships almost minor in comparison
So if we want kinetic dealing lasers and CCP decides it is balanced we really do not have room to complain if we accepted the above nonsense.
(besides the recoil on the 800mm guns an their 8 metric ton shells, with the above listed muzzle velocity would be enormous the "weld and duct tape" Minnie ships would fall apart after repeated firings) |
Mfume Apocal
Origin. Black Legion.
433
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 21:16:00 -
[30] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:What I would ALSO like to see was tracking enhancer fall-off bonus being reduced to 15% like their optimal bonus. The medium ACs are slaughtering frigates due to having the best tracking around with a huge fall-off projecting the damage way out where frigates are supposed to kite...
Blasters have better tracking and on many Gallente hulls are backed by a tracking bonus on top of it. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |