Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 42 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
|
CCP Guard
C C P C C P Alliance
569
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Tallest brings yet more news of balancing. This time he tells us what he's doing to hybrid weapons and tech II ammo this winter!
Check it out right here and make sure you tell Tallest what your thoughts are about the changes. He's waiting for your feedback. CCP Guard | EVE Community Developer |
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
367
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:24:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Tallest best Tallest. CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog What does CSM 6 do? |
ChromeStriker
Sebiestor Tribe
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
O_o
Edit (as i re-read it a couple of times ):
I think this is going to be a 'good start' thread. The better fitting on hybrids is going to make a LOT of people very happy, iv thrown some numbers around very quickly and some fits i had only wished for have become possible The damage increases (wish the larges had it too) is just win and dearly needed .
But, and its a big one, as you have said this isnGÇÖt going to be enough to bring them up to par with projectile and laser ships, that will only happen with more of a look at the hybrid ships themselves.
Good start and very very very welcome <3 CCp - Nulla Curas |
Crasniya
Dragon's Legion of New Eden
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
Thank you for changes, which I hope, will make my Hyperion no longer the poor laughing stock of gunships everywhere. |
Jamaican Herbsman
I Love You Mary Jane
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:30:00 -
[5] - Quote
Holy ****!
Two step wrote:CCP Tallest best Tallest.
Indeed |
Shirley C
Kumovi The G0dfathers
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
The changes appear very well thought through with the new stats finally bringing Gallente back in line.
Can I assume that you will be reviewing the impact of the changes over a period of 3-6 months from change? |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
212
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:31:00 -
[7] - Quote
Would recommend giving each of the t2 ammo's different bonuses. The game is better when the feel and behaviour of races is distinctive.
Will post more feedback soon. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:32:00 -
[8] - Quote
THIS has been due for a LONG time... just awesome :D
Thank you for finally getting around to this! |
Tristan North
The Scope
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:33:00 -
[9] - Quote
Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it. |
|
CCP Lemur
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:33:00 -
[10] - Quote
My name is CCP Lemur and I approve of this message and/or service.
Finally time to get the dust of all my Gallente ships. QA Guy | Actually Existing | A-Team Signature up to your IMGination. |
|
|
Minsc
Alpha Empire
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:34:00 -
[11] - Quote
nice, hopefully I can finally start fitting hybrids on my gallente ships again instead of autocannons |
Dierdra Vaal
Veto. Veto Corp
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:34:00 -
[12] - Quote
Quote:Before we start looking at armor tanking issues or individual ships, Hybrid weapons as a whole need to be boosted up to a level where using them becomes desirable.
What made you decide the weapons themselves were the issue, rather than the ships (hybrid ship maneuvrability, tracking bonuses, engagement ranges, etc)? I'd be very interested to see what research process you guys use to find the 'weak spots' in current balancing/game design problems.
Veto #205 * * * Director Emeritus at EVE University * * * CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:34:00 -
[13] - Quote
i am happy that hybrids are being looked at but i fear that the changes are not enough to make them viable...
a good way to boost hybrids should be found in thier ammo:
like you did to projectiles...
plus blasters need an alpha boost to make them worth while using...
CCP Tallest i would storongly recommend you read pattern clerks thread on hybrid balance... it should put you in the right direction |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1079
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:35:00 -
[14] - Quote
GÇ£Inertia Modifier -5% on the following shipsGÇ¥
GǪso the numbers in the now-famous sisi data dump were in other words modded in the wrong direction GÇö the ships listed all got a +5% modifier when it should have been -5%? GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
KayTwoEx
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Cascade Imminent
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:36:00 -
[15] - Quote
me likes |
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:36:00 -
[16] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GÇ£Inertia Modifier -5% on the following shipsGÇ¥
GǪso the numbers in the now-famous sisi data dump were in other words modded in the wrong direction GÇö the ships listed all got a +5% modifier when it should have been -5%?
Quoting because of importance. |
Kinroi Alari
Pan Galactic Gargle Blasters Important Internet Spaceship League
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:38:00 -
[17] - Quote
Looking forward to the final version of this correction.
|
Mr LaForge
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:38:00 -
[18] - Quote
Start that vindicator training... I Support the Goons! |
Bryant21
Interest Recovery Service
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:39:00 -
[19] - Quote
Large Hybrids V Added to queue. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
212
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:40:00 -
[20] - Quote
I think the most problematic ships within the gallente line up are the Deimos, Hyperion, Brutix and the Nerfed Drone boats of which are now the least used of their class. If you had to focus on any specific ships it would be those.
Also, don't forget caldari...
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
|
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:40:00 -
[21] - Quote
Tristan North wrote:Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it.
The agility change is an agility buff. The ships will be more agile. |
|
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:40:00 -
[22] - Quote
I feel blasters need to do more damage so they can deal faster in their relative ranges compared to AC's.
Railguns T2 "spike" ammo could do with a +10% multiplier on damage too. |
Chad VanGaalen
Knights Of Divinity Unforgiving.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:42:00 -
[23] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Tristan North wrote:Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it. The agility change is an agility buff. The ships will be more agile.
Awesome. |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
149
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:43:00 -
[24] - Quote
I fly Gallente ships. |
Ender Black
Lone Star Exploration Lone Star Partners
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:45:00 -
[25] - Quote
CCP Tallest, though not as tall as me, is indeed best Tallest The Pod Goo Podcast http://www.podgoo.com
Pod Goo also publishes editorials, guest blogs, and guides for free. -áJust email [email protected] your material. |
Jasmin Kron
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:45:00 -
[26] - Quote
no changes in current consumption? |
R0ot
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:45:00 -
[27] - Quote
Having several hyrbid characters I would like to say I love you CCP. |
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
46
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:45:00 -
[28] - Quote
Quote:Javelin, Gleam and Quake (all sizes): Removed tracking speed penalty, added 25% tracking speed bonus Close range ammo you can actually use at close range? Who are you and what did you do to the real CCP?
Also, this was mentioned ages ago, but the names of Spike and Javelin are counterintuitive. |
Tesseya
Brave New Soldiers. SUB ZERO Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:46:00 -
[29] - Quote
it was boost hybrids or projectile?
/me looking to new bonuses Hail and Gleam
if it boost hybrids, then it so LOAL. In the end CCP make light fitting hybrids in gallente ships. oh wai - it boost? This is not a boost - a vital necessity What should have been done long ago. CCP late in this changes.
i want cancel my SP in hybrids skill. Give me back my SP in hybrid gunnery!
Under the guise of boost again Gallente boost Matar
/facepalm |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:47:00 -
[30] - Quote
question if the shi[ps are faster and more agile wont that mean they will orbit faster thus meaning they would need even more tracking? something tells me 20% is not close enough...
plus the eagle is still going to be the worst hac... so what you go from 190 dps at 160km with spike to 209 dps at 160km... its still chipping paint at that range...
spike needs a boost aswell! |
|
Schmell
Russian Thunder Squad Against ALL Authorities
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:49:00 -
[31] - Quote
Wow, it sucks so very much. As i feared - it was in chaos dump and it will be pushed to release.
Hello gallente, your medium size is still useless ****. And no, pg and cpu decrease wont help you much to fit neutron blasters to deimos and megathron
And S, M and L railguns still dont have place in current meta game (beam dont have it either funnily enough). All Hail (and quake) MINMATAR |
Sarmatiko
145
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:49:00 -
[32] - Quote
Wait a second. If this dev blog about how poor was gallente compared to minmatar in the past and now you are boosting feds AND minnies at the same time, does it mean that gallente still sucks my long howitzer barrel?
ps: in before whine proposal about addition of explosive lazors. |
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:50:00 -
[33] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:question if the shi[ps are faster and more agile wont that mean they will orbit faster thus meaning they would need even more tracking? something tells me 20% is not close enough...
plus the eagle is still going to be the worst hac... so what you go from 190 dps at 160km with spike to 209 dps at 160km... its still chipping paint at that range...
spike needs a boost aswell!
This, this and alll this. :D
Oh, and uh..maybe watch out for the Rokh.
Blaster Rokh could get pretty mean... |
TheButcherPete
StoneWall Metals Productions Bloodbound.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:53:00 -
[34] - Quote
Woot! Gallente weaponry finally mean something in combat, hooray CCP! Now, when are my 6m in drone SP going to mean something? :P
GÖÑ |
Razor Blue
Hyvat Pahat ja Eric The Polaris Syndicate
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:54:00 -
[35] - Quote
Like i posted in Ships & Modules forum:
Can you not take look at the T1 hybrid charges too?
Like you did with projectiles
|
Bernard Schuyler
Aurora Security Transstellar Operations
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:54:00 -
[36] - Quote
Dierdra Vaal wrote:Quote:Before we start looking at armor tanking issues or individual ships, Hybrid weapons as a whole need to be boosted up to a level where using them becomes desirable. What made you decide the weapons themselves were the issue, rather than the ships (hybrid ship maneuvrability, tracking bonuses, engagement ranges, etc)? I'd be very interested to see what research process you guys use to find the 'weak spots' in current balancing/game design problems.
Well, if the weapons were good, and the ships were bad... Wouldn't we be seeing people employing hybrids on non-Gallente vessels?
It seems to be more the case that people are avoiding using the weapon systems themselves as much as possible, rather than the ships. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1082
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:55:00 -
[37] - Quote
Tesseya wrote:it was boost hybrids or projectile?
[GǪ]
Under the guise of boost again Gallente boost Matar Sarmatiko wrote:Wait a second. If this dev blog about how poor was gallente compared to minmatar in the past and now you are boosting feds AND minnies at the same time, does it mean that gallente still sucks my long howitzer barrel? No, Minmatar is not being boosted.
Short-range ammo for long-range weapons is being boosted, since they suffer the same issue as blasters do: they're meant to be used at short range, but don't (or didn't) have the tracking to support this role. GÇöGÇöGÇö GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ GÇö Karath Piki-á |
M1AU
Rheintal Underground Rising
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:55:00 -
[38] - Quote
I'm not exactly sure if this is enough. But it's a start. |
Jitabics
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:56:00 -
[39] - Quote
Ok, now please nerf gallente ships. Thanks. |
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:57:00 -
[40] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Tristan North wrote:Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it. The agility change is an agility buff. The ships will be more agile.
Not wanting to rain on your much appreciated parade, just wanting to make sure it does what it's supposed to do (because I like the changes for the most part): You guys realize, that "higher agility" means a >lower< agility modifier in your equations and data-base, right? The data we got from the SiSi files had it exactly the other way around, lowering agility by increasing the agility mod on those ships you named... |
|
Tesseya
Brave New Soldiers. SUB ZERO Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:58:00 -
[41] - Quote
CCP had to introduce another module to the Gallente - a battering ram. Purely for lulz. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
103
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 14:59:00 -
[42] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:...But, and its a big one, as you have said this isnGÇÖt going to be enough to bring them up to par with projectile and laser ships, that will only happen with more of a look at the hybrid ships themselves.... Wouldn't you rather do it incrementally and assign some of the boost to the ships so we don't end up with a repeat of the projectile boost fiasco (autos > all regardless of hull and Winmatar just plain better).
This will make hybrids very competitive again, rest should come from individual hulls if you ask me.
PS: Nerf the goddamn projectiles already! .. nix some damage of all the ammo!
|
Niraia
Starcakes THE R0NIN
67
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:00:00 -
[43] - Quote
I understand that you don't want to buff these too much, but.. well, I'm glad I can still fly Hurricanes.
- Chief of Security, EOH Poker - Terrorist cult advocate |
Morel Nova
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:01:00 -
[44] - Quote
I like it overall, but a few reflections: 1. I still think blasters need a flat 10% or so damage buff up close, perhaps even 20% to make them competitive, as it is now an armor hurricane will out-dps a brutix and be more agile/faster (not sure if that last one changes with this), and it still has decent range. 2. Hail doesnt need its ranged penalty removed. not sure where you got the idea that it was under performant. its been the only close range t2 ammo thats been useful the last few years. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:03:00 -
[45] - Quote
Much as I love these new changes (I have 2 Gallante toons) CCP need to do something about their insider trading. I love the fact that somehow from a new Dev blog today all the ammo types that have just had boosts anounced were bought up off the market 7 days ago. Players that are involved in the balancing/development ideas should not be able to make huge sums of isk out of inside trading. |
Siberius Maxim
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:03:00 -
[46] - Quote
Hmm ... no speed and agility buff to the Proteus? You guys think its too speedy now? |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:03:00 -
[47] - Quote
This is what i want to see for hybrids:
blaster base damage goes up by 50% rate of fire reduced by 30% tracking increased by 40%
rails: damage increase by 10% (already done) rof decreased by 10% activation cost reduced by 20%
ammo change:
damage is being split between therm/kin plus a tracking boost built into the ammo
so plutonium does 80% therm 20% kin with a 1.05% incrase to tracking
spike needs 20% increase to base damage |
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
701
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:04:00 -
[48] - Quote
bzzzt bzzzt
|
|
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:04:00 -
[49] - Quote
Madner Kami wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Tristan North wrote:Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it. The agility change is an agility buff. The ships will be more agile. Not wanting to rain on your much appreciated parade, just wanting to make sure it does what it's supposed to do (because I like the changes for the most part): You guys realize, that "higher agility" means a >lower< agility modifier in your equations and data-base, right? The data we got from the SiSi files had it exactly the other way around, lowering agility by increasing the agility mod on those ships you named...
Yes, please whoever implements this change please google first how your attributes work, wouldn't want this to go live with an accidental nerf
I could've even gotten behind a nerf to be honest, for that to work the speed buff is way to small though. This would require the ships to be (much) faster then minmatar, but not able to whizz around enemies. Only get in close extremely fast, then just dps the hell out of whatever is there. The proposed changes might also work just as well, time will tell (or sisi...) |
JC Anderson
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
60
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:04:00 -
[50] - Quote
.....Taranis. |
|
Kraven Drakenovic
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:06:00 -
[51] - Quote
What i dont understand is why there hasnt been any change to railgun tracking... 6 mil in rails bs 5 and my mega still cant track for peanuts against MISSION L4 Battle ships... its supposed to be the best tracking vessel in the gallente fleet alaas sadly more damage might be a good idea but not really useful if that high damage salvo just gives him a nice breeze ( by high dmg i mean higher than current) and im left killing battle ships with hammer II's in a turret boat... care for a little explanation on that Ccp. Cause if the mega struggles to mission track the main reason im loathe to fitout a hyperion for missioning least the mega gets a tracking bonus |
Morn Hyland
Amnion Partners
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:06:00 -
[52] - Quote
The problem with hybrids rails is that long range medium damage is that the range >150km is supposed to allow several shots at the target before they can get into range. See your I was there vid for how you think it still works. The reason for all tachyon / 425mm based fleets disappearing was on grid scanning. Long range today is in the projectile sweet spot around 100km where the shorter distance is compensated by good alpha and that the other fleet cannot just warp to your location.
I don't see how your changes will fundamentally change this - and I suspect Eagles will still be on sale in Jita at less than there bpo build cost after Christmas. |
Selnix
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:06:00 -
[53] - Quote
At least they finally admitted that the Falcon is meant to be a blaster brawler. |
Liafcipe9000
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:07:00 -
[54] - Quote
not even a 10 or 15 % range increase? hybrid range is just horribad... unacceptable! |
Largo Coronet
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:08:00 -
[55] - Quote
This post is relevant to my interests and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter. |
Morel Nova
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:09:00 -
[56] - Quote
JC Anderson wrote:.....Taranis.
I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot more of them.
for blaster, probably not. it already had good tracking, its weakness is range so it will still die to most AC fitted frigates. rail taranis will have gotten better though |
Stan Kirby
Risky eXplosion Death or Glory
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:09:00 -
[57] - Quote
Minmatar or projectile boost: - +100% artillery burst damage - overpowered cynabal, machariel, dramiel - huge falloff bonus from TE and TC.
... Gallente/hybrid boost: - blasters tracking speed +20% .... LOL - railguns +10% damage ... megaLOL
CCP fail... again. |
White Flow
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:09:00 -
[58] - Quote
I don't actually fly Gallente, but anything that gets LESS Canes and Drakes all over the place must be a good thing!!
|
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
180
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:10:00 -
[59] - Quote
Best blog evar! |
Koghrun Amman
LEGION OF PROFESSOR CHAOS Darkmatter Initiative
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:11:00 -
[60] - Quote
Finally! I can fly a Ferox or Rokh without at least one low slot dedicated to an RCU. They called me crazy when I shunned the Drake in favor of the Ferox; well, we'll see who has the last word. Also, this change makes the Hybrid Rigs viable with railguns, where as before the multiplier on the already massive grid requirement was prohibitive. |
|
Roosterton
Eternal Frontier
121
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:11:00 -
[61] - Quote
"Hail (all sizes): Removed falloff penalty"
Sorry, RF Fusion... |
Femaref
Armageddon Day WE FORM VOLTRON
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:12:00 -
[62] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:Much as I love these new changes (I have 2 Gallante toons) CCP need to do something about their insider trading. I love the fact that somehow from a new Dev blog today all the ammo types that have just had boosts anounced were bought up off the market 7 days ago. Players that are involved in the balancing/development ideas should not be able to make huge sums of isk out of inside trading.
It's called test server. Once the data is on the test server, you (read: people who know their way around certain tools) are able to read the new item data from the cache files. This has nothing to do with insider trading, as everybody has the same opportunity to get the information. Insider trading restricts the information to only a few, which clearly doesn't happen here. Mind, not being able to use a tool doesn't mean you are restricted from it, you are just not able to use it. |
Akura Goldwing
SILENCE ... I kill you
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:13:00 -
[63] - Quote
I find it interesting, that Caldari Ships don-¦t become an Velo-Buff because they have an 10% rangebonus already... The Rokh was an "Fan-Boat" before the Hybrid-Buff and will be after. That 10% Range Bonus of the Caldari is more unseless than an third Leg or some like it. If someone needs an Sniper, he probably uses an Amarr or Minmatar Ship.
Just my 2 cents |
xo3e
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:13:00 -
[64] - Quote
"ok. lets boost both close and long range Projectiles, and also Lasers and say that this is Hybrid wepons boost actually" (c) CCP
i dont want to be politically incorrect, but... WTF IS THIS? WHAT IS THE POINT IN BOOSTING TRACKING WHEN BLASTER BOATS STILL CANT GET CLOSE ENOUGH?
this "boost" looks like bad excuse, and blaster boats will still only be able to stand against n00bs in hands of a skilled pilots. and i dont think that this is looks like good balance.
inb4 "whine more n00b... wait.. WHAT?" at9 gold medal. (boss ******) |
Wacktopia
Sicarius. Legion of The Damned.
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:13:00 -
[65] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GÇ£Inertia Modifier -5% on the following shipsGÇ¥
GǪso the numbers in the now-famous sisi data dump were in other words modded in the wrong direction GÇö the ships listed all got a +5% modifier when it should have been -5%?
Oh god I hope that you're right with this, Tippia. |
Reppyk
The Black Shell
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:14:00 -
[66] - Quote
I'm okay with all these numbers.
My only concern is the T1 ammos. Most of them will almost never be used.
Example : Iridium and Plutonium are kinetic+em Uranium and Tungsten are thermal+explo.
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
214
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:14:00 -
[67] - Quote
Stan Kirby wrote:Minmatar or projectile boost: - +100% artillery burst damage - overpowered cynobal, machariel, dramiel - huge falloff bonus from TE and TC. ... Gallente/hybrid boost: - blasters tracking speed +20% .... LOL - railguns +10% damage ... megaLOL CCP fail... again. It does have that feeling doesn't it?
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Z800XV
True Power Team
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:14:00 -
[68] - Quote
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Make frequent recharging hybrids and equal to 5 seconds instead of 10. on each recharge a certain amount of capacitor will be taken instead of on each shot. say to recharge clip needed 150 capacitor instantly(well, make it around number of shots, example one shot take 10 capacity, clip have 15 ammo = 150 capacity) then shoot them without capaciy. number of rounds in the clip... say it will be 10-15. So we're partially leaving dependence DPS from capacity.
After this fix hybrids take their own place. Plus, this can vary damage mode depending on how many ammo will be in clip.(leveing it to devs) (example: 10 rounds with damage mode X10 and 5 rounds with damage mode x13 (well, calculate how much dps is lost by recharge to leave it the same as it is now)) DPS is still the same but appears new side - we have superDPS(also very close depend in clip) for a short time and in the coupe with overheating blasterboats would like everyone is waiting for. |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
78
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:14:00 -
[69] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Tristan North wrote:Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it. The agility change is an agility buff. The ships will be more agile. Excellent!
Is this showing up on SISI anytime soon? |
Louis deGuerre
Malevolence. Void Alliance
55
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:15:00 -
[70] - Quote
Max Velocity +10
+10 or +10% ?
I like the changes but they are much too conservative. The major problem with blasterboats is and remains speed.
This blog is more a minmatar buff than a gallente one FIRE FRIENDSHIP TORPEDOES ! |
|
Wacktopia
Sicarius. Legion of The Damned.
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:15:00 -
[71] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Tristan North wrote:Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it. The agility change is an agility buff. The ships will be more agile.
YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH
Ahem.
YEAAAARRGGJHGHGHGHGHGHG!!!!!! |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
214
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:16:00 -
[72] - Quote
Re the ammos: To paraphrase from here... https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=14433
Rails should fill in the performance gaps leaving alpha and dps to the other weapon systems but doubling down on what is left...
Quote:Ammo: Railgun base damage increased by 10%
Spike base damage increased by 25%
Tech 2 Ammo now receives short range variants that alter the behaviour of the turrets (beyond additional dps, or range) either compensating for short falls or improving strengths of the turrets in very different ways. - Quake - 25% increase to Artillery alpha, 5% Less damage than RF EMP and 33% less range and fall off. - Gleam - Increases damage - 15% more damage than Navy Multifreqency and 33% less tracking and 33% less optimal range. - Javelin - Increases tracking by 50% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 50% increased capacitor usage.
Hybrid Ammo receives reorganisation into 4 parts: Antimatter remains unchanged Iron base damage increased by 20%
Plutonium - (Same as current plutonium except: ), 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage Uranium - -(Same as current plutonium except: ), 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal damage
Thorium - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal Lead - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Iridium - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal Tungsten - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Railguns now do more damage, and much more damage at longer ranges. True to the RP nature of what most of us consider railguns to be like, ultra high muzzle velocity means, damage attenuates much less at long to ultra long range.
This picture should help explain the changes: http://www.theskyunion.com/railguns.jpg Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Alundil
The Unnamed. Novum Militis ExParte
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:16:00 -
[73] - Quote
White Flow wrote:
I don't actually fly Gallente, but when I do I wear my sunglasses.
O really?
I like these changes so far and hope they are "a start" |
Katrina Bekers
Fighters Squadron
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:16:00 -
[74] - Quote
This is a nice and very long overdue first step.
But, as the devblog already hints, the real problem with nobody fighting in gallente ships is not the weapons systems per se, rather the boats using them.
Close range nimbleness and armor tanking don't match. Buffer armor tanking (the PVP one) even less, with the colossal weight penalty paid with plates.
And... About the buffs themselves:
Hybrids are buffed. But this doesn't buff Gallente only. Also Caldari ones.
T2 ammo are buffed. But this doesn't buff Gallente only. All four races have ammo violently buffed up.
You're really unable to give our race some EXCLUSIVE love, aren't you? You feel this urge to buff the already overused Minmatar or the ubiquitous Caldari in the meanwhile, huh? << THE RABBLE BRIGADE >> |
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies Joint Venture Conglomerate
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:17:00 -
[75] - Quote
No cap usage reduction? |
Wacktopia
Sicarius. Legion of The Damned.
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:18:00 -
[76] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Stan Kirby wrote:Minmatar or projectile boost: - +100% artillery burst damage - overpowered cynobal, machariel, dramiel - huge falloff bonus from TE and TC. ... Gallente/hybrid boost: - blasters tracking speed +20% .... LOL - railguns +10% damage ... megaLOL CCP fail... again. It does have that feeling doesn't it?
No... it has the feeling of CCP trying to balance something without creating FOTM lol-damage-mobiles.
Lets just see how these changes actually affect the game. If they're not enough they have already said they will go back and look at armor tanking ships combined with hybrids in future. |
Tsubutai
The Tuskers
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:19:00 -
[77] - Quote
I'm not at all convinced that the boost should be applied to small hybrids, which are already very competitive; Gallente frigates are already arguably the best in their respective classes. Also, what happened to the reduction in cap consumption? |
Zi'Boo
Zi'Corp
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:19:00 -
[78] - Quote
You may also want to look into null ammo.
Both scorch and barrage extend the respective range by 50% (if you compare scorch to multi it's more like 300%), while null adds only 25% range.
Since blasters have about equal amount of optimal and falloff it's only fair that null would add 50% to both. |
Kazanir
Eighty Joule Brewery Goonswarm Federation
336
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:21:00 -
[79] - Quote
Tallest : In the datamined info from Chaos, we saw that all hybrid weapons (blaster and railguns, including capital types) had their capacitor usage reduced by 30%. This change isn't noted in your devblog. Does that mean that you forgot to mention the capacitor usage changes or that the cap changes will not be implemented? |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:22:00 -
[80] - Quote
Schmell wrote:And S, M and L railguns still dont have place in current meta game (beam dont have it either funnily enough). All Hail (and quake) MINMATAR
I can't help but echo this sentiment. Rails still have no way to leverage that "average damage," at the rediculously long range they've got (that's before you recall that caldari ships also have an optimal bonus). Furthermore I see no mention of cap usage, tracking, or reload time: all of which plague the rail pilot in practice and make the platform a comparatively sub-par choice.
I want to believe that 10% damage and a little more leeway on grid/cpu will make headway for rails, but I have serious doubts. |
|
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:22:00 -
[81] - Quote
JC Anderson wrote:.....Taranis.
I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot more of them.
Afraid not. While this is a nice start -áit doesn't address a few bug issues.-á
1. I can still be kitted with a scram and/or web.-á 2. Hybrids suck power.-á 3. MWD suck power 4. Speed probably isn't enough when you consider armor tanks make you slow.-á 5. Hybrid ammo is big still.-á
|
VaL Iscariot
The Concilium Enterprises Spectrum Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:22:00 -
[82] - Quote
So my overwhelmingly powerful Megathron will now be even more powerful? Thanks, CCP!
Also:
I flew Gallente before the buff.
Does that make me a Hybrid Hipster? |
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
119
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:22:00 -
[83] - Quote
Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction?
Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now.
Reduced Capacitory usage: * All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use |
|
rodyas
The Scope Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:22:00 -
[84] - Quote
Can someone clarify something for me, is the CPU reduction suppose to be a percentage, as well as teh speed mod a percentage as well? |
Largo Coronet
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:23:00 -
[85] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Railguns now do more damage, and much more damage at longer ranges. True to the RP nature of what most of us consider railguns to be like, ultra high muzzle velocity means, damage attenuates much less at long to ultra long range. This picture should help explain the changes: http://www.theskyunion.com/railguns.jpg Could you please put some numbers on the graphs for clarity? kthx |
gfldex
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:23:00 -
[86] - Quote
Medium and small blasters became a complete gamble when webbers where nerfed and scrams got boosted. That change was ment to be a boost to AF. That never played out. You acknowledge that there is a problem with webbers in conjunction with blasters but fail to understand the underlying issue. The combined effect of having a rather useless webber and at the same time getting your MWD shut off was the killer. A brutix can lose 75% of it's damage because a rifter is switching it's MWD off.
For Dreads adding the mass boost to siege modules made blasters a complete nono. If you get bumped at jump in you can't drop in siege for minutes. You might even have to relocate via warp out and back in to get into any reasonable range. If there are hostiles around that is simply not an option.
Fiddling around with fitting requirements or tracking wont change anything. The big gamble that are medium and small blasters is still there and I wont take it. Your unwillingness to take a change to the game back that didn't play out as expected is not going to make anything better.
Before we got T2 ships the low kin/therm resi on pretty much any PvP fit ship made up for the lower damage mod on rails. Increasing the base damage wont change that. Any T2 ship got either increased kin or therm resi. With combat prolongment and the RR boost volley damage got even more important in PvP then it used to be. A 10% dps increase wont change that.
I can't see how the proposed changes will improve anything in PvP.
If you really want to change something you need to let rails play in their own league. I would propose to turn rails upside down. Let the shortest rails do the most damage and then give those short rails a hefty damage boost. If you keep trying to have a difference between rails and beams/arties without making them different you will just keep shifting inferiority around.
In my eyes the root of all evil started at the very beginning of EVE when 4 races got introduced that where ment to fill the same role without being redundant. Nobody would argue about the inferiority of Apocs compared to Hulks because those different factions ships are meant to fulfill a different role. If you don't give up on the concept of having the same role for different ships or weapon systems you will just keep shifting FotMs around.
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:24:00 -
[87] - Quote
Fix active tanking to include a bonus to incomming rr... Cuss right now 5% to resists is op in comparisson... |
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:25:00 -
[88] - Quote
Blasters definitely need a damage increase on reflection. Now, this might look very high on paper, but perhaps a 20% increase to damage in addition to these changes. This way, whilst their damage dealt in close proximity is very high, they still have similar TTKGÇÖs as their peers, due to the fact that they have more travelling than any other ships to get into their optimal range GÇô i.e they accrue more damage in the process. If I take 2 well established ships, the hurricane and a Brutix: (fittings ripped mercilessly from Battleclinic, because I LOST MY EFT BACKUPS >.>)
[Hurricane, Comparison] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Damage Control II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Invulnerability Field II Warp Disruptor II Large Shield Extender II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive
425mm AutoCannon II 425mm AutoCannon II 425mm AutoCannon II 425mm AutoCannon II 425mm AutoCannon II 425mm AutoCannon II Medium Energy Neutralizer II Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
Warrior IIx5
VS
[Brutix, Brutix : Neutron Shield gank ] Reactor Control Unit II Damage Control II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Warp Scrambler II Invulnerability Field II Large Shield Extender II 10MN MicroWarpdrive I
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Antimatter Charge M
Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I
Hammerhead II x5
We can see that DPS is not too far apart, (768 dps vs 592 dps), yet the speed of a hurricane is 1434 m/s vs the Brutix's 1112 m/s (before the change). Tank is only different by 4k EHP.
10 m/s is not going to effect this hugely. The tanking abilities are relatively close, as are the dps abilities, considering the hurricane can kite outside the Brutix's maximum 9km effective range, as it is the faster ship. Now, if the Brutix was given greater damage, (20% increase), we see its DPS rise to 921 dps. There is a larger difference, but now, that is accounted for by the hurricanes ability to kite the target, as well as the fact that Brutix will recieve more damage attempting to get into that range. What it does mean, however, is that when it is in range, it will hurt and hurt hard, evening out this fight somewhat.
|
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:25:00 -
[89] - Quote
VaL Iscariot wrote:So my overwhelmingly powerful Megathron will now be even more powerful? Thanks, CCP!
Also:
I flew Gallente before the buff.
Does that make me a Hybrid Hipster?
It means you sat on gates and station undocks. |
xo3e
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:25:00 -
[90] - Quote
Quote:Does that mean that you forgot to mention the capacitor usage changes or that the cap changes will not be implemented?
HURRDURR HYBRYD WEPONS ARE FINE YOU GOT YOUR TRACKING NOW MOVE ALONG at9 gold medal. (boss ******) |
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:26:00 -
[91] - Quote
Tallest, listen brother....
some change is better than no change, i'll give you that. you seem to have a good understanding of what's wrong (you mentioned projectiles, and the possibility of the actual ships needing boosts).
but these changes dont even scratch the surface, not even close. you have to look at it this way:
- why should i use a blaster boat over an AC or pulse boat? - if the role is not changing, then make these guns as desirable as lasers and projectiles - blaster platforms need to be the fastest in the game or have some sort of resistance to scrambling, or more resists to damage, or a really long web, or something, hands down. you cant leave these ships status quo (10m/s boost is nothing, 30m/s boost would be something) - if youre not touching the ships much, then increase blaster range and falloff significantly. i hate to say it, but make them like AC's.
i cant stress this enough, please consider an AC nerf as a viable solution to this mess. then simply balance rails and blasters to pulses at medium range
TLDR: projectiles are simply overpowered, consider nerfing them. blasters need to be as appealing as AC's and pulses in some way. if youre not changing the role of these weapons, blaster boats need some serious buffing; they should be the fastest OR the most resilient in the game.
thanks for listening, this is a great start. im sure some other players will give you a much better breakdown of what i mentioned above because the community is pretty much in agreement. |
Walextheone
The Red Circle Inc.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:28:00 -
[92] - Quote
Good start but compared to projectiles hybrids still still need cap, can not swtich damage output type and have less range.
SO a 5-10% damage increase should really be given to become somewhat be in line with them. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:29:00 -
[93] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction? Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now. Reduced Capacitor usage: * All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
Now, on to that issue of rails having way too much wasted range. |
Wacktopia
Sicarius. Legion of The Damned.
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:29:00 -
[94] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Schmell wrote:And S, M and L railguns still dont have place in current meta game (beam dont have it either funnily enough). All Hail (and quake) MINMATAR I can't help but echo this sentiment. Rails still have no way to leverage that "average damage," at the rediculously long range they've got (that's before you recall that caldari ships also have an optimal bonus). Furthermore I see no mention of cap usage, tracking, or reload time: all of which plague the rail pilot in practice and make the platform a comparatively sub-par choice. I want to believe that 10% damage and a little more leeway on grid/cpu will make headway for rails, but I have serious doubts. Wacktopia wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:Stan Kirby wrote:Minmatar or projectile boost: - +100% artillery burst damage - overpowered cynobal, machariel, dramiel - huge falloff bonus from TE and TC. ... Gallente/hybrid boost: - blasters tracking speed +20% .... LOL - railguns +10% damage ... megaLOL CCP fail... again. It does have that feeling doesn't it? No... it has the feeling of CCP trying to balance something without creating FOTM lol-damage-mobiles. Lets just see how these changes actually affect the game. If they're not enough they have already said they will go back and look at armor tanking ships combined with hybrids in future. It should be obvious to anyone with a shred of experience using railguns on non-frigate hulls that these changes are not going to do much of anything. I think we all know what happens if these ineffectual changes go live and are promised to be reviewed "in the future." I'd much rather see rails go fotm for a while than continue to see them all-but-ignored for another half decade.
I agree this patch is more blaster-focused than rails.
I'm wondering if we're going to see an on-grid warp nerf to 200-250km? |
David Xavier
The Scope Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:29:00 -
[95] - Quote
Fix the forums so posts don't get eaten by it. Really annoying!
The lowering of fitting requirements is welcome!
About rails, if they are intended to be "The Average" long range weapons system between artillery and beam lasers, then please tune tracking accordingly as well. Currently targets easily get under the guns due to lack of alpha and the lack of tracking.
For example the Tech 2 350mm railgun should have more like 0.01328 instead of 0.01167 rad/sec tracking , without skills and modules. |
stoicfaux
341
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:30:00 -
[96] - Quote
Roosterton wrote:"Hail (all sizes): Removed falloff penalty" Sorry, RF Fusion...
Agreed. Definitely reduced demand for RF Fusion.
edit: Plus a 11.6% damage boost for Ye Olde Angel hunting Vargur... Nice.
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|
Dalton Vanadis
Miranda United F0RCEFUL ENTRY
420
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:31:00 -
[97] - Quote
Nice guys. I might have to give hybrids another go at this point. I await your further iteration on the matter though; as many have pointed out here and it seemed with your dev blog, there is a lot of examination and study to be done on how well this buffs up hybrids and their uses in actual gameplay. |
Schmell
Russian Thunder Squad Against ALL Authorities
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:31:00 -
[98] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:Much as I love these new changes (I have 2 Gallante toons) CCP need to do something about their insider trading. I love the fact that somehow from a new Dev blog today all the ammo types that have just had boosts anounced were bought up off the market 7 days ago. Players that are involved in the balancing/development ideas should not be able to make huge sums of isk out of inside trading.
Test server base dump was laid out a week ago. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:31:00 -
[99] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction? Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now. Reduced Capacitor usage: * All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use Now, on to that issue of rails having way too much wasted range.
Yeah like remove the optimal range bonus and replace with a rate of fire bonus |
xo3e
The Deliberate Forces HYDRA RELOADED
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:33:00 -
[100] - Quote
Quote:blaster platforms need to be the fastest in the game or have some sort of resistance to scrambling, or more resists to damage, or a really long web, or something, hands down. you cant leave these ships status quo (10m/s boost is nothing, 30m/s boost would be something)
blasters platforms are fine. here we have few carebears on vindicators in the corner of the map. you cant say now, that blaster boats is unusable at all HA-HA.
srsly ccp what is wrong with you guise? do you even play your own game? at9 gold medal. (boss ******) |
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:33:00 -
[101] - Quote
Perdition64 wrote: hurricane vs brutix
this is a good summary of why pvp'ers generally stick with AC platforms.
- incredible falloff - better tracking - no cap use - minnie ships are the fastest - while tank remains on par with all other ships
this is overpowered. you have to give people a reason NOT TO fly an AC boat at medium/close ranges. remember, one scram and the blaster boat is dead in the water....AC boat is still doing significant damage at 25km, medium blasters dont work past 10km.
|
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:33:00 -
[102] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction? Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now. Reduced Capacitor usage: * All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
Ok that takes care of the power hungry issue for the guns but still leaves some big issues.-á
Can I be cap stable if I fit the required MWD? What about ships like the Hyperion that have and active rep bonus that cycles them faster, sucks more power.-á
What about how armor tanking makes you slow?
What about kitting gallente ships with scram making it so they can't get in range to do their theoretical damage.-á |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
33
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:33:00 -
[103] - Quote
I pulled up EFT. First ship I looked at was the much maligned DieMost
It will still be DieMost with these stats.
For the first fit I threw together, with perfect fitting skills, this boat does an insane amount of DPS close in....715 pre-heat, which is great, but still has issues.
Incorporating the changes to blasters to the fit below: 1. Power grid changes free up approx 114 grid, which is great and now allows the ability to fit the whole rack of neutron blasters plus an 800 mm plate, barely (boat below uses 1197 of 1237.5 grid) 2. CPU changes free up 10 CPU, which now also allow the ability to fit T2 tackle mods, instead of meta 4/faction. Boat below uses 430.25 of 437.5 CPU 3. However, these are based on leaving the 6th high slot empty. There is not enough CPU or grid for anything useful in there. 4. Top speed of boat with MwD on, no overheat, has gone from 1407 to 1469 m/s. That is clearly not enough to make a difference. 5. Total EHP with T1 Trimarks on fit below comes in at 41,595. Might be a tad light when compared to other slow HAC's, but something that can be lived with, IF it was slightly faster.
[[Deimos, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Armor Explosive Hardener II
Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive Stasis Webifier II Warp Disruptor II
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M [empty high slot]
Hammerhead II x5 |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:33:00 -
[104] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction? Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now. Reduced Capacitor usage: * All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use Now, on to that issue of rails having way too much wasted range. Yeah like remove the optimal range bonus and replace with a rate of fire bonus
Allow a choice between RoF and Alpha based on ammunition, imo. |
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
121
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:34:00 -
[105] - Quote
Excellent! New Player "boost" https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=243993#post243993 Mining + War Decks = yummy! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=25608&find=unread |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:40:00 -
[106] - Quote
by the way Tallest, when it comes to cruiser-sized ships, gallente pilots have nothing to snipe with. the Ishtar is merely situational because sentries cant move with the ship.
similarly to brutix vs. hurricane discussion, you gotta think about deimos vs. beam zealot. make the deimos a VIABLE ship. also think: brutix has more EHP and dps....why fly a HAC blaster boat?
take each gallente ship and ask yourself - why would anyone fly this over something else? if you cant find an answer, then that ship needs to be brought up to par. |
Ripard Teg
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:42:00 -
[107] - Quote
These are all very decent changes! I congratulate CCP for taking some good first steps in the direction of rebalancing hybrids, and hope that their efforts continue into the new year.
Still, there's one other change that should be strongly contemplated for this iteration: please increase medium rail damage more than 10%.
While small and large rail damage will benefit from the proposed change, +10% damage is still not going to be enough for the medium rails, which are still going to be rather ridiculously sub-par even after this buff. Comparing (for instance) the DPS output of a Muninn versus an Eagle will show that even with a 10% increase, the Eagle finds itself laughably disadvantaged in every respect. And the less said about trying to compare a rail Ferox versus an arty Cane, the better.
CCP, please increase medium rail damage by 20%, not 10%. Thank you! Jester's Trek: wherein I ramble about EVE Online, gaming, and from time to time... life. |
Tore Vest
Vikinghall
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:45:00 -
[108] - Quote
Rails need 20% more dmg ..... Blasters ... good with 20% more tracking..... but need maby at least 5km longer optimal range ?
And realy ? xl blasters and rails are good enough ? |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
214
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:45:00 -
[109] - Quote
FYI, Deimos is/will be viable as a sniper (in terms of raw dps +emergency drones) however the Eagle/Moa/Ferox/Vulture situation is painful. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Langbaobao
Most Wanted INC White Noise.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:46:00 -
[110] - Quote
Quote:Max Velocity +10 on the following ships:
Arazu, Astarte, Brutix, Catalyst, Deimos, Dominix, Dominix Navy Issue, Enyo, Eos, Falcon, Guardian-Vexor, Helios, Incursus, Ishtar, Lachesis, Maulus, Megathron, Megathron Federate Issue, Megathron Navy Issue, Thorax, Tristan, Utu, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, Vigilant
Quote:Inertia Modifier -5% on the following ships:
Adrestia, Arazu, Ares, Astarte, Atron, Brutix, Catalyst, Celestis, Cormorant, Daredevil, Deimos, Dominix, Dominix Navy Issue, Eagle, Enyo, Eos, Eris, Exequror Navy Issue, Falcon, Federation Navy Comet, Ferox, Guardian-Vexor, Harpy, Helios, Hyperion, Incursus, Ishkur, Ishtar, Kronos, Lachesis, Maulus, Megathron, Megathron Federate Issue, Megathron Navy Issue, Merlin, Moa, Phobos, Raptor, Rokh, Sin, Taranis, Thorax, Tristan, Utu, Vexor, Vexor Navy Issue, Vigilant, Vindicator, Vulture
The Falcon is a hybrid ship? O Rly? I don't think I've ever seen one fitted with rails, they always have missile launchers for killmailwhoring. A really good Falcon pilot doesn't even put anything because that's not the job of a Falcon. Let's be serious about this. Do we want Falcons even more maneuverable, so they can escape more easily the just retribution of those they've jammed? I don't think so...
With regards to the Rokh, I'm unsure, since it's a shield ship so already relatively maneuverable. But as already mentioned, I don't see this becoming the are of the Rokh. But is to be kept on eye.
And last but not least the Myrmidon, I haven't seen it on the list. An explanation for that? |
|
Forlorn Wongraven
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:47:00 -
[111] - Quote
Can we get Sisi updated to all skills at 5? Same for supercap changes. We had that two years ago with DD and supercarrier introduction - please help us helping you testing! Ugleb > and TDR won't log in so long as their core members are demotivated for whichever reason is in flavour this week |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:48:00 -
[112] - Quote
Langbaobao wrote: The Falcon is a hybrid ship? O Rly? I don't think I've ever seen one fitted with rails, they always have missile launchers for killmailwhoring. A really good Falcon pilot doesn't even put anything because that's not the job of a Falcon. Let's be serious about this. Do we want Falcons even more maneuverable, so they can escape more easily the just retribution of those they've jammed? I don't think so...
Valid.
Langbaobao wrote: With regards to the Rokh, I'm unsure, since it's a shield ship so already relatively maneuverable. But as already mentioned, I don't see this becoming the are of the Rokh. But is to be kept on eye.
ROFL, I hope you're joking. |
Baneken
The New Knighthood The Polaris Syndicate
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:48:00 -
[113] - Quote
On grid scanning nerf would definitely make rails (and sniping) more viable again, but it wouldn't really take that long to fleets have cov ops hovering at the edge of a grid for some quick scanning to get a warp in which would take us right back to start.
However if information warfare links would proportionally decrease your signature instead of targeting range (so that you would be extremely difficult to scan down from a grid) sniping might see return with rails. Though that change would likely lead to another sort of meta gaming with AFK alts and T3's in WH's and we'd be back to square one.
|
Zelda Wei
New Horizon Trade Exchange
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:51:00 -
[114] - Quote
If price is considered a broad indication of utility and attractiveness to players, then the clear omission is spike the cheapest T2 hybrid ammo and even border line unprofitable to make from a BPO. |
Garbad theWeak
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:52:00 -
[115] - Quote
This is an excellent start, but there are still a few issues. I've plugged all this into the test version of pyfa and fooled around a bit with fits. As I see it:
- hybrid snipers are once again top in the game. At 200k, they outperform even lasers, and shockingly, caldari are the best. I think hybrids are officially fixed. You can debate if armor snipers are still better, but its competitive, especially the naga. They also should easily outrange pulses now.
- blasters are still inferior. They get a slight increase in damage at the cost of inferior range/speed. Blasters are still all but useless outside of a very small gang situation.
- inability to switch damage types hurts. The proposed swaps between kin/them and therm/kin would REALLY help.
I think the next step for blasterboats is to buff those ships individually. |
Reppyk
The Black Shell
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:54:00 -
[116] - Quote
Langbaobao wrote:With regards to the Rokh, I'm unsure, since it's a shield ship so already relatively maneuverable. Rokhs. Maneuvrable.
Sir, you never fly one of these.
Also, picture of the day :
http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/856/sharkrokh.png |
Sannikoff
GOP KOHTOPA
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:54:00 -
[117] - Quote
politically correct. we bust hybrid weapons after bust minmatars weapons. |
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:54:00 -
[118] - Quote
Tore Vest wrote:Rails need 20% more dmg .....-á Blasters ... good with 20% more tracking..... but need -ámaby at least 5km longer optimal range ? And realy ? -áxl blasters and rails are good enough ? -á
XL Blasters tracking is a actually too good as blaster Titans **** sub caps. If they nerf them though they won't hit their attended target. XL guns probably need a code change to prevent sub cap **** like they did with fighter bombers.-á |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:55:00 -
[119] - Quote
Umm you do know that shootings over 150km is useless |
Bilaz
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:56:00 -
[120] - Quote
ok, so you tweaked hybrid guns a bit. now where is the boost we have been waiting for ages?
Everything is horribly wrong with hybrids now - they are useless and worthless - and they would still be worthless and useless after these changes, maybe not so horribly but still. (small and xl are fine btw) You may look back how incredibly projectiles were boosted and they were twice as good as hybrids now to begin with. get us something of that calibre and magnitude please. |
|
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:58:00 -
[121] - Quote
Comedy reply, "What about blaster POS mods?" |
Darth Felin
Monkey Attack Squad Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 15:59:00 -
[122] - Quote
Well. this boost is OK for T1 ships, blasters still won't be used much but at least they will have something. But what's about t2 ships now? T2 hybrid platforms are terrible and you can not fix it with blaster fix. |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Important Internet Spaceship League
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:00:00 -
[123] - Quote
Hurray! My hybrid skills will be useful again! |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:01:00 -
[124] - Quote
A lot of the changes look ok but a few important points:
The T2 ammo changes look shady. The tracking boosts and improving Hail range are really too much (Hail is v good as is)
And most importantly, the blaster boost is inadequate by a large margin. They really need something more to be worth bringing over longer range weapons!
IMHO a 5-10% damage boost would be the ticket, but even more wouldn't really be OP. They need to do *massive* damage to justify using them in the current state of the game. |
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
80
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:02:00 -
[125] - Quote
I think its a pretty good start. However as the blog mentioned, there is a disconnect between gallente armortanking and their fighting style, which is basically to run down their opponents, grab them, hold them and kill them at close range.
Now, a speedboost certainly is a good start, but you cant make Gallente ships faster than minmatar without breaking the lore. Furthermore, minmatar skirmish warfare supremacy means they can kite gallente ships quite easily with medium ranged guns. The web changes in Quantum Rise made blaster tracking insufficient, which seems to be fixed with the blatser tracking boost. But gallente ships will still not be able to run down and catch minnie ships. I dont know, if you dont need a 90% web to track with blasters anymore, maybe gallente blasterplatforms should be given a webrangebonus, to make it harder for miniie ships to kite successfully. Free Kugu |
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:03:00 -
[126] - Quote
Garbad theWeak wrote:- hybrid snipers are once again top in the game. At 200k, they outperform even lasers, and shockingly, caldari are the best. I think hybrids are officially fixed. You can debate if armor snipers are still better, but its competitive, especially the naga. They also should easily outrange pulses now.
Nobody snipes at 200km any more since the probing changes (if you're being outgunned by snipers 151km or further away, the FC probes and fleetwarps to a shorter, more favourable range).
Mid-ranged rail-megas and sniperions with their damage bonus look to be more competitive with this change, but things like the Rokh will still suffer since the range they excel at is a range they'll never be able to fight at. |
Llyandrian
Livestock Science Exchange
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:03:00 -
[127] - Quote
The huge spike in hail volume last week 4 million units in one trade is more than a typical month and implies a leak. |
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:03:00 -
[128] - Quote
Blasters need more dps. Blaster boats commit to a fight due to always being in scram, web and neut range. You could increase their rate of fire and lower their cap usage more along with ammo that takes up less space to accomplish this. You could also increase blaster module hit points so they can be overloaded much longer. Increase the overload damage bonus. Personally I prefer the higher rate of fire, but any will do. As long as the dps is increased by say 15-20%. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:04:00 -
[129] - Quote
Garbad theWeak wrote: - hybrid snipers are once again top in the game. At 200k, they outperform even lasers, and shockingly, caldari are the best. I think hybrids are officially fixed. You can debate if armor snipers are still better, but its competitive, especially the naga. They also should easily outrange pulses now.
First off, 200km sniping is a dinosaur strategy for obvious reasons. The fact they "easily out-range," a short-range weapon system shouldn't be an issue. In what way does this "fix," rails? Why would you choose to abandon a mael for a rokh because of these changes? Would you ever think that an eagle was a better choice than a zealot for sniper hac in light of these changes? If your answer is "yes," to either of those you either know something Tallest isn't telling us, or you're completely off-base. |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:05:00 -
[130] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:Much as I love these new changes (I have 2 Gallante toons) CCP need to do something about their insider trading. I love the fact that somehow from a new Dev blog today all the ammo types that have just had boosts anounced were bought up off the market 7 days ago. Players that are involved in the balancing/development ideas should not be able to make huge sums of isk out of inside trading.
... I haven't read all the posts in this thread, yet but I just wanted to point out that it was known for weeks that Hybrid Weapons and Ammo will receive a buff, no mystery there. |
|
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
80
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:05:00 -
[131] - Quote
Llyandrian wrote: The huge spike in hail volume last week 4 million units in one trade is more than a typical month and implies a leak.
Welcome to last week Free Kugu |
Amro One
One.
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:08:00 -
[132] - Quote
No Rokh, hybrids still suck. |
Einar Matveinen
Familia Oscura
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:09:00 -
[133] - Quote
Is this speed increase on gallente ships +10m/s or +10%?. |
Xython
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
209
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:11:00 -
[134] - Quote
CCP Lemur wrote:My name is CCP Lemur and I approve of this message and/or service.
Finally time to get the dust of all my Gallente ships.
Come out and gank Miners with us, you're always welcome! |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:14:00 -
[135] - Quote
A failoff boost on blaster more helpfull than a tracking boost = start to DPS at longer range (helpfull in fleet), can play the range to have tracking, can DPS a bit nano ship instead dying like a kitten in a mixer, and give a real utility to use null ammo. And work about this other usless bonus : the armor rep amount. It's really ****** compared to a 5% all resist, armor resist bonus is good for remote tanking, passive tank, capacitor, armor rep bonus just good for active tank... And add a low slot to the hyperion... abaddon got 20 slot, hyperion 19, what is that joke? |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:14:00 -
[136] - Quote
Einar Matveinen wrote:Is this speed increase on gallente ships +10m/s or +10%?.
10m/s |
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies Joint Venture Conglomerate
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:15:00 -
[137] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction? Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now. Reduced Capacitor usage: * All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
Good stuff.
You also appear to have forgotten the +10% optimal and +50% falloff for blasters.
|
Silath Slyver Silverpine
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:15:00 -
[138] - Quote
Sounds to me that when it comes to PvP, it's less a matter of hybrids being sucky, but of projectiles being ridiculously good.
Then again thats always been one of my issues with PvP in any game... balancing is always a pain and there's always flavors of the month. Although with EVE it's more like flavor of the year... |
pmchem
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:16:00 -
[139] - Quote
blasters will still suck for many of the reasons already stated by others |
TheButcherPete
StoneWall Metals Productions Bloodbound.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:18:00 -
[140] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction? Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now. Reduced Capacitor usage: * All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
Me love you long time CCP Tallest, thanks for unscrewing Hybrids |
|
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:18:00 -
[141] - Quote
Silath Slyver Silverpine wrote:Sounds to me that when it comes to PvP, it's less a matter of hybrids being sucky, but of projectiles being ridiculously good.
That's becoming more and more apparent.
I dislike power creep, I have to say. Perhaps nerfing projectiles in line with other weapon systems is a better idea. |
Warde Guildencrantz
Fake Philanthropists P I R A T E S
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:19:00 -
[142] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction? Actually, yes there is. I accidentally left it out of the blog. Sorry about that. It is being added to the blog right now. Reduced Capacitor usage: * All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
@Tallest:
Are you going to throw the changes to T2 missiles in there as well?
Unrelated question, still wondering if the devs are planning on changing up the missile graphics for the winter expansion. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:19:00 -
[143] - Quote
Jeffrey Powel wrote:A failoff boost on blaster more helpfull than a tracking boost = start to DPS at longer range (helpfull in fleet), can play the range to have tracking, can DPS a bit nano ship instead dying like a kitten in a mixer, and give a real utility to use null ammo. I think a 15 or 20% failoff boost not too much OP, considering in blaster boat you have to be in web/scramble/neutra range to be efficient. And work about this other usless bonus : the armor rep amount. It's really ****** compared to a 5% all resist, armor resist bonus is good for remote tanking, passive tank, capacitor, armor rep bonus just good for active tank... And add a low slot to the hyperion... abaddon got 20 slot, hyperion 19, what is that joke?
|
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:20:00 -
[144] - Quote
pmchem wrote:blasters will still suck for many of the reasons already stated by others
State them again so it doesn't go ignored. It takes 5 years for hybrid tweaks. |
Buzzmong
Aliastra Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:21:00 -
[145] - Quote
Silath Slyver Silverpine wrote:Sounds to me that when it comes to PvP, it's less a matter of hybrids being sucky, but of projectiles being ridiculously good.
Arguably, for starters all CCP needs to do is halve the Falloff bonus on TE's to make them match the Optimal bonus. It will at least improve the balance of the bonuses across the weapons systems a bit and not heavily favour Autocannons.
|
Garbad theWeak
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:22:00 -
[146] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Garbad theWeak wrote: - hybrid snipers are once again top in the game. At 200k, they outperform even lasers, and shockingly, caldari are the best. I think hybrids are officially fixed. You can debate if armor snipers are still better, but its competitive, especially the naga. They also should easily outrange pulses now.
First off, 200km sniping is a dinosaur strategy for obvious reasons. The fact they "easily out-range," a short-range weapon system shouldn't be an issue. In what way does this "fix," rails? Why would you choose to abandon a mael for a rokh because of these changes? Would you ever think that an eagle was a better choice than a zealot for sniper hac in light of these changes? If your answer is "yes," to either of those you either know something Tallest isn't telling us, or you're completely off-base. Obviously, but if things change caldari hybrids are now the kings of 200k+ sniping. And that's it. For 100k sniperhacs, eagle is still the worst (lowest dps, EM hole, superfluous range). For 150k BS, maels still dominate. For brawlers, both nanopest and hellcat still dominate hybrid platforms. |
Rikki Sals
State War Academy Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:22:00 -
[147] - Quote
I hope that this is just the beginning and that balance in general gets fine tuned more frequently. These changes look pretty good. |
Noisrevbus
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:23:00 -
[148] - Quote
Greetings Tallest et. al.
CCP Tallest wrote:...they are meant for longer range combat and as such should not need a velocity boost as much as other hybrid turret ships.
That excerpt from the blog make it sound as a deliberate and conscious choice, tied to a larger plan or vision for how things are meant to be played or function.
I would appreciate it if you (CCP Tallest) or someone else could outline, explain and motivate that part a bit better.
The general consensus on these forums seem to be that hybrid platforms with range bonuses fare no better than other hybrid platforms, while some of their largest issues are tied to "extreme long range" being outdated as a concept, and lacking mobility being a key factor keeping them out of gangs and contest aside those ranges. There need to be something more behind such an abrubt conclusion as "they have range, should get less". Will they get something else? is this coupled with upcomming changes to reinforce "extreme long range" that let them capitalize on said range bonuses in terms of actual range (as opposed to ammo selection)? etc. You leave alot of questions unanswered. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:24:00 -
[149] - Quote
Quote:Hybrid Turrets
Reduce CPU usage:
XL Turrets: -5 CPU L Turrets: -3 CPU M Turrets: -2 CPU S Turrets: -1 CPU
Reduce Powergrid usage:
All hybrid turrets: -12% Powergrid usage. Rounded to nearest whole number.
Reduced Capacitor usage:
All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use
Damage Increase:
All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
So, the reason to use beam lasers is now... oh wait, there's none.
Whoever decided rails should deal the same damage as beams needs to do some serious elaborating to justify coping with their adnormally high cap usage and their fittings stats for a mere gain of some tracking.
I for one don't see how it's balanced. 2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is" 2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?" Nice progress, guys. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:27:00 -
[150] - Quote
Morel Nova wrote:I like it overall, but a few reflections:
1. I still think blasters need a flat 10% or so damage buff up close, perhaps even 20% to make them competitive, as it is now an armor hurricane will out-dps a brutix and be more agile/faster (not sure if that last one changes with this), and it still has decent range. Tracking boost isnt much of a boost considering any AC ships you fight will have dual TE most of the time, so will still track just as well as you.
I did some rough calculations some time ago of vagabond vs deimos, both standard fits and deimos needs to catch and get to optimal within 15 seconds to win that engagement. that is a very short period of time and it didnt even factor in the vagabonds tracking advantage.
2. Hail doesnt need its ranged penalty removed. not sure where you got the idea that it was under performant. its been the only close range t2 ammo thats been useful the last few years.
This really. (With formatting) |
|
Kraven Drakenovic
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:27:00 -
[151] - Quote
I have noticed 2 destinct camps in this debate:
1) the EFT Warriors are all Hur Hur they are now l33t
2) the ppl actually persisting using hybrid blasters and rails. And screaming for ccp to recognise the actual fault
YER eft is a great tool. It does not however replicate realtime combat situations as constantly changing transversals and angular velocities
Yeah these changes look awesome on Eft
But when was the las time u sat still while someone is taking pot shots at your hull?
I have an idea go use a megathron in a lvl 4 with 425 mm guns on it and try and do sufficient damage to remove a BS before your cap bottoms out its like throwing rocks at the sea hoping to fill it up. Sure it will work. But your gunna be there a LONG time.
" Your group of 425mm Railgun II misses (target) completely
If i had a 100 isk for everytime that was broadcast i'd own jita |
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd Ferguson Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:27:00 -
[152] - Quote
These changes seem about right. Give hybrids a significant, but not ridiculous, buff. Then if there's still an issue with particular ships, you can tweak the ship stats (or bonuses) in the next iteration. If you make the hybrid buff itself so ridonkulous that ALL hybrid boats are suddenly feasible, then some hybrid boats will be ridiculously OP.
GJ CCP |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
215
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:28:00 -
[153] - Quote
With further analysis, the change/boost that will have the most effect was the hybrid grid reduction - Increases the viably of active tanking setups somewhat (though as long as neuts remain in the game as they are I don't think i'll be doing active tanking on sub cap gallente... ever). Tracking... not enough, there is little reason why blasters should not be able to hit ships of equal signature, in an orbit at optimal range for 100% accuracy. Some of us understand for this to be possible the tracking formula may need to be re-written?
As for speed, unless there's a mass reduction bonus I didn't read, will it really be enough? Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:30:00 -
[154] - Quote
Since you agree that the ships and armor tanking needs to be looked at as well can you balance one or two ships along with these changes? |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:30:00 -
[155] - Quote
The shortest range weapon system needs to be on the fastest ships. Period. End of story. Gallente already have some large hulls. Let them at least have the ability to get into range very quickly. |
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:31:00 -
[156] - Quote
Who the hell snipes over 150kms? -áThey'll just warp on top of you.-á |
Ancy Denaries
Mind Games. 0ccupational Hazzard
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:31:00 -
[157] - Quote
Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction? Reading comprehension. You might want to look into it. |
Max Von Sydow
Droneboat Diplomacy
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:32:00 -
[158] - Quote
Reilly Duvolle wrote: Now, a speedboost certainly is a good start, but you cant make Gallente ships faster than minmatar without breaking the lore.
Then let them make new lore, cant they say that some gallente engineer have designed a new superior propulsion system for gallente ships that make them faster but less agile than minmatar ships? |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:32:00 -
[159] - Quote
Garbad theWeak wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Garbad theWeak wrote: - hybrid snipers are once again top in the game. At 200k, they outperform even lasers, and shockingly, caldari are the best. I think hybrids are officially fixed. You can debate if armor snipers are still better, but its competitive, especially the naga. They also should easily outrange pulses now.
First off, 200km sniping is a dinosaur strategy for obvious reasons. The fact they "easily out-range," a short-range weapon system shouldn't be an issue. In what way does this "fix," rails? Why would you choose to abandon a mael for a rokh because of these changes? Would you ever think that an eagle was a better choice than a zealot for sniper hac in light of these changes? If your answer is "yes," to either of those you either know something Tallest isn't telling us, or you're completely off-base. Obviously, but if things change caldari hybrids are now the kings of 200k+ sniping. And that's it. For 100k sniperhacs, eagle is still the worst (lowest dps, EM hole, superfluous range). For 150k BS, maels still dominate. For brawlers, both nanopest and hellcat still dominate hybrid platforms.
Thanks for making my point. 200km sniping is not a niche worth having on any ship. Rails, hybrids in general, are in no way "top in the game," due to the listed changes. In-fact they're all still sub-par to their laser and especially projectile alternatives.
Are you changing your mind or just insisting that 200km snipers are better than we all know them to be? |
Ager Agemo
I N E X T R E M I S Fidelas Constans
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:33:00 -
[160] - Quote
I came! D: |
|
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:33:00 -
[161] - Quote
As others have said, it's a nice start but probably isn't enough. The inherent problem is that blaster ships are armor-tanked passively, and as such as quite slow to get up close before they start doing any damage (the small agility and speed bump given here won't solve that). When compared to the huge operational range of ACs and (especially) pulse lasers with Scorch, it's rare to be able to get into range to do proper blaster damage. And if by some miracle you do, that damage isn't all that much more than the aforementioned ACs, pulses etc which have been hammering at you all the time while closing in.
Blasters work if you land right on top of someone and are able to immediately scram and web them -- and even then, with the reduced web effectiveness we have now, it's not a given.
Honestly, I think that Scorch and (Barrage? The usually used t2 AC ammo) are just too good, in comparison. They give utterly huge operational ranges to both ACs and pulse lasers. Compared to those, blasters aren't worth using, even with these moderately conservative boosts. Hate to say it, but they need a nerf.
Sure, the boost is welcome. I just don't think it makes up for the overpowered nature of ACs and pulse lasers (with certain ammo) in comparison.
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:34:00 -
[162] - Quote
Great to see CCP address the issue and obviously they are tracking on the fact that the ships using them are all jacked up. Unless this is addressed all these changes are frankly a minor band-aid, but I'll add a few more 2 cents on the table:
1) Why is the Mrym and the Ishkur not gettting the speed/agility boost? You can't tell me they are too fast already and the poor Myrm needs some help.
2) Since all the other weapon systems seem to have a unique capability such as either not using cap, or no ammo needed, change of damage type, or missiles don't miss (for the most part); how about giving Hybrids something special as well. Like INSTANT AMMO changes like scripts. This would help in shifting ammo types to deal with ranging which is not realistic now with that 10 second delay.
3) Will all these tracking increases make frigs unable to tackle without being popped? |
Alara IonStorm
RvB - BLUE Republic
257
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:35:00 -
[163] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote: So, the reason to use beam lasers is now... oh wait, there's none.
Don't feel so bad, after the changes there will still be no reason to use Rails ether.
Scorch, Heavy Missiles and Artillery are the long range weapons in the the game.
They should look into that. |
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:36:00 -
[164] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:The shortest range weapon system needs to be on the fastest ships. Period. End of story. Gallente already have some large hulls. Let them at least have the ability to get into range very quickly.
This, pretty much. Right now the fastest hulls (Minmatar) also have the borderline-overpowered weapon systems (ACs). Guess what people fly in close-range combat?
...and of course, in addition to being the fastest hulls by numerical stats, Minmatar also shield-tank. Gallente ones are significantly slower and are forced to armor-tank (which means plates because of the non-working nature of pvp active tanking, which means extra speed penalties). It doesn't work. |
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:37:00 -
[165] - Quote
Ancy Denaries wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:No cap usage reduction? Reading comprehension. You might want to look into it.
Actually, that wasn't there until that post, alerting CCP Tallest to his mistake, which got him to change the blog to include it.
You might want to work on your reading comprehension too. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:37:00 -
[166] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Perdition64 wrote: hurricane vs brutix this is a good summary of why pvp'ers generally stick with AC platforms. - incredible falloff - better tracking - no cap use - minnie ships are the fastest - while tank remains on par with all other ships this is overpowered. you have to give people a reason NOT TO fly an AC boat at medium/close ranges. remember, one scram and the blaster boat is dead in the water....AC boat is still doing significant damage at 25km, medium blasters dont work past 10km.
And this. Max gank fitted Brutix overloads 965 DPS without implants, Hurricane does 905 DPS or 821 DPS with amazing neuting power while outperforming in nearly every other way (muuch faster even after the change, able to deal good damage outside of scram range etc) |
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:38:00 -
[167] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:With further analysis, the change/boost that will have the most effect was the hybrid grid reduction - Increases the viably of active tanking setups somewhat (though as long as neuts remain in the game as they are I don't think i'll be doing active tanking on sub cap gallente... ever). Tracking... not enough, there is little reason why blasters should not be able to hit ships of equal signature, in an orbit at optimal range for 100% accuracy. Some of us understand for this to be possible the tracking formula may need to be re-written?
As for speed, unless there's a mass reduction bonus I didn't read, will it really be enough?
I agree. It's like instead of hybrids being really crappy, they are now just plain crappy. They will be a bit better, but there is other weapon platforms that simply will do the job better. |
Delicious Bacon
Lost Enterprises... SOLAR WING
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:39:00 -
[168] - Quote
gfldex wrote:
In my eyes the root of all evil started at the very beginning of EVE when 4 races got introduced that where ment to fill the same role without being redundant. Nobody would argue about the inferiority of Apocs compared to Hulks because those different factions ships are meant to fulfill a different role. If you don't give up on the concept of having the same role for different ships or weapon systems you will just keep shifting FotMs around.
And that is what we like to call "balance". It's a b#@$% isn't it?
|
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:40:00 -
[169] - Quote
Llyandrian wrote: The huge spike in hail volume last week 4 million units in one trade is more than a typical month and implies a leak.
Yes, you can read about it here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=24631
If you read more in the forums you could've taken part in that ammo price speculation! The most relevant part is the link in that post entitled "UPDATE: Winter patch preliminary specifics!", linking to the third page. Most changes mentioned in the blog have been available there... |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
74
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:46:00 -
[170] - Quote
here are the fixes for hybrids:
blasters:
concept shotguns (short range arties...)
1. Increase base damage by 50% 2. Decrease rate of fire by 30% 3. Increase falloff by 15% 4. increase tracking by 37.5%
railguns: Concept long range auto cannons
1. Increase base damage by 15% 2. Increase rate of fire by 15% 3. decrease activation cost by 40% 4. increase tracking by 37.5%
ammo:
Simular boost that projectile ammo got
concept choice between what damage type you want to do between thermal and Kinetic (i.e. antimater does 80% thermal damage 20% kin damage, uranium does 80% kin damage and 20% thermal damage)
also include a tracking bonus built into the ammo
Caldari boost: remove the optimal range bonus for hybrid turrets and replace with a rate of fire bonus
gallente boost: remove the falloff bonus and tracking bonus and replace with a speed pulpusion moduel mass reduction per level
change the internal rep bonus to include a bonus incomming remote rep
General fix: change the speed reduction affect on armor rigs and replace with an agility reduction change reload time from 10 seconds to 5 seconds |
|
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:55:00 -
[171] - Quote
And after that hybrid will be overpowered. Ok for a boost, but don't joke. BTW i like the concept to have 2 close range ammo whith different kin/therm %, very nice idea. |
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:55:00 -
[172] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote: So, the reason to use beam lasers is now... oh wait, there's none.
Don't feel so bad, after the changes there will still be no reason to use Rails ether. Scorch, Heavy Missiles and Artillery are the long range weapons in the the game. They should look into that.
Yup. Scorch, in particular, is stupidly overpowered.
|
Hentes Zsemle
EVE Corporation 21123151
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:56:00 -
[173] - Quote
Theese are not the changes you are looking for. |
Iohet Nolafew
Star Frontiers BricK sQuAD.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 16:58:00 -
[174] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:The shortest range weapon system needs to be on the fastest ships. Period. End of story. Gallente already have some large hulls. Let them at least have the ability to get into range very quickly.
Exactly. Change should be applied to Angel ships, as well.
Katrina Bekers wrote: You're really unable to give our race some EXCLUSIVE love, aren't you? You feel this urge to buff the already overused Minmatar or the ubiquitous Caldari in the meanwhile, huh?
No one said it was a Gallente buff. Half of the Caldari ships are basically useless. They're fat, slow, shield ships that fit no doctrine and do laughable damage. They suffer the same problems as Gallente, except when you ignore weapon system slow armor ships are acceptable while slow shield ships are not.
|
Faelyn L'Darcassan
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:00:00 -
[175] - Quote
Since it has been mentioned that Gallente ships have trouble getting into range in the first place, how about giving them a mwd bonus? like +10% mwd speed per level? wouldn't that help? once in range, they'd scram/web their target and melt them with blasters? |
Xavier Linx
Omni Research
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:01:00 -
[176] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Would recommend giving each of the t2 ammo's different bonuses. The game is better when the feel and behaviour of races is distinctive.
+1 Though I think this is a great start,
|
Archetype 66
Pleasure and Pain Ares Protectiva
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:01:00 -
[177] - Quote
All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
How does it work ? I'm not comfortable with turret formulas and how bonus works (Turret + Skills + Ship Bonus+ Riggs + Implants etc...)* But does a +10% to Damage modifier means mandatory +10% DPS...I'm not sure about that and I feel that it can be more...
* I had read an excelent post about how bonus work and how they apply (Skills > Riggs with penality or not) but I can't find it anymore. Anyone can link it or PM it to me. Tvm ! |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:07:00 -
[178] - Quote
Faelyn L'Darcassan wrote:Since it has been mentioned that Gallente ships have trouble getting into range in the first place, how about giving them a mwd bonus? like +10% mwd speed per level? wouldn't that help? once in range, they'd scram/web their target and melt them with blasters? Do you realise the speed a 10% mwd speed give to a ship? |
Tashanaka
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:07:00 -
[179] - Quote
I'm not convinced this will fix hybrids. Sure they will be easier to fit, use less cap, and L/M/S blasters have 20% better tracking, however, they've buffed the tracking of other short range weapons by 50% which seems to nullify the blaster bonus.
+10 speed boost doesn't seem like a big change (Deimos goes from 198m/s to 208m/s) and with a T2 AB it'll go 20m/s faster than current. Blaster boats will still be kited to death by Pulse & AC boats without any way to applying DPS while the Pulse & AC boats can apply DPS. Blasters will still be a very situation weapon system, thus I'd still rather use my Zealot or train for a 'Cane than fly a Deimos.
"...The goal is to make them better at what they already do, not to change their roles. Blasters should do high damage at short range. Railguns should do average damage at long range..."
Seems CCP is enforcing LORE over a real buff to hybrids without taking into consideration the reality of how EVE really plays.
|
Holy Cheater
Monks of War DarkSide.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:08:00 -
[180] - Quote
Changes to hybrid turrets are positive, but not sufficient. In fact, they are far from it.
The blaster boats would still have similar damage with far less range than other turret weapons and with armor tank which will further degrade their capability to catch someone.
Quote: Hail (all sizes): Removed falloff penalty
This stuff alone gives a hell of a lot of boost to autocannons comparing to this hybrid "balancing". |
|
Spazz21
Rage For Order Nihil-Obstat
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:08:00 -
[181] - Quote
I think I just crapped a Rainbow in my pants.... wwwweeeeeeeeeeeee!!! |
Wu Phat
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:09:00 -
[182] - Quote
The Dominix will still not benefit from the buff as its limp **** power grid holds it back from being an awesome cheap solo or buffer gank/tank ship. Was hoping to fit a full rack of large neutron II's with buffer fit or large electron II's and double rep, double cap injection with this expansion, but thatGÇÖs not going to happen. |
carmelos53
OMG totally awesome corp of one Burning Spear.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:10:00 -
[183] - Quote
I'd just like to say thank you ccp, the team is on the right track.
Now please start focusing on rebalancing the ships. If you want 6 months to do this people will end up losing faith.
I'd like to think that progress can be shown weekly with specific ships types.
The proteus in particular is difficult to fit so once these changes hit maybe take another look at mega hulls, bc hulls, t3 and assault ships??
|
Mirei Jun
Right to Rule THE UNTHINKABLES
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:10:00 -
[184] - Quote
I'll be looking to test these changes on Singularity.
I think this goes a long way towards addressing the underlying problems, but obviously its all in the testing.
|
Faelyn L'Darcassan
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:10:00 -
[185] - Quote
Jeffrey Powel wrote:Faelyn L'Darcassan wrote:Since it has been mentioned that Gallente ships have trouble getting into range in the first place, how about giving them a mwd bonus? like +10% mwd speed per level? wouldn't that help? once in range, they'd scram/web their target and melt them with blasters? Do you realise the speed a 10% mwd speed give to a ship?
Indeed I do - that would be the sole point of getting into range fast, right? Maybe a +5% would be enough though. Moreover, since mwds drain cap rather fast they likely would not be permarun, or would they?
I for once would not perma run a so bonused mwd as that would even more stress the hybrid tracking issues... then again, maybe I am all wrong, it was just an idea based on the fact that gallente ships have trouble to get into range... |
Lillena
Objects-in-Space
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:11:00 -
[186] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:Great to see CCP address the issue and obviously they are tracking on the fact that the ships using them are all jacked up. Unless this is addressed all these changes are frankly a minor band-aid, but I'll add a few more 2 cents on the table:
1) Why is the Mrym and the Ishkur not gettting the speed/agility boost? You can't tell me they are too fast already and the poor Myrm needs some help.
The Myrmidon is not a hybrid turret ship, and this is more of a hybrid buff, not a gallente buff. As for the ishkur I have no idea, maybe they think it's good enough with it's 5 drones. |
zulrock
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:14:00 -
[187] - Quote
While these changes are great for starters i think at some latter point you have to look at some of the bonuses on the Hyperion, and Brutix hull ships as the repair bonus is useless, its only usefull for PvE but blasters and rails aren't useful for this purpose. a bonus for resists or armor amount would be better.
As far as tech 2 ammo you should take a look at the close range ammo as no one uses conflag or void or Null. |
1nsan1ty
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:14:00 -
[188] - Quote
I'd like to see Gallente different.. maybe add some special drone bonuses for the Gallente ships (for eg, make web drones actually usefull on gallente ships, so that we have a chance to catch up with others). Maybe even go further and design a new kind of drone (eg, sentry drones that can move with your ship, might give few ships sniper roles then)..
I am pretty sure that the way to save this race is revival and fixing of drones combined with some minor blaster/rail changes. The reason I made a Gallente character, back then, was this illusion that the Gallente were DRONES race, combination of few weapon systems, etc .. (you guys still remember the massive drone boat that the Domi was.. feared it was.. not mocked for its ugly looks, like today :))
Bring those days back I say!
|
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
156
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:15:00 -
[189] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:CCP Tallest brings yet more news of balancing. This time he tells us what he's doing to hybrid weapons and tech II ammo this winter! Check it out right here and make sure you tell Tallest what your thoughts are about the changes. He's waiting for your feedback.
yay its a great day for gallente... time to catch some frogs & snails for the celebration party Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless your from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:16:00 -
[190] - Quote
carmelos53 wrote: The proteus in particular is difficult to fit so once these changes hit maybe take another look at mega hulls, bc hulls, t3 and assault ships??
Proteus difficult to fit? lol? |
|
Damion Rayne
Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:16:00 -
[191] - Quote
It's a good thing I've spent many a long hour staying true to my gunboats and Gallente ships. Intaki Vicotor! |
Anaesthera
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:16:00 -
[192] - Quote
Where, oh where, is the Black Ops boost? My Sin has about 1 foot layer of dust on it. And I don't mean the little velocity changes... I'm talking overhaul. Pick two:
- Bigger fuel bay and/or less consumption.
- Longer lasting bridge.
- Lower skill pre-req to light covert cyno.
- Higher resists.
- More drone bandwidth.
And, oh heck, might as well throw this one in too- covert ops cloak
|
Astor Daeoli
Eye of God Controlled Chaos
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:16:00 -
[193] - Quote
CCP Tallest, that a start.
Have you tested a boost to webs? Why not try a 25% base boost to webs? That would bring t2 webs to 75% seepd still a long way off their original 90% base, but this plus the tracking boost might be enough. No boost to webs leaves blasters broken.
edit.. or if you won't boost webs how about reducing scram range to 6k base for t2 scram? |
Niamo Higate
The Concordiat Concordiat Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:19:00 -
[194] - Quote
1nsan1ty wrote:I'd like to see Gallente different.. maybe add some special drone bonuses for the Gallente ships (for eg, make web drones actually usefull on gallente ships, so that we have a chance to catch up with others). Maybe even go further and design a new kind of drone (eg, sentry drones that can move with your ship, might give few ships sniper roles then)..
I am pretty sure that the way to save this race is revival and fixing of drones combined with some minor blaster/rail changes. The reason I made a Gallente character, back then, was this illusion that the Gallente were DRONES race, combination of few weapon systems, etc .. (you guys still remember the massive drone boat that the Domi was.. feared it was.. not mocked for its ugly looks, like today :))
Bring those days back I say!
Drone boats you say?
Myrm Fleet
(fight at 3:40 ish)
Also <3 for hybrid/ t2 ammo love |
Cap Tyrian
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:19:00 -
[195] - Quote
I could argue all day but TL;DR
Give Hybrids their own role.
"more range, higher alpha, faster re-lode time, damage versatility" thats the wrong way to go.
high DPS and high Tracking is the way for Blasters, but not viable if you cant reach your target/ hold your target in place / doge your targets weapons with your burning hull to apply a few more shots etc etc you all know the issues and paradox about how Blasters are suppose to work and real eve.
less cap use or smaller amo, that really makes a difference ..... not.
My Proposal,
invent hybrids all new. High DPs fast tracking is good but how about giving them, in adition, threw amo some special effects for their cap usage. for example
EWear effects,
Webifire amo to keep the hard caught target in range and maybe make use of the tracking advantage. Lock braking amo, cap neutralizing amo, etc
or Bleed threw amo. Your Hybrid charges rip a big hole in that shield letting a bit DPS bleed threw
Just be Creative CCP!
|
Tore Vest
Vikinghall
42
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:20:00 -
[196] - Quote
Sensor strength !!! A close combat blasterfitted ship need sensor strength !
|
Archetype 66
Pleasure and Pain Ares Protectiva
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:21:00 -
[197] - Quote
Archetype 66 wrote:All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
How does it work ? I'm not comfortable with turret formulas and how bonus works (Turret + Skills + Ship Bonus+ Riggs + Implants etc...)* But does a +10% to Damage modifier means mandatory +10% DPS...I'm not sure about that and I feel that it can be more...
* I had read an excelent post about how bonus work and how they apply (Skills > Riggs with penality or not etc..) but I can't find it anymore. Anyone can link it or PM it to me. Tvm !
Bump
|
Vedje
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:23:00 -
[198] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
I want to believe that 10% damage and a little more leeway on grid/cpu will make headway for rails, but I have serious doubts.
Word
I completely agree with you Reduction off pg cpu needs are important So is the reduction on cap drain, love that
However, i believe that so small damage & tracking boost just don't cut it. Correct me if i am wrong, but as i see it a blastertron for example, which is a bs and as such should be superior to say a cruiser or a battlecruiser on short range will still be completely incapable off dealing out decent damage to them. A hurricane would be way superior to a Brutix, and again gallente left with only one bc somewhat capable of pvp, the myrmi.
Correct me if i am wrong but, 10% better tracking is almost not worth the mention
Come'on CCP, work with us here |
Valarie Rikeen
Nexus Advanced Technologies Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:24:00 -
[199] - Quote
Perdition64 wrote:Blasters definitely need a damage increase on reflection. Now, this might look very high on paper, but perhaps a 20% increase to damage in addition to these changes. This way, whilst their damage dealt in close proximity is very high, they still have similar TTKGÇÖs as their peers, due to the fact that they have more travelling than any other ships to get into their optimal range GÇô i.e they accrue more damage in the process. If I take 2 well established ships, the hurricane and a Brutix: (fittings ripped mercilessly from Battleclinic, because I LOST MY EFT BACKUPS >.>)
......
We can see that DPS is not too far apart, (768 dps vs 592 dps), yet the speed of a hurricane is 1434 m/s vs the Brutix's 1112 m/s (before the change). Tank is only different by 4k EHP.
10 m/s is not going to effect this hugely. The tanking abilities are relatively close, as are the dps abilities, considering the hurricane can kite outside the Brutix's maximum 9km effective range, as it is the faster ship. Now, if the Brutix was given greater damage, (20% increase), we see its DPS rise to 921 dps. There is a larger difference, but now, that is accounted for by the hurricanes ability to kite the target, as well as the fact that Brutix will recieve more damage attempting to get into that range. What it does mean, however, is that when it is in range, it will hurt and hurt hard, evening out this fight somewhat.
Again, maybe 20% is too far, maybe 10% would suffice. All I know is that blasters and rails both need a bit more damage, to really make their roles attractive alternatives. It seems this buff does not go far enough. To paraphrase others here, why would you fly blasters over AC's as it stands? This buff, compared to the projectile buff is impotent.
thats not really "close" brutix has 25% more damage. also, remember you are comparing a tier 1 BC with a tier 2
that 10 m/s is base speed, so that will scale to approximately 70-80 m/s after skills/MWD etc. that only closes 25% of the speed difference.
of course, if kiting is the issue... then no difference in dps will change that. But when a brutix warps in at 0 and scrams and webs that hurricane... he will die. |
Callidus Dux
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:24:00 -
[200] - Quote
I currently use missiles. But I really want to train some gunnery skills. My first thought was, that I could learn Caldari and Hybrid. But it was never a good idea. Than I heard of the upcoming Hybrid changes and I was happy, that it might be a good idea to use Caldari and Hybrid. But it seems, that the Caldari will not have much from this changes.
Maybe I have used missiles to long and see no improvements for this changes of hybrid for Caldari. But in my eye it looks, that I should absolutely NOT train Hybrid for my caldariships.
Maybe I am wrong. But at this point; I am a little bit disappointed because of the, for caldari, useless changes.
Please change the SHIPS of the Caldari, concerning hybridplatforms, too. I want to learn and test a Rokh. But with: Caldari Battleship Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret optimal range per level and 5% shield resistance per level I think that the SHIP itself has not the best statistics and that it would be very disappointing.
Please correct me, if I am wrong. |
|
LoRDa RaMOs
The Lagrangian Mechanics Nine Worlds
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:25:00 -
[201] - Quote
All i can say is thank you for this first shot at hybrids.
Let's see how these changes play out and tweak the changes in the ( most likely near ) future. |
Zerkuron
Suicidal Trainingscamp
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:26:00 -
[202] - Quote
Here are just y 2 cents.
I Think Blasterboats (High Damage, low Range) schould be the fastest Ships, while autocannon (really good range, good damage) should be more or less slow.
But here come the problems:
What abaout caldari and Amarr?
I would say Amarr schould be the ones with avarage speed and damage but good tank because they are endangered by both of the Specialized weapon Types. (Outranged or outgunned)
I don`t use Missiles or rockets so I can`t say anythig about this. I didn`t take E-War into account, but I think ECM is good as it is, but the other E-WAR should use a look at. Especially Dampener need an overhaul. (Maybe a fall-off or opti reduction instead of longer tergeting time, which only assist ecm but is in no way a standalone effect for use)
But one positive comment on the game. Freighters are well balanced |
Ager Agemo
I N E X T R E M I S Fidelas Constans
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:27:00 -
[203] - Quote
hey come to look at it... what about VOID ammo ? its a short range ammo and still has a stupid tracking penalty |
syrus mac
Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:29:00 -
[204] - Quote
This is just a clever way for CCP to remove some isk from the game while stimulating the economy!
Everybody is gonna jump in their Gallente ships, fly out to do battle and get totaly creamed only then realising that the Hybrid Buff is not good enough.
I would have though it was pretty obvious that the ship with the shortest range guns should go fastest? OR......increase the range of those guns/ammo!
I suggest Industry chars stock up on Minmatar BPO's and minerals.
|
Addicted User
Falling Stars Squadron
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:29:00 -
[205] - Quote
Lasers nerfed again? |
Ariane VoxDei
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:30:00 -
[206] - Quote
Perdition64 wrote:Silath Slyver Silverpine wrote:Sounds to me that when it comes to PvP, it's less a matter of hybrids being sucky, but of projectiles being ridiculously good. That's becoming more and more apparent. I dislike power creep, I have to say. Perhaps nerfing projectiles in line with other weapon systems is a better idea. 2005 called.
But speaking of which, we could start by making them use cap. Then look at alpha. And giving the hybrids and laser more versatility or taking some of the projectile versatility away (e.g. make them kin/exp only).
I'll get back to the hybrids later this week, when I have had time to discuss the changes OOG. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
86
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:30:00 -
[207] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Tristan North wrote:Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it. The agility change is an agility buff. The ships will be more agile.
I luv you
While I'm very happy with these changes and want to thank you for this excellent first step, I'd like to hold (web) your attention on T2 blasters ammo.
Adding +20% tracking to those blaster turrets will somehow be negated by the penalty kept. (?)
Also, has many of us already mentioned in different threads, those little changes about speed and agility will certainly change how the ships will now react to the actual pvp environement.
My question for you, if you can find somehow some time to answer with all that stuff "to do", is about rigs plates armor tank mods, decresing speed maneuvrability. Can this be something kept under the jacket for future (soon) changes if this is still not enough to bring Gallente line up competitive enough vs other races?
Has it stands, and for some of us, have the feeling that those changes will not be enough. What are your thoughts about this, is it possible that in a near future some other changes can be donne if gallente will still be the last choice you'll ever do for anything in eve?
Thank you for the good job. |
Ottersmacker
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:31:00 -
[208] - Quote
The fitting bonuses will probably result in a lot of good things (more available PG for more buffer and reps and so on), but the people making the balacing decisions should really try and force the role of blasters as "shortest range but very high damage with decent tracking".. at least that's how i've understood the concept of blasters thus far. The superior damage is a key point and it would need to be even more pronounced, perhaps give them something like a 20% damage increase (not this specific flat percentage but just as an idea).
I'd love to see blasters made so good to be considered as the FOTM, right now pretty much the only reason to use blasters besides trying new things is to be deliberately underpowered in order to get more fights.
oh and hail is fine already -.- |
Celebris Nexterra
Insanely Twisted
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:37:00 -
[209] - Quote
3 things.
1. Hybrid T1 ammo needs to be fixed. No one will ever use any ammo other than Antimatter, Null, or Void (Plutonium in rare cases). It all sucks, and sucks even more now that all hybrid turrets have the cap need significantly reduced (major bonus of other ammo types is less cap usage).
2. Railguns need a tracking boost OR the aforementioned ammo change should grant some sort of tracking boost. Artillery tracks almost identically to railguns while having far more range and alpha and no cap usage.
3. "Hail (all sizes): Removed falloff penalty"
WTFFFFFFFF!!! So you're saying there's no longer any reason to use high-damage ammo for AC's? Because that's what you just said. The only penalties left are now optimal range (LOL) and tracking. AC's are already the best-tracking guns in the game, and without limiting their range, that tracking penalty means LOLnothing to anything other than frigs. 425's on shield canes already hit easily at 15km+. Not to mention with the Loki's web bonus, it can now use Hail without having to compensate for a single thing. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:38:00 -
[210] - Quote
Wu Phat wrote:The Dominix will still not benefit from the buff as its limp **** power grid holds it back from being an awesome cheap solo or buffer gank/tank ship. Was hoping to fit a full rack of large neutron II's with buffer fit or large electron II's and double rep, double cap injection with this expansion, but thatGÇÖs not going to happen.
Of course not, it's a drone boat, drones should do the majority of the DPS. That ship is one of the better ships using hybrids at the moment, and probably will still be after the changes. The problem with drones is that you can't improve the damage with modules (but the damage level isn't bad without mods), only sentries can be pushed a bit with rigs. |
|
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:38:00 -
[211] - Quote
Guess I should restart building hail, what with it not sucking balls anymore. Also Hurray for Quake, It might actually hit that orbiting at 500 Raven now. |
Garbad theWeak
18
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:40:00 -
[212] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Garbad theWeak wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Garbad theWeak wrote: - hybrid snipers are once again top in the game. At 200k, they outperform even lasers, and shockingly, caldari are the best. I think hybrids are officially fixed. You can debate if armor snipers are still better, but its competitive, especially the naga. They also should easily outrange pulses now.
First off, 200km sniping is a dinosaur strategy for obvious reasons. The fact they "easily out-range," a short-range weapon system shouldn't be an issue. In what way does this "fix," rails? Why would you choose to abandon a mael for a rokh because of these changes? Would you ever think that an eagle was a better choice than a zealot for sniper hac in light of these changes? If your answer is "yes," to either of those you either know something Tallest isn't telling us, or you're completely off-base. Obviously, but if things change caldari hybrids are now the kings of 200k+ sniping. And that's it. For 100k sniperhacs, eagle is still the worst (lowest dps, EM hole, superfluous range). For 150k BS, maels still dominate. For brawlers, both nanopest and hellcat still dominate hybrid platforms. Thanks for making my point. 200km sniping is not a niche worth having on any ship. Rails, hybrids in general, are in no way "top in the game," due to the listed changes. In-fact they're all still sub-par to their laser and especially projectile alternatives. Are you changing your mind or just insisting that 200km snipers are better than we all know them to be? You think we are arguing, but we are saying the same things -- even with the buffs, hybrids are by far the worst. Blasters are inferior to auto/pulse in all situations, rails are inferior to beam/arty in all situations except 200k+ sniping, which is useless thanks to probers.
The hybrid changes are not enough to fix the problem. Not even close. |
Shimmir
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:43:00 -
[213] - Quote
ITT a bunch of whiners who are upset CCP might finally be learning how to balance in increments and not making hybrids into rapestorms. |
Archetype 66
Pleasure and Pain Ares Protectiva
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:44:00 -
[214] - Quote
Archetype 66 wrote:All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
How does it work ? I'm not comfortable with turret formulas and how bonus works (Turret + Skills + Ship Bonus+ Riggs + Implants etc...)* But does a +10% to Damage modifier means mandatory +10% DPS...I'm not sure about that and I feel that it can be more...
* I had read an excelent post about how bonus work and how they apply (Skills > Riggs with penality or not etc..) but I can't find it anymore. Anyone can link it or PM it to me. Tvm !
Re bump...
|
Tokougawa
Triton Research Illuminati.
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:44:00 -
[215] - Quote
I think the Energy System changes for the pilots is great, but damage is preferred. |
Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:45:00 -
[216] - Quote
Celebris Nexterra wrote: WTFFFFFFFF!!! So you're saying there's no longer any reason to use high-damage ammo for AC's? Because that's what you just said. The only penalties left are now optimal range (LOL) and tracking. AC's are already the best-tracking guns in the game, and without limiting their range, that tracking penalty means LOLnothing to anything other than frigs. 425's on shield canes already hit easily at 15km+. Not to mention with the Loki's web bonus, it can now use Hail without having to compensate for a single thing.
Exactly! I thought this was suppose hybrid rebalance not a projectile buff. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:46:00 -
[217] - Quote
Boost web range 3%-5% per level, ship bonus
Boost blaster optimal 5%
Don't boost Hail (why?)
Remove on-grid probing. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:51:00 -
[218] - Quote
Archetype 66 wrote:Archetype 66 wrote:All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
How does it work ? I'm not comfortable with turret formulas and how bonus works (Turret + Skills + Ship Bonus+ Riggs + Implants etc...)* But does a +10% to Damage modifier means mandatory +10% DPS...I'm not sure about that and I feel that it can be more...
* I had read an excelent post about how bonus work and how they apply (Skills > Riggs with penality or not etc..) but I can't find it anymore. Anyone can link it or PM it to me. Tvm ! Re bump...
it's simply 10% more to the damage modifer of the gun. |
crazyr2
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:54:00 -
[219] - Quote
When I started playing a few years back, gaming friends were giving me advice - go Gallente, get in close to people and melt them. So I went Gallente. I have trained T2 large hybrids and Gall BS5.
Rails sound better than before, but where is the Blaster love? Giving blasters a tracking boost won't change much imho. People can complain about the range, but that's not what blasters are all about - its damage.
Tracking bonuses aren't going to make blasters more useful in 0.0 or PvP. Warping to 0 and melting stuff would, there no reason to do that now and there won't be afterwards.
|
Celebris Nexterra
Insanely Twisted
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:54:00 -
[220] - Quote
Hmmm, I am now motivated to make a stupidly simple analogy for what you're saying about blasters vs all other weapon types.
You give a person a shotgun (Gallente ship with blasters), you give the opponent an assault rifle (Minmatar ship with AC's). You place these two people in an open field at 50m (any place in space where the ships do not land on top of each other). The person with the shotgun is actually Aretha Franklin, while the person with the AR is Usain Bolt. Usain is able to run at full speed while shooting his gun and never missing, while Aretha "runs" while shooting and never hitting. Sure, it'll take a few hits before she goes down, but she has absolutely no chance to ever hit her target. NOW BOOST HER SPEED BY 10%!!!!
And you tell me this is fair? |
|
Lykouleon
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
260
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:54:00 -
[221] - Quote
Prepare for ******** glory!!! Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER SO I CAN HIT THEM WITH MY SWORD
WIdot Director of Quality Control and Ironically Signing My Title to Posts To Make People ~mad~ |
Celebris Nexterra
Insanely Twisted
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:57:00 -
[222] - Quote
Only thing left is to make it so that when a ship is faster than a drone, THE DRONE WILL ACTUALLY GO ITS FULL SPEED THE WHOLE TIME.
Do you see car chases where the chaser is a Ferrari and the chasee is a Prius and the Ferrari just presses the gas OCCASIONALLY??? |
Sylviria
Unforeseen Consequences. THE UNTHINKABLES
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:58:00 -
[223] - Quote
I am still not sure about the fitting requirements. And then especcially about the CPU need. We all know that PG & CPU both were an issue with fitting. There is a -12% PG need, so that's a solved problem, which is pretty nice already.
But, then you look at the cpu need. Let's say, we stick with the Tier 3 snipers BS's.
Maelstrom with T2 1400's and a proper fit: can't fit it due to PG needs. But with a Ancillarry Router in there if fits. Great! Abaddon with T2 1400's (since it's used a lot nowadays), exactly the same problem.
Hyperion with T2 425's. Now, that's were the problems start. If you want to get a proper fit for it, you still lack a lot of CPU. The base need of the T2 425's is 77 CPU. After the patch that would be 74 CPU.
Let's say you've got Weapon Upgrades 5. That's a -25% CPU need. T2 425's before the patch: 57.75 CPU T2 425's after the patch: 55.5 CPU
So that's just 2.25 CPU less. With 8 rails fitted it's a total off 18 CPU. Still won't be able to fit a full rack of 425's then + proper fit.
Alright, the Strom & Baddon can't fit a full rack aswell without putting a rig on there. But that's a POWERGRID rig! And the Hyperion has a CPU problem! But there is no increase CPU output rig AT-ALL in the game.
So instead of elliminating a problem, you just make the problem, well, a bit less. So reduce the CPU need more of add a CPU rig ingame. Personally, i'd say the rig. So then all the Tier 3 BS's need a rig to fit 8 guns with a proper fit supporting it. |
Vrykolakasis
Trinity Operations Aurora Irae
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:58:00 -
[224] - Quote
This does seem to make Rokh/Hyperion fits available that weren't before, which I'm happy about. I like the ammo improvements. I think it's wise to take the changes slowly to avoid OP-ing anything. Don't stop if improvements can still be made, though. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 17:59:00 -
[225] - Quote
Garbad theWeak wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Garbad theWeak wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Garbad theWeak wrote: - hybrid snipers are once again top in the game. At 200k, they outperform even lasers, and shockingly, caldari are the best. I think hybrids are officially fixed. You can debate if armor snipers are still better, but its competitive, especially the naga. They also should easily outrange pulses now.
First off, 200km sniping is a dinosaur strategy for obvious reasons. The fact they "easily out-range," a short-range weapon system shouldn't be an issue. In what way does this "fix," rails? Why would you choose to abandon a mael for a rokh because of these changes? Would you ever think that an eagle was a better choice than a zealot for sniper hac in light of these changes? If your answer is "yes," to either of those you either know something Tallest isn't telling us, or you're completely off-base. Obviously, but if things change caldari hybrids are now the kings of 200k+ sniping. And that's it. For 100k sniperhacs, eagle is still the worst (lowest dps, EM hole, superfluous range). For 150k BS, maels still dominate. For brawlers, both nanopest and hellcat still dominate hybrid platforms. Thanks for making my point. 200km sniping is not a niche worth having on any ship. Rails, hybrids in general, are in no way "top in the game," due to the listed changes. In-fact they're all still sub-par to their laser and especially projectile alternatives. Are you changing your mind or just insisting that 200km snipers are better than we all know them to be? You think we are arguing, but we are saying the same things -- even with the buffs, hybrids are by far the worst. Blasters are inferior to auto/pulse in all situations, rails are inferior to beam/arty in all situations except 200k+ sniping, which is useless thanks to probers. The hybrid changes are not enough to fix the problem. Not even close.
Sorry, my sarcasm detector must have been offline. |
Reva Shakar
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:00:00 -
[226] - Quote
Quote:Hybrid turret ships While I am hesitant to boost individual ships right now, Well when you do get to individual ships I would suggest starting with the Eagle. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:00:00 -
[227] - Quote
Hybrids need to be buffed (or projectiles nerfed) to the point where a Caldari ship is better off with hybrids than projectiles.
So, Caldari turret ships users (all 10 of you), does this buff make you want to swap out your projectiles for hybrids?
|
EI Digin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
194
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:01:00 -
[228] - Quote
All of these changes are very interesting! Very happy that close range t2 ammo has been addressed, along with blasters.
The biggest concern I have is that because railguns are supposed to be long-range, average damage weapons, they won't be able to excel at their primary goal because it is relatively simple to get on top of a ship that is sniping at long range (150km+) due to probing and warping mechanics. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:02:00 -
[229] - Quote
Jeffrey Powel wrote:carmelos53 wrote: The proteus in particular is difficult to fit so once these changes hit maybe take another look at mega hulls, bc hulls, t3 and assault ships??
Proteus difficult to fit? lol?
Yea I usually have a noticeable amount of PG (not to mention CPU) left and always feel dirty or like I've done something wrong... who knows, maybe I have? |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:04:00 -
[230] - Quote
Reva Shakar wrote:Quote:Hybrid turret ships While I am hesitant to boost individual ships right now, Well when you do get to individual ships I would suggest starting with the Eagle.
Agreed.
X Gallentius wrote:Hybrids need to be buffed (or projectiles nerfed) to the point where a Caldari ship is better off with hybrids than projectiles.
So, Caldari turret ships users (all 10 of you), does this buff make you want to swap out your projectiles for hybrids?
I think the better question is: Will those caldari hybid ship pilots be any more or less a waste of space after replacing their AC's with Blasters or Rails. The answer is quite obivously, "no." |
|
Garbad theWeak
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:05:00 -
[231] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Sorry, my sarcasm detector must have been offline. I can think of only one ship that the new Hybrids make effective: naga. A sniperhac style naga can now do ~450 dps between 70-120k while still being reasonably fast (~1600), cap stable, and having good tank (~45k, ~240 res). I can see these ships actually working.
But everything else hybrid related still seems like crap. |
Steve4c
DeckardsDisciples ORPHANS OF EVE
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:07:00 -
[232] - Quote
I appreciate that Gallente ships are being looked into and hyrbid wepons are getting a long awaited fix.
I am an almost a pure gallente pilot
I see issues, with current the proposal.
Blasters: Optimal range (needs the buff)
Rails: are useable as they are now.
Powergrid usesage change on hyrbids = good
stop trying to compensate gallente ships and address the real issue here.
Blasters optimal & falloff is riddiculously weak!
For Instance Incursions, even with officer/faction fits optimal is less than 15k, for a gallente ship to get in this range, you address that with a speed boost?
Flagship pirate faction Battleships:
Vindicator vs Machariel: you could give 100% bonus to Vindicator speed and it will not catch a Microwarpdrive mach, period.
A faster ship requires more tracking speed to actually hit at a faster velocity
how do battleships address that issue they sit there and wait for ships to come in range, mach can sit there no issues to range and just alpha/volley.
Vindicator starts moving to get in range it looses tracking can't hit until in optimal+falloff range, then still has to wait far longer than any other battleship before it can lay any dps.
Even with an Oneiros giving a optimal range boost and having fitted a t2 optimal rig ( I still can't get within a decent range to do the effective dps)
Vindicator vs Nightmare When sansha get within optimal range of vindi (ooooh ammo runs out and needs changing) meanwhile Ammar ships still firing away and can instant swap crystals, have free cargo space -useful for lyavite etc. ( can go on running sites for longer without having to leave fleet to restock).
Yes Ammar ships doing better dps, have the best resists and armor, less ammo cost in use and above all can hit 60k+ no lag issues as everyone knows with lazer pew pew.
(logi giving either bonus of tracking speed, optimal or cap or no bonus at all will still allow a nightmare to be more effective, than its gallente Pirate faction equivalent -(Megathron based hull-hybrid wepon system)
So CCP's intentions of giving Gallente a marginal speed boost to compensate, feels like a kick in the teeth.
T3 ships Incursion:
1st: Legion (best ship for vangaurds- quickest isk grinded in Incursions) 2nd: Loki 3rd: Tengu 4th: Proteus
Proteus can't get within optimal range quick enough to do dps before the other dps have already blown up Sansha.
These days a megathron and navy mega are not deemed fit enough to compete in contested sites, therefore unlikely to be accepted to fleets. The same is beginning for the standard faction counterparts.
Marauders:
1st:Paladin 2nd:Golem 3rd:Kronos 4th:Vargur
Most people are fully aware of all of the above ships capabilities for Incursions ( which are a very popular form of end game pve in Hi sec, isk making)
Now I need address Hyrbrid turrents in Wormholes:
My Wormhole corp buddies are being very patient with me, they can see no gallente ships are fit for anything above a c3 anom.
guess what the main issue is: Optimal again then power grid. So just 1x large active repper can be fitted, that also means not enough powergrid to fit out all of the Hyrbid turrets:
In order of preference:
Drones are primary for sleepers (not cost effective) c3 anom: 1st: tengu 2nd: legion 3rd: loki 4th: proteus
Even Gallentes favoured pve ship ishtar, will not likely use hyrbrid.
drone boats: becoming out fo favour then boils down to optimal not speed on gallente hybrids....
Please do not work around the issue by Increasing damage, speed, tracking,(powergrid- this buff still needed)
Address 'OPTIMAL'
Have a hot coffee guys/gals at CCP and think this through...
* 1 fix - Address the actual issue of hybrids: Optimal
* lots of fixes - working around the actual problem, can cause even more imbalances that need later rectifying.
I hope there is enough valid points here to verify my opinion:
Starting to look like I need to Cross train for legion/Nightmare for Incursions and accept Gallente was a mistake
For wormhole life doing solo anoms, Tengu/Golem/Paladin/legion many except for gallente ships fail at grinding these sites:
Getting to the stage where i think a Thanatos is my only option for solo anoms in wormholes c3 & above, lots more risk/cost...
(PVP) Minmatar Loki/Machariel, if you can fly these ships with t2 gun skills would you use the Gallente equivalent, i think not.
my thoughts on picking Gallente as faction: lets just rage quit and spend all my grinded isk on Blink ( 500+ bil later am broke)
Being offered 2 bil in the Eve char bazzar for this char with 7 bil+ implants goes to show what players think of Gallente pilots, you can't even sell your char for a reasonable amount.
looks Like nyx or nothing if you are gallente.. no one wants your char - your doomed to be a hulk miner with low skills otherwise, then you might get enough isk for another faction character!
This is all beacuse of Hybrid turrets optimal range.
Buffs and nerfs to factions cause tears to those factions not having any:
1 fix ( balance optimal), this helps address a fraction of the super nerf to drone boats in Eve's early days... |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:07:00 -
[233] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Hybrids need to be buffed (or projectiles nerfed) to the point where a Caldari ship is better off with hybrids than projectiles.
So, Caldari turret ships users (all 10 of you), does this buff make you want to swap out your projectiles for hybrids?
well, let's see
small rails... less DPS than AC med rails... woo I can fit all turrets on an eagle now but it's still slow (no agility boost?) large rails... hey can hit harder at 200km for the 3 seconds before the arty fleet lands in optimal under me. Since I'm a slow, lumbering rokh with crap agility I'm not able to warp off.
nah, I'll stick with my min/amarr char for most of my PvP.
But the big thing is, To get into web range and blaster optimal means getting into scram range which in turn means no MWD. So all canes and maels have to do is stay at longer range and kite. Loki with web bonuses means there's no way a blaster boat will catch up. |
Insane Randomness
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:09:00 -
[234] - Quote
So people seem to be missreading this, so I'll elaborate. This is the boost to JUST the weapons and ammo. They decided t start giving us the buff's to these GUNS first, not the ships. Stay tuned for hybrid starship balancing, as well, hopefully.
Too those whom say "The speed boost isn't enough" let me elaborate on this as well. The Gallente are friends wityh the matari, and as such, their ships tend to have a decent speed next to amarrian or caldari ships. This is for a reason. A +10 m/s boost too speed translates to an extra 25 m/s with decent skills in afterburner, and an extra 250m/s with an MWD. Those whom say that there should have not been a boost too speed because of tracking are daft. Since when, in pvp, do you leave your MWD on all the time? I was under the impression that you use an afterburner all the time, at which point your new guns will certainly be able to track, or plus your mwd to get within range and then pound the **** out of them.
Finally, too the dude whom said the eagle is useless because at long range it's DPS is low. No dip sherlock, at long range, every weapons DPS is going to be low, except for cruise missiles, whom I could get off three volleies and warp out before it hits me. The railgun has the second longest range in game, next too cruise missiles, and as such, will have one of the lowest DPS at range. Try useing shorter range, 160km is a bit too much. 100km will do you good, and if you focus on your skills and fittings I'll bet you could double your firepower. If not you could at least hit 350. and if you wanted to go short range, with an eagle I'll bet 30km and 450 DPS is possible now.
I believe that this is good for the hybrid turret ships whom were fine the way they are, if not for the lack of power inthe guns, IE Megathron, Dominix, Brutix, Thorax, Incursus. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:12:00 -
[235] - Quote
Ager Agemo wrote:hey come to look at it... what about VOID ammo ? its a short range ammo and still has a stupid tracking penalty I think void is intended for larger targets where tracking doesn't matter. Your smaller ship uses void to lay the wood to a larger one, for example.
Also, null ammo opt+falloff increase should be increased to match range increases for lasers and hybrids (37-40%), or tracking penalty for null should be removed if you want to keep Gallente T2 ammo gimped in range. |
Xenial Jesse Taalo
Tactical Nyan Cat Attack Force OMNIMODUS ALLIANCE
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:12:00 -
[236] - Quote
Not much of a hybrids buff really when they go and buff T2 rockets, missiles and Hail at the same time. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
86
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:13:00 -
[237] - Quote
Marcel Devereux wrote:I thought this was suppose hybrid rebalance not a projectile buff.
While hybrids are being buffed, somehow projectiles are getting even more fotom than ever.
I don't understand why since they already work perfectly in any situation a lot better than hybrids and the choice between hybrids/projectiles will still remain: projectiles.
But hybrids are buffed with those changes that's a fact. It will not be enough, and that is a fact also. |
Skippermonkey
Tactical Knightmare
143
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:14:00 -
[238] - Quote
nice changes, but you need to go further and increase the 'on-grid' warp range and increase the max lock range, give us back our railguns!! |
TL Castiel
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:14:00 -
[239] - Quote
Hybrid will still suck!
Hybrid might be a little bit better for PVP but not because of the hybrid boost but because of the hybrid platform boosts (ships).
I have created a little image here to demonstrate what I mean: Currently the DPS output on the Marauders are as follows for PvE:
http://i43.tinypic.com/s4xwmb.jpg
Kronos: Green Vargur: Red Paladin: Blue Golem: Light blue
Add an Extra 10% to hybrid DPS output with Javelin (yes, t2 ammo) and you will soon realize that OMG, Railguns will never be as useful as a torp Golem, Mega Pulse paladin, AC Vargur! That 10% will mean that the DPS output of the Rails are: 487 not 443. I believe that Cruise Missile Ravens or CNRs or golems do as much damage as a beloved Railgun fitted Kronos. AWESOME!
What if you swap the Javelin (which will give 25% tracking bonus to Rails) to Navy AM? Well, the curves will change around a bit, the intersections will be different, but at the end of the day to targets - that are closer than 35 km - rails will do significantly less damage output: Say at 20km:
Quote:Kronos/Paladin/Vargur/Golem /w t1 torp 685 / 755 / 806 / 816
One more thing: I used 2 Faction MFS on a kronos where we all know there are situations where 5 lowslots are just not enough to tank the mission. So for those missions the 685 drops to 513 whereas all the other ships can afford either to have 2 lows sacrificed for DPS or even all of them. (vargur/golem)
Quote:Railguns should do average damage at long range. How is that average compared to other platforms at say 100km? Check the graphs out, look at the numbers.. You are right, with t2 ammo, Rails almost hit as much as other platforms but not quite yet. Q: Have you ever seen anyone use Hybrids for Sniping? Isn't alpha worth more than DPS for sniping? Rails = low alpha.
After all: Railguns are still not usable well enough
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:15:00 -
[240] - Quote
Insane Randomness wrote:So people seem to be missreading this, so I'll elaborate. This is the boost to JUST the weapons and ammo. They decided t start giving us the buff's to these GUNS first, not the ships. Stay tuned for hybrid starship balancing, as well, hopefully.
The "lay back and take it," defense is tired, old, and needs to be put away.
Insane Randomness wrote: Too those whom say "The speed boost isn't enough" let me elaborate on this as well. The Gallente are friends wityh the matari, and as such, their ships tend to have a decent speed next to amarrian or caldari ships. This is for a reason. A +10 m/s boost too speed translates to an extra 25 m/s with decent skills in afterburner, and an extra 250m/s with an MWD. Those whom say that there should have not been a boost too speed because of tracking are daft. Since when, in pvp, do you leave your MWD on all the time? I was under the impression that you use an afterburner all the time, at which point your new guns will certainly be able to track, or plus your mwd to get within range and then pound the **** out of them.
lol
Insane Randomness wrote: Finally, too the dude whom said the eagle is useless because at long range it's DPS is low. No dip sherlock, at long range, every weapons DPS is going to be low, except for cruise missiles, whom I could get off three volleies and warp out before it hits me. The railgun has the second longest range in game, next too cruise missiles, and as such, will have one of the lowest DPS at range. Try useing shorter range, 160km is a bit too much. 100km will do you good, and if you focus on your skills and fittings I'll bet you could double your firepower. If not you could at least hit 350. and if you wanted to go short range, with an eagle I'll bet 30km and 450 DPS is possible now.
I guess you don't have any experience sniping at that range or you've never seen a covert ops pilot worth a ****.
Insane Randomness wrote: I believe that this is good for the hybrid turret ships whom were fine the way they are, if not for the lack of power inthe guns, IE Megathron, Dominix, Brutix, Thorax, Incursus.
You must not fly any of them then, I take it? |
|
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:15:00 -
[241] - Quote
Steve4c wrote: stop trying to compensate gallente ships and address the real issue here.
Blasters optimal & falloff is riddiculously weak!
This is the point. |
TL Castiel
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:16:00 -
[242] - Quote
Xenial Jesse Taalo wrote:Not much of a hybrids buff really when they go and buff T2 rockets, missiles and Hail at the same time.
Ohh my God.. At the beginning there was Hail with tracking penalty and range penalty... You wanna do that 900 DPS in your Hurricane? Sure get in the face of the other as if you had blasters but guess what! Make hurricanes and AC plantforms better compared to everything else: remove tracking penalty at first and then remove range penalty!
Boost hybrid while boosting AC-s so that hybrid boost will not worth xxxx |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:17:00 -
[243] - Quote
Insane Randomness wrote:So people seem to be missreading this, so I'll elaborate. This is the boost to JUST the weapons and ammo. They decided t start giving us the buff's to these GUNS first, not the ships. Stay tuned for hybrid starship balancing, as well, hopefully.
Considering this buff is 3-4 years in the making, don't blame people for not believing a ship change will follow if not anounced.
Quote:Too those whom say "The speed boost isn't enough" let me elaborate on this as well. The Gallente are friends wityh the matari, and as such, their ships tend to have a decent speed next to amarrian or caldari ships. This is for a reason. A +10 m/s boost too speed translates to an extra 25 m/s with decent skills in afterburner, and an extra 250m/s with an MWD. Those whom say that there should have not been a boost too speed because of tracking are daft. Since when, in pvp, do you leave your MWD on all the time? I was under the impression that you use an afterburner all the time, at which point your new guns will certainly be able to track, or plus your mwd to get within range and then pound the **** out of them.
no, you run the MWD on a kiting fleet all the time. In a BC/BS your sig radius is already huge and you're focusing on optimal and alpha. This applies to skirmishes also, and even vaga gangs.
Quote:Finally, too the dude whom said the eagle is useless because at long range it's DPS is low. No dip sherlock, at long range, every weapons DPS is going to be low, except for cruise missiles, whom I could get off three volleies and warp out before it hits me. The railgun has the second longest range in game, next too cruise missiles, and as such, will have one of the lowest DPS at range. Try useing shorter range, 160km is a bit too much. 100km will do you good, and if you focus on your skills and fittings I'll bet you could double your firepower. If not you could at least hit 350. and if you wanted to go short range, with an eagle I'll bet 30km and 450 DPS is possible now.
ok, you take your fleet of eagles at 100km to my fleet of canes. let's see how much damage you do before I burn 15km-20km and start taking you out one by one. I'll give you a clue- it will take seconds.
Quote:I believe that this is good for the hybrid turret ships whom were fine the way they are, if not for the lack of power inthe guns, IE Megathron, Dominix, Brutix, Thorax, Incursus.
hybrids were fine? really?
|
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:18:00 -
[244] - Quote
Archetype 66 wrote:Archetype 66 wrote:All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
How does it work ? I'm not comfortable with turret formulas and how bonus works (Turret + Skills + Ship Bonus+ Riggs + Implants etc...)* But does a +10% to Damage modifier means mandatory +10% DPS...I'm not sure about that and I feel that it can be more...
* I had read an excelent post about how bonus work and how they apply (Skills > Riggs with penality or not etc..) but I can't find it anymore. Anyone can link it or PM it to me. Tvm ! Re bump...
In a nutshell: It's a straight +10% to the damage modifier of a weapon (each volley will do 10% more damage per shot).
DPS = Damage per Time (here: in seconds) Time = Refire Time of the weapon (including skills or ship bonuses) Damage = Damage value of the used ammo multiplied with the Damage Modifier of the Weapon Damage of the used Ammo = combined damage listed on a slug's stats Damage Modifier of the Weapon = Mutliplier listed in a weapon's stats (including skills and ship bonuses)
DPS = Damage (ammo stat) * Damage Multipler (weapon stat) / Refire Time (weapon stat) |
Tashanaka
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:24:00 -
[245] - Quote
Insane Randomness wrote:So people seem to be missreading this, so I'll elaborate. This is the boost to JUST the weapons and ammo. They decided t start giving us the buff's to these GUNS first, not the ships. Stay tuned for hybrid starship balancing, as well, hopefully....
Stay tuned?! It only took CCP how many years to get around to it.
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:25:00 -
[246] - Quote
Can I ask how you came to the figure of 20% for the tracking boost?
I ask as, in the context of the web changes you refer to (90% --> 60%, representing a 400% change to potential target speeds under webbing), the proposed boost seems a bit 'meh'.
Also one thing that is mentioned a lot is damage; have you ever considered something such as boosting the 'overload' damage for blasters - i.e. you might not make it into the fight, but if you by some miracle get within optimal, you can shunt everything into the guns for a brief period to overwhelm a target.
War-Machine |
Illectroculus Defined
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:25:00 -
[247] - Quote
Glad to see hybrids getting some love, before I really understood the game I trained them, and then when I got in a Rokh I loved that ship so much I just needed to get T2 rails on it, because flying a cool looking ship makes up for the better weapons systems on other, uglier ships.
Anyway the Rokh is still disadvantaged in a more general way, it still gets limited by the 250km hard limit on locking range, sure nobody build snipers for PVP, but this hard 250km range is another place where we bump up against random arbitrary limits on the sandbox. Is it ever going to be possible to remove this limit for this and every other ship? |
KFenn
Percussive Diplomacy
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:26:00 -
[248] - Quote
I love all the armchair video game designers in this thread. You don't know exactly how the changes will play out, and you're already calling for more buffs.
All we have is numbers. When we try these numbers out for real (and once metagame settles), THEN we'll know if anything else needs changing. Not until.
+1 for what looks like a solid set of changes CCP. Commanding Officer of the Treacle Tart Brigade SLAPD Director |
Illwill Bill
Svea Rike Controlled Chaos
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:30:00 -
[249] - Quote
Interesting.
Have you considered removing the 249 km lock range limit. Assuming removing it won't do anything silly, like breaking research slots in NPC stations, or turning all text on the forum green, I can't really see any reason for keeping the range. |
FlameGlow
Avalon Guards Gypsy Band
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:31:00 -
[250] - Quote
-12% PG is still not enough for medium rails to fit well
Also Hail ammo boost WTF???? It already had less penalties than void and conflagration(25% capacitor use for 5% tracking penalty) and plan is to lift the only penalty that matters - falloff?
Illwill Bill wrote:Interesting.
Have you considered removing the 249 km lock range limit. Assuming removing it won't do anything silly, like breaking research slots in NPC stations, or turning all text on the forum green, I can't really see any reason for keeping the range.
With scan being so easy it won't help anything |
|
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:33:00 -
[251] - Quote
Blaster need more changes for better working.
At least +50% optimal (mega with t2 neutron guns have now 4.5km optimal with antimatter ammo and lvl5 skills) and at least +25% faloff (mega with t2 neutron guns have now 13km faloff with antimatter ammo and lvl5 skills)
After this changes would be 6.75km optimal, with 16.25km falloff. (antimatter)
|
Schwester Minotaur
Tobruk Heavy Industries Shadow of xXDEATHXx
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:34:00 -
[252] - Quote
Hi, i am from Germany, so please do not focus on my language :).
I also love the Rokh, but the bonus or better changes here - does not recognize that ship.
The Caldari built the Rokh to have a even Hybrid Platform against the gallente. And as the caldari are militants, they focused on sniper range - to get their additional bonus. So the Rokh have the +optimal Range bonus.
So why - it is hardcaped by 250km, even the Rokh is able to sniper on 320km+ ?.
You really should remove this hardcap, or gain the hardcap for that ship to make it even.
Greetings
|
KFenn
Percussive Diplomacy
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:36:00 -
[253] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Blaster need more changes for better working.
At least +50% optimal (mega with t2 neutron guns have now 4.5km optimal with antimatter ammo and lvl5 skills) and at least +25% faloff (mega with t2 neutron guns have now 13km faloff with antimatter ammo and lvl5 skills)
After this changes would be 6.75km optimal, with 16.25km falloff. (antimatter)
Stop trying to make blasters like autocannons. They're -NOT- autocannons.
Autocannons = Assault Rifles. Blasters = Shotguns. Huge damage at zero range. Commanding Officer of the Treacle Tart Brigade SLAPD Director |
David Xavier
The Scope Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:38:00 -
[254] - Quote
Wu Phat wrote:The Dominix will still not benefit from the buff as its limp **** power grid holds it back from being an awesome cheap solo or buffer gank/tank ship. Was hoping to fit a full rack of large neutron II's with buffer fit or large electron II's and double rep, double cap injection with this expansion, but thatGÇÖs not going to happen.
Actually I would love to see the Dominix get it's 6th high slot turned into an utility high slot, and get some extra PG in exchange, but I am afraid that is a pipe dream.
Back to topic, some update if any of the ideas posted in this thread are being considered or not. |
Xenuria
The Scope Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:38:00 -
[255] - Quote
While you are fixing things everybody said you would never fix, how about you fix the tech 3 subsystems for the Proteus.
The drone subsystem should be able to fit Heavy Drones and the bonus to drone damage should be larger otherwise nobody is going to use it.
The Hybrid propulsion armature should get buffed too because that is the one I use for missions and even with my skills capped I find it's damage lacking. Maybe give it an extra turret slot, The art on the ship already reflects the capability to use the maximum of 8 turrets. Why not make the game play reflect that as well?
Hybrid Blasters are the Sawed Off Shotguns of eve online. They are Designed to be HIGH DAMAGE low range. I do think that the damage could be tweaked a bit.
Consider the following... You have a pilot with all skills at 5
A single tech 2 medium drone with ship bonuses does more damage in 1 hit Than A single tech 2 medium Hybrid Blaster with ship bonuses and tech 2 ammo
Should something like a drone be doing more damage then a single blaster?
tl:dr Good job CCP now just fix subsystems and hybrid damage needs a buff.
|
KFenn
Percussive Diplomacy
32
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:40:00 -
[256] - Quote
Wu Phat wrote:The Dominix will still not benefit from the buff as its limp **** power grid holds it back from being an awesome cheap solo or buffer gank/tank ship. Was hoping to fit a full rack of large neutron II's with buffer fit or large electron II's and double rep, double cap injection with this expansion, but thatGÇÖs not going to happen.
What? The Dominix is a fantastically versatile ship, in Solo and as a Gank/Tank with sentries. Why don't you try flying the ship? Commanding Officer of the Treacle Tart Brigade SLAPD Director |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:40:00 -
[257] - Quote
Schwester Minotaur wrote:Hi, i am from Germany, so please do not focus on my language :).
I also love the Rokh, but the bonus or better changes here - does not recognize that ship.
The Caldari built the Rokh to have a even Hybrid Platform against the gallente. And as the caldari are militants, they focused on sniper range - to get their additional bonus. So the Rokh have the +optimal Range bonus.
So why - it is hardcaped by 250km, even the Rokh is able to sniper on 320km+ ?.
You really should remove this hardcap, or gain the hardcap for that ship to make it even.
Greetings
It doesn't matter. Anything over 150km and an on-grid prober will give an opponent a warpin at optimal. Sniping is dead in skirmish/fleet warfare right now.
Sure, you can sit 240km at a gate, have tackle on the gate, and snipe small groups but you might as well have a cane, mael, or tempest at closer range for more DPS.
The problem isn't that the Rokh (or Eagle) is a bad ship, it's just that for what it does, every other ship does its job BETTER. |
Naso Gomez
Astral Edge
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:41:00 -
[258] - Quote
I currently fly Gallente with Large Hybrid 5, and I will still be making the switch to Minmatar Projectiles with these proposed changes.
There's just no point of using a ship/weapon system that is clearly inferior to another. |
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:43:00 -
[259] - Quote
KFenn wrote: Stop trying to make blasters like autocannons. They're -NOT- autocannons.
Autocannons = Assault Rifles. Blasters = Shotguns. Huge damage at zero range.
Agree on this. Problem is, when talking about medium and large blasters:
1) The ships need to be fast and nimble enough to be able to apply that zero range damage effectively. They aren't.
2) The damage that blasters do when in their optimal needs to be large enough to compensate for their tiny operational envelope. It isn't.
ACs are strictly better than blasters in almost all situations (talking about actual pvp here, not laboratory conditions), even more so considering the hulls that use them are also significantly faster than blaster hulls. This buff, unfortunately, does not change that equation (especially since it also contains a huge AC buff, which I see no reason for). |
adopt
We Need A Home
93
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:44:00 -
[260] - Quote
All blaster turrets: +10% to Tracking speed All blaster turrets: +20% to Falloff
All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier All railgun turrets: +10% to Tracking speed
Suddenly my Hurricane can have a real 1v1 vs a Brutix Shadoo > Always remember to fit Cynosural Field Generator I, have 450 Liquid Ozone in your cargo and convo a friendly Pandemic Legion member if you have a capital or super capital ship tackled. |
|
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:48:00 -
[261] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:Can I ask how you came to the figure of 20% for the tracking boost?
I ask as, in the context of the web changes you refer to (90% --> 60%, representing a 400% change to potential target speeds under webbing), the proposed boost seems a bit 'meh'.
Also one thing that is mentioned a lot is damage; have you ever considered something such as boosting the 'overload' damage for blasters - i.e. you might not make it into the fight, but if you by some miracle get within optimal, you can shunt everything into the guns for a brief period to overwhelm a target.
I like this variation as well.
Like I stated previously, IMHO the stated boost in OP is in the right direction, but at least the blaster boost is too little.
So, either do
A) 10-20% straight damage boost to blasters in addition to the tracking boost
or
B) 5-10% straight damage boost and 20-30% overload damage boost
Numbers might obviously need tweaking but that would indeed make the game so much more exciting to play!
That being said, I wouldn't be opposed to a *Slight* falloff boost to blasters either, though I'd still prefer for them to retain their unique identity as close range face melting instead of just being cap using ACs... (if they have the DPS for the job that is) |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:50:00 -
[262] - Quote
This is not bad but I believe Blasters still need some raw dps boost. There were numbers floating around somewhere but the basics were with blasters you only had a few percentage points different in damage between AC and blasters with not near the range or the ability to select damage type. They need to be boosted back into face melters so they are worth going in at 2km and frying people. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:50:00 -
[263] - Quote
KFenn wrote:I love all the armchair video game designers in this thread. You don't know exactly how the changes will play out, and you're already calling for more buffs.
Let me anaologize for you: Say rails are a car with square wheels and projectiles are a car with round wheels. The engineers come to you heralding their vision for the former car: A new spoiler, carbon-fiber hood, and superior exhaust system. You stare blankly at the square wheels, wondering how that fundamental flaw could be overlooked.
KFenn wrote: All we have is numbers. When we try these numbers out for real (and once metagame settles), THEN we'll know if anything else needs changing. Not until.
I think we've been over the "lay back and take it," defense. They want out feedback, not submission.
KFenn wrote: +1 for what looks like a solid set of changes CCP.
I agree, they're on the right track, but if you're going to shout down anyone saying "this isn't enough," you're clearly out of touch with the obvious flaws hybrids have dealt with for years. |
Razor Blue
Hyvat Pahat ja Eric The Polaris Syndicate
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:51:00 -
[264] - Quote
TL Castiel wrote:Hybrid will still suck! Hybrid might be a little bit better for PVP but not because of the hybrid boost but because of the hybrid platform boosts (ships). I have created a little image here to demonstrate what I mean: Currently the DPS output on the Marauders are as follows for PvE: http://i43.tinypic.com/s4xwmb.jpgKronos: Green Vargur: Red Paladin: Blue Golem: Light blue
Your Kronos fit needs improving, imo.
Heres mine
Still... Im hoping for CCP to look at the T1 hybrid charges. Boost Hybrids by giving them a reason to reload other than antimatter charges too
Edit. Forgot to add that theres no point comparing Marauders. Others can use short range weapons, and Paladin has tier4 long range guns, so Kronos will always seem to be bit underpowered. But it does perform rather nicely with good fit. |
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:51:00 -
[265] - Quote
KFenn wrote:I love all the armchair video game designers in this thread. You don't know exactly how the changes will play out, and you're already calling for more buffs.
All we have is numbers. When we try these numbers out for real (and once metagame settles), THEN we'll know if anything else needs changing. Not until.
+1 for what looks like a solid set of changes CCP.
Even with the speed buff you will still take 2 minutes or more to even get in blaster range while pulse rapes you. Then, when you maybe do finally get in range you don't have a huge dps advantage to make up for the shortcoming of blasters **** range.-á
The auto cannon boats can still kite you.-á
There is no mystery. It is a start but it is all going to leave hybrid boats being ****.-á |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:53:00 -
[266] - Quote
Valarie Rikeen wrote: We can see that DPS is not too far apart, (768 dps vs 592 dps), yet the speed of a hurricane is 1434 m/s vs the Brutix's 1112 m/s (before the change). Tank is only different by 4k EHP.
thats not really "close" brutix has 25% more damage. also, remember you are comparing a tier 1 BC with a tier 2
Just needed to correct this, read my later post, the real 3 damage mod gank fit overload DPS figures are 965 for Brutix and 905 for Hurricane, sans implants.
Also, the tier system is ******** anyway so it's not a good justification, and in the Gallente case, Brutix is the gank BC anyway Myrm. gank DPS vs Cane is even worse, Myrm ganks for only 868 so fix Hybrids AND Drones, eh? |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:56:00 -
[267] - Quote
CCp Tallest, may I make a small suggestion: Increase minimum warp range to 200km. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:57:00 -
[268] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:I think the better question is: Will those caldari hybid ship pilots be any more or less a waste of space after replacing their AC's with Blasters or Rails. The answer is quite obivously, "no." Good point, that might actually be the better question. Without considering drones or missiles (advantage Rupture if included):
Moa (after buff) 200mm rails (three mfs), spike: 73km+13km = 86km, 157 dps, 422 alpha Rupture 650mm Arties (two tracking enhancers, two gyros), tremor, 57km + 36 km = 93 km, 150 dps, 838 alpha Rupture 650mm Arties (one tracking enhancer, three gyros), tremor, 50km + 28 km = 78 km, 168 dps, 886 alpha
As far as I can tell, the results are similar with other ammo types.
What compelling reason is there to fly a Moa over a Rupture? What is its niche? Shouldn't Moa dps be significantly higher at the same long ranges as a Rupture, since the Rupture alpha is 2 times as great? Rupture still has same or better dps.
|
Vedje
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:57:00 -
[269] - Quote
From what i see, it's pretty simple, no need to complicate things even further
Idk what the general idea was when blasters were conceived, but CCP need to tare the old blaster scheme down and start a new.
Either A) Less damage, but better optimal, less falloff, among with better tracking making blasters more like AC. I can see why many disapprove this, indeed it will take that special something blasters had, however then again not many people are fascinated with that special something blasters have now.
or B) Continue with current strategy, namely blasters being some sort of space shotgun. However, if that does come in pass it will mean that gallente ships, due to seriously low range will need some other bonuses. Such as speed bonuses. It would be normal that the weapon with lowest range moves at fastest speed if it was to compete with other systems.
|
Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:57:00 -
[270] - Quote
This is like putting new leather seats in a Ford Pinto. Sure it will be a more comfortable fit and the lighter metals will slighty bump up your acceleration, but you'll be too slow still, unable stretch out your reach and tend to explode before you arrive. |
|
Sam Bowein
Sense Amid Madness
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:58:00 -
[271] - Quote
@CCP Tallest: Most of the time, the act of balancing is either too strong and creates a new FOTM (see projectiles buff), or too small and players are unhappy (your current proposal on hybrids).
It think the best way to approach the hybrid problem is to ask the players what they feel is needed. There are a lot of threads where smart people have investigated the problem and proposed solutions.
Make a best-of of these solutions, and let us, players using hybrids, vote on which is best.
Then maybe you'll not have balance (which is IMHO impossible to obtain), but at least you'll have happy players ! |
Harotak
Malicious Destruction War Against the Manifest
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 18:59:00 -
[272] - Quote
Good changes, but I would like for blasters to get the same 10% damage buff that rails are getting. Also, its the medium hybrids that suffer the most IMO, so possibly increase their damage buff to 15%? |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
86
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:02:00 -
[273] - Quote
Creat Posudol wrote:Jeffrey Powel wrote:carmelos53 wrote: The proteus in particular is difficult to fit so once these changes hit maybe take another look at mega hulls, bc hulls, t3 and assault ships??
Proteus difficult to fit? lol? Yea I usually have a noticeable amount of PG (not to mention CPU) left and always feel dirty or like I've done something wrong... who knows, maybe I have?
You care to link your fit?
I'm already waiting for a lol fit or civilian blasters on it. Sry but you're not even close to ever convice me of that. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:03:00 -
[274] - Quote
Sam Bowein wrote: vote on which is best.
Let us hope it does not ever come to that. lol |
Razor Blue
Hyvat Pahat ja Eric The Polaris Syndicate
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:09:00 -
[275] - Quote
Harotak wrote:Good changes, but I would like for blasters to get the same 10% damage buff that rails are getting. Also, its the medium hybrids that suffer the most IMO, so possibly increase their damage buff to 15%?
Yeah, maybe the boost should be vice versa. Blasters get moar damage and Rails more tracking. Then add bit selection to the ammo damage types and voila |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:13:00 -
[276] - Quote
+10 to speed ? seriously? I don't see that making a big difference, and the +10% damage i still dont see as being enough to bring gallante into the fleets of today....
CCP Tallest, Hybrids are supposed to be the king of all dps there supposed to be monsters, thats why they have multiple negatives....
Negative: Forced into Therm/Kin damage type only Negative: Capacitor usage Negative: Ammo required to fill cargo Negative: 10 second reloads to swap ammo types...
Positive: High DPS
As you can see the HighDPS just doesn't counter the Negatives... Tracking is a huge issue for blasters, but even so with the speed buff ships like the brutix will still DIAF before they get in range of the target, and be able to hold them in place...
The ships either need major speed buffs, more ships with web bonuses, or an ehp buff that will let the little bastards survive enough to get in close to start dealing damage!
TALLEST: There talking about changes to things, how about taking away the stacking penalty from web drones, how about that then suddenly gallante blaster boats can refit with web drones to actually pin there enemy down
Don't get me wrong i'm estatic to see you guys working on hybrids, i just dont think you realize just how badoff gallante ships and weapons currently are in fleet fights (Besides the dominix which has other... graphical fugliness problems) ... |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:16:00 -
[277] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:I think the better question is: Will those caldari hybid ship pilots be any more or less a waste of space after replacing their AC's with Blasters or Rails. The answer is quite obivously, "no." Good point, that might actually be the better question. Without considering drones or missiles (advantage Rupture if included): Moa (after buff) 200mm rails (three mfs), spike: 73km+13km = 86km, 157 dps, 422 alpha Rupture 650mm Arties (two tracking enhancers, two gyros), tremor, 57km + 36 km = 93 km, 150 dps, 838 alpha Rupture 650mm Arties (one tracking enhancer, three gyros), tremor, 50km + 28 km = 78 km, 168 dps, 886 alpha As far as I can tell, the results are similar with other ammo types. What compelling reason is there to fly a Moa over a Rupture? What is its niche? Shouldn't Moa dps be significantly higher at the same long ranges as a Rupture, since the Rupture alpha is 2 times as great? Rupture still has same or better dps.
THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Give rails ROF not damage, make it so that Railguns are the Autocannons of long range... and blasters are the artillery of in your face FU damage (But even more than artillery since artillery get to choose there damage type and use no cap) |
Ugleb
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
68
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:25:00 -
[278] - Quote
Quote:Javelin, Gleam and Quake (all sizes): Removed tracking speed penalty, added 25% tracking speed bonus
Hail (all sizes): Removed falloff penalty
Speaking as a Minmatar, I hereby declare my love for CCP Tallest.
Very nice to see CCP identifying an related issue and taking the time to address it there and then. Good stuff. http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/ |
thoth rothschild
Aliastra Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:26:00 -
[279] - Quote
The major problem for gallente gun vessels (not drone boats) is the combination of armor tank and short range guns. Not beeing able to reach 30km , which is warp disruptor kiting range, because of lacking low slots and slowest ship layout is devastating.
it should be minmatar using hybrid and gallente using projectiles.
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
78
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:27:00 -
[280] - Quote
Jeffrey Powel wrote:And after that hybrid will be overpowered. Ok for a boost, but don't joke. BTW i like the concept to have 2 close range ammo whith different kin/therm %, very nice idea.
not really blaster are looking at an 8% increase to dps... but a 50% increase to alpha...
though rails are getting a 45% increase to dps (which sounds like a lot) but if ccp does not fix probs then rails will need that means rails need that much more damage... |
|
Jane Idoka
LoneStar Industries Comatose Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:29:00 -
[281] - Quote
gfldex wrote:Medium and small blasters became a complete gamble when webbers where nerfed and scrams got boosted. That change was ment to be a boost to AF. That never played out. You acknowledge that there is a problem with webbers in conjunction with blasters but fail to understand the underlying issue. The combined effect of having a rather useless webber and at the same time getting your MWD shut off was the killer. A brutix can lose 75% of it's damage because a rifter is switching it's MWD off.
For Dreads adding the mass boost to siege modules made blasters a complete nono. If you get bumped at jump in you can't drop in siege for minutes. You might even have to relocate via warp out and back in to get into any reasonable range. If there are hostiles around that is simply not an option.
Fiddling around with fitting requirements or tracking wont change anything. The big gamble that are medium and small blasters is still there and I wont take it. Your unwillingness to take a change to the game back that didn't play out as expected is not going to make anything better.
Before we got T2 ships the low kin/therm resi on pretty much any PvP fit ship made up for the lower damage mod on rails. Increasing the base damage wont change that. Any T2 ship got either increased kin or therm resi. With combat prolongment and the RR boost volley damage got even more important in PvP then it used to be. A 10% dps increase wont change that.
I can't see how the proposed changes will improve anything in PvP.
If you really want to change something you need to let rails play in their own league. I would propose to turn rails upside down. Let the shortest rails do the most damage and then give those short rails a hefty damage boost. If you keep trying to have a difference between rails and beams/arties without making them different you will just keep shifting inferiority around.
In my eyes the root of all evil started at the very beginning of EVE when 4 races got introduced that where ment to fill the same role without being redundant. Nobody would argue about the inferiority of Apocs compared to Hulks because those different factions ships are meant to fulfill a different role. If you don't give up on the concept of having the same role for different ships or weapon systems you will just keep shifting FotMs around.
This has been the most insightful post i have read so far and one that i had a feeling for but wasn't quite able to put my finger on until now. One thing that really bugs me about the game and i have been with it for quite a few years now is seeming crapshoot of ship roles for each race, they are all over the place. I think a ground up rethinking of races and ship roles should be really taken for long term health of EVE. As i see it these issue will crop up constantly untill each race is defined by its ships: caldari will excell at EW, minmatar at ductaping... err damage, amarr tanking and gallente at whatever they're supposded to be good at (as long time gallente pilot i'm still not sure what) |
Faelyn L'Darcassan
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:31:00 -
[282] - Quote
I agree with the posts stressing the need for a specific role for hybrids. Now what was that supposed to be again?
Looking at hybrids in RL, they have primarily one damage type - kinetic and due to their nature are somewhat simpler by design than e.g. traditional projective weapons (i.e. fewer parts, not necessarily easier to build though). Since they can use smaller caliber ammo for the same damage than projectiles, they would likely have (much) better tracking at the cost of increased power needs. Rails have long effective range and thus accuracy and damage retention, while blasters have short range but cause huge damage. Thus a possible positioning could be the GÇÿreversalGÇÖ of autocannons & artys (rails - higher ROF, long range, low alpha vs. blasters - lower ROF, high alpha, short range):
Blasters GÇô the ultimate close range weapon of doom: - comparable if not better tracking than autocannons (should comfortably hit ships half class smaller) - low optimal and falloff (fire field contained particle charges), but definitely higher optimal than now - very high volley damage (high energy and mass = massive damage) - comparably high DPS (compensates for short range, i.e. time spent on getting into range) - lower ROF than autocannons and lasers due to need of energizing the charges - relatively high cap use Bottom line: if you get into blaster range, you should wish youGÇÖd never be born in the first place.
Rails GÇô the ultimate sniperGÇÖs choice: - have decent tracking, e.g. half-way between lasers and projectiles - have very high optimal, reasonable falloff (maybe reverse optimal/falloff from artys?) - less volley damage than both projectiles and lasers - comparable DPS at a given range - decent ROF, better than lasers and much better than artillery - medium cap use Bottom line: reliable and consistent long-range power projection & damage retention
To differentiate ammo types, hybrids should have better damage retention over their effective range compared to both projectiles and lasers (missiles have perfect damage retention). They should stick with THERMAL/KINETIC damage and instead of making damage variable, the different charges might have different EWAR effects on targets for a short period of time (think different warheads). E.g., antimatter increasing armor/structure damage, plutonium dissipating capacitor, lead slowing ships down, thorium disrupting sensors, iridium increasing shield damage.
Does this fix hybrids? Maybe yes and maybe not, since one may argue that this was their purpose all along. I believe that any changes to hybrids will necessitate changes to ship stats to make them effective.
Personally I want to see blaster boats viciously fry anything they get on top off and snipers hurt and confuse enemies at long range. The same blaster boats however should be somewhat more resilient such as to have a chance to get there but being armor tanked, should be less agile. Designated blaster boats might get AB/MWD bonuses to get on top faster GÇô think a surprise gank attack, but should again be more sluggish once there, i.e. not outmaneuver minnie ships. These might, if clever enough try to get away using their superior speed. Alternatively, some Gallente ships might get web range bonuses to pin those kiting Minnie ships down and leave them the choice of warping out, or biting the dust if they tally for too long.
|
gfldex
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:32:00 -
[283] - Quote
Jane Idoka wrote:gfldex wrote: #stuff about pew pew# This has been the most insightful post i have read so far and one that i had a feeling for but wasn't quite able to put my finger on until now.
I demand likes! :->
|
Darnok Iksnibiks
Bifrost Investment Group
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:37:00 -
[284] - Quote
Wellcome
I generally like the first iteration of the changes.
Only question i would like to ask is why Hyperion gets only 5 m/s speed boost? It always was the slowest to align Gallente battle ship but the fastest one. now Megathron is as fast as hype while having better agility and tracking bonus. In my opinion Hyperion lost one of its few advantages over mega...
With regards Darnok Iksnibiks |
Ratnose Banker
Pink Sockers
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:38:00 -
[285] - Quote
If blasters are so crappy then how about give every gallente ship a web bonus instead of just the new battlecruiser? |
Ratnose Banker
Pink Sockers
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:40:00 -
[286] - Quote
Also X-L Blasters really do need the 20% tracking tbh!! |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
86
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:42:00 -
[287] - Quote
Ratnose Banker wrote:If blasters are so crappy then how about give every gallente ship a web bonus instead of just the new battlecruiser?
Because even with 5% strgh bonus per level you'll see all cry birdies on Talos thread come up with their main and numberous alts say tons of crap stuff they don't even know about.
You know, the kind of idiot that still thinks in blaster/web range they should keep all the advantages, because someone need to be the last at everything, and in their mind is gallente, so they don't need buffs because somehow they may loose some ships against gallente ... |
Willl Adama
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
36
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:43:00 -
[288] - Quote
The listed changes look fine imo, I don't rly think blasters are so much worse off than the rest tbh. I think most people are underestimating the fitting buff which will give blasters more range/dps generally. There might be a few ships that could still use a slight PG boost though, like the proteus. Latest Video:-á-á Kill Will: Volume 4 |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:46:00 -
[289] - Quote
Still needs more DPS. Too close to AC's in DPS without any of the advantages. |
Metellus Titurius
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:50:00 -
[290] - Quote
My thoughts summed up:
-Rails need a larger bump in damage, otherwise players still have no reason to use them over artillery -Don't decrease the powergrid for rails as much because the point of sniping is to sacrifice a TON of tank for dps at range -Change the T2 ammo for rails so that they offer unique bonuses instead of generic trading of range for dps/dps for range -Assault cruisers like the Eagle and Demios still have no place in a fleet, whether it be null sec or low sec warfare.
Other than me griping about rails still being terrible, the blaster side of the hybrids looks GREAT! |
|
Metellus Titurius
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:51:00 -
[291] - Quote
Kumq uat wrote:Still needs more DPS. Too close to AC's in DPS without any of the advantages.
More of my point that there is no reason to use hybrids over AC's, Arty, or Lasers. You'll just be wasting your time in another patch that doesn't change anything. |
TaterRoller
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:54:00 -
[292] - Quote
Good start to changes, but not enough. Range is still awful, and the speed boost just isnt enough, I sure hope this list is just tentative. |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 19:56:00 -
[293] - Quote
xo3e wrote:"ok. lets boost both close and long range Projectiles, and also Lasers and say that this is Hybrid wepons boost actually" (c) CCP
i dont want to be politically incorrect, but... WTF IS THIS? WHAT IS THE POINT IN BOOSTING TRACKING WHEN BLASTER BOATS STILL CANT GET CLOSE ENOUGH?
this "boost" looks like bad excuse, and blaster boats will still only be able to stand against n00bs in hands of a skilled pilots. and i dont think that this is looks like good balance.
inb4 "whine more n00b... wait.. WHAT?"
I have this same question...
Could you please explain your hesitancy to change ship hybrid bonuses?
(I'm also a bit suprised, I know Caldari are more ranged hybrids, but I didn't realize Caldari had so few blaster boats? I didn't see Caldari AF mentioned at all .. and rails on a harpy are well ... hmmmmmm: Subject to individual opinion)
Please explain the hesitancy to change ship related states to better facilitate Hybrid rebalance? |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:05:00 -
[294] - Quote
Got through about 1/2 of the posts here, and I think many of you need to get on EFT and try some new loadouts, using the new stats, before you rant and rave about the proposed rebalancing.
The real problem with Gallente ships has been the combined high PG reqs of both hybrid guns and armor plates, which made balancing gank vs tank difficult. In addition, after the previous across-the-board speed rebalancing, Gallente ships were running a bit too slow, due to the speed/agility penalty from armor plates and armor rigs.
The proposed reduction in PG reqs for hybrid guns means that many of the Gallente blaster ships will be able to fit a full rack of higher grade guns, while maintaining the same amount of tank - ie. instead of electron blasters, you can now fit ion blasters. This is equivalent to giving a massive damage buff to both blasters and railguns. For example, upgrading from T2 medium electron blasters to T2 medium ion blasters, is a 60% boost in damage. Railguns get an additional 10% damage buff, on top of the ability fo upgrade to higher grade guns - from the old T2 350mm rails to the new T2 425mm rails, we're talking about a 50% boost in damage. So, what are you complaining about?
However, the PG reduction is even better than a simple damage buff. Why? Because you can also opt to keep the same gank, and use the extra PG to upgrade your tank instead.
For example, the PG req for an 400mm plate is 30, whereas the PG req for an 800mm plate is 200. In many cases, due to the high PG of the hybrid guns, Gallente ships have been a bit short on PG for the 800mm plate and thus forced to use the 400mm plate. Now, with the lower PG of the guns, you will be able to upgrade many ships to the 800mm plate, which has 100% more armor HP than the 400mm plate. So, armor tanking gets a bit of love out of this hybrid rebalance, too.
But, we don't stop here. Currently, if you want a beefer armor tank, you might opt to use two (2) 400mm plates, or one (1) 800mm plate + RC/PDS module or ACR rig (to boost the PG). The reduction of the gun PG reqs means that you will be able to fit the single 800mm plate, without a PG upgrade, to get the identical tank. This effectively frees up either a low slot or a rig slot - which can be used for an additional damage mod/rig, a tanking mod/rig, or even a speed mod/rig. Yeah, baby!
Next, the buff to Gallente ship max velocity/agility helps to take the edge off of the armor plate penalty. For example, the Incursus (new speed 344 m/s) is now only a hair slower than the Rifter (353 m/s), and likely more agile. With faster tracking blasters, the upgraded Incursus just might be the new FOTM for solo PvP frigs... hmm.
And, finally, the substantial reduction in cap use of the hybrid guns reduces the need for cap rechargers, cap boosters, nosferatus, and CCC rigs. Again, we''re talking about freeing up mod/rig slots which can be used to improve gank, tank, or speed.
|
carmelos53
OMG totally awesome corp of one Burning Spear.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:07:00 -
[295] - Quote
Raw damage still doesn't justify switching to gallente blaster boats for close engagements when you can still fly mini with ac and have nearly the same damage but hit at much greater range....
Tracking still needs a bigger buff... I'm sorry but a shield tanked mini has compatible tracking with 2-3 tracking enchancers and gallente doesn't (in general) have enough kids to compensate.....
The proteus still needs to be addressed. Of is still way to low to make it as useful as the other t3s in pvp especially when the legion (after these changes) will be able to hit at 14km op and only be doing 57 less dps.....
If ccp is worried about making gallente overpowered I can undersand.... But keep in mind unless you warp at 0. And keep the target at 0 there is no diversity with blaster boats so they NEED TO BE AMAZING AT 0km and frankly this just isn't enough...
^edit to the poster above me^ you are talking about a very niche market when it comes to fitting electrons instead of ions etc.... I think you need to compare a few ships in eft my friend. The rest of your post is very well thought out and I applaud you for it.
And you stated armor tanking blaster boats now get to drop their cap fittings for extra tank??? I don't know a sigle pilot who uses ccc rigs for pvp.... Yes it will help in missions... But I don't think anybody plays missions unless they have to so question mark to you sir.
Reducing the was needed just to help the fittings on most blaster platforms... It's not a big OMG ehp buff unless you drop some resists for another plate ....
No one uses cap rechargers or power relays in pvp. In some rare cases people might... |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:11:00 -
[296] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Got through about 1/2 of the posts here, and I think many of you need to get on EFT and try some new loadouts, using the new stats, before you rant and rave about the proposed rebalancing.
Spoken like someone who's got no experience flying a hybrid platform. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:17:00 -
[297] - Quote
Dear CCP Tallest... The community has echoed their sentiments towards your proposed changes in various ways. Following are mine...
*) Reduce CPU usage: fixed number change is pure wrong. It should have %age reduction - 15% *) Reduce Powergrid Usage: -12% . This is not enough. I think -30% will give the ability to fit a good tank with speed mods and Cap booster. *) Reduced Capacitor usage: All hybrid turrets: -30% capacitor use - Thanks very much this was much needed. *) Tracking Speed Increase: All blaster turrets: +20% to Tracking speed - A 40% buff is really necessary. *) Max Velocity +10 - waste of buff. Really not worth anything *) Inertia Modifier -5% - waste of buff. Really not worth anything *) Tech II Ammo: You said "Javelin is quite obviously underpowered". Then you buff it by removing the cap penalty. Is that why it was underpowered? I am not mentioning the tracking speed penalty removal because it is applied to all ammo types.
The whole community has been providing tons of suggestion for years now. It is very sad to see you come out with this solution. You have completely missed out on... 1) Correcting the base optimal and falloff of blasters. 2) Correcting base damage modifiers on hybrid guns (Rails and Blasters). 3) Correcting the stacking penalty of T2 short range ammo.
If you intend to go forward with your proposed changes please re-imburse me the Skill Points that I have for hybrid guns so that I can pick another (projectile or laser). I will be happy with that.
Many Thanks and Best Regards Dare
|
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:20:00 -
[298] - Quote
xo3e wrote:" i dont want to be politically incorrect, but... WTF IS THIS? WHAT IS THE POINT IN BOOSTING TRACKING WHEN BLASTER BOATS STILL CANT GET CLOSE ENOUGH?
This is the ******* point, boys. I'm still thinking in a shield active tanking Megathron, favored now than they will lower the capacitor use... |
ATTAKowl
Sigillum Militum Xpisti Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:23:00 -
[299] - Quote
I want to see the Rokh with a better drone bay. It is a battleship and should perform like one. |
McBrideCZ
Sardinky ve Vesmiru
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:23:00 -
[300] - Quote
Railguns really deserves more than 10% damage buff. Other changes sounds pretty sweet!
When we are talking about weapon balance, Tachyon Lasers need some balance too. Compared to Megabeam laser, they offer only tiny damage boost but with huge PG stress.
8x Megabeam II vs. 8x Tachyon II on abaddon with 3xHeat sink II, All level 5 skill and Multifreq. L crystals:
Tachyons will get you 56 more DPS, 3+5 better optimal + falloff and much higher alpha at the cost of 3600 more PG usage and 30 more CPU usage with lower tracking
Compared to insange PG/CPU/Cap usage, the advantage of Tachs vs. Megabeams is very small.
Tachs should use some damage boost or decrease of CPU/PG.
|
|
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:23:00 -
[301] - Quote
@Tallest/Ballancers: Not quite certain how often this was brougth up in this thread already, btu could we also lower the size of hybrid ammo, while we're at it? |
Al'ha
Aliastra Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:23:00 -
[302] - Quote
Max Velocity +10? Funny joke. Another one Matar boost. Again. Why CCP do not like Gallente?.. |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:25:00 -
[303] - Quote
Hail w/o falloff penalty.
TY TY TY TY TY TY |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:26:00 -
[304] - Quote
Speed and agility on blasterships needs to be improved even more tbh. The boats are still sluggish as hell, and cant get close to other ships fast enough. Remember that those damn buffer tanks, or plates/armor rigs makes the gallente blasterboats slower. That wouldnt be such a problem if it wasnt for the fact that we have the worst optimal and falloff range of all race's.
The deimos is one of the ships that need a special look at, since it is atm a useless ship.
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
80
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:27:00 -
[305] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Got through about 1/2 of the posts here, and I think many of you need to get on EFT and try some new loadouts, using the new stats, before you rant and rave about the proposed rebalancing.
Spoken like someone who's got no experience flying a hybrid platform.
yeah i know eh the thing with pre boosted blasters is on eft they looked awesome... but we need more than just on paper awesome...we need in game awesome and the boost from CCP Tallest will just make them look better on paper but not in practice
|
PinkKnife
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:27:00 -
[306] - Quote
Quote:Before we start looking at armor tanking issues or individual ships, Hybrid weapons as a whole need to be boosted up to a level where using them becomes desirable.
Highlighted for those who I think glossed over this. However it seems they aren't done with Gallente/Hybrids just yet. |
Iohet Nolafew
Star Frontiers BricK sQuAD.
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:28:00 -
[307] - Quote
Metellus Titurius wrote:My thoughts summed up:
-Rails need a larger bump in damage, otherwise players still have no reason to use them over artillery -Don't decrease the powergrid for rails as much because the point of sniping is to sacrifice a TON of tank for dps at range -Change the T2 ammo for rails so that they offer unique bonuses instead of generic trading of range for dps/dps for range -Assault cruisers like the Eagle and Demios still have no place in a fleet, whether it be null sec or low sec warfare.
Other than me griping about rails still being terrible, the blaster side of the hybrids looks GREAT!
Only makes sense if sniping did overwhelming DPS, which it doesn't. Maybe be more applicable if you weren't limited on max targeting range, but that is not the case.
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:[quote=xo3e] (I'm also a bit suprised, I know Caldari are more ranged hybrids, but I didn't realize Caldari had so few blaster boats? I didn't see Caldari AF mentioned at all .. and rails on a harpy are well ... hmmmmmm: Subject to individual opinion)
Probably because when you tank a Caldari ship you explode its sig. They're more rail oriented because they need to stay out of optimal as much as possible. Doesn't help that the ships already have higher sigs than average even without shield mods.
|
Jade Greenfire
KISIN Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:30:00 -
[308] - Quote
Question for you CCP Tallest:
I realise this is for ships, but I am curious as to what changes you plan for hybrid POS guns/batteries to make them effective & attractive alternate to the standard projectile & lazers batteries? Seems they need some rebalancing love too.
|
Jane Idoka
LoneStar Industries Comatose Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:31:00 -
[309] - Quote
Celebris Nexterra wrote:Hmmm, I am now motivated to make a stupidly simple analogy for what you're saying about blasters vs all other weapon types.
You give a person a shotgun (Gallente ship with blasters), you give the opponent an assault rifle (Minmatar ship with AC's). You place these two people in an open field at 50m (any place in space where the ships do not land on top of each other). The person with the shotgun is actually Aretha Franklin, while the person with the AR is Usain Bolt. Usain is able to run at full speed while shooting his gun and never missing, while Aretha "runs" while shooting and never hitting. Sure, it'll take a few hits before she goes down, but she has absolutely no chance to ever hit her target. NOW BOOST HER SPEED BY 10%!!!!
And you tell me this is fair?
+1 for giving Aretha Franklin a shotgun... |
PhantomTrojan
Shadows of Fornax E C L I P S E
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:37:00 -
[310] - Quote
This will make most of the hybrid weapon close somehow to balanced, but still almost every gallente "ship" need some kind of buff because this is nowhere near enough to make the Diemost viable or even the brutix, atarte and eos. I also think that the blaster need a decent damage buff of 5-10%, to compensate for the half of ur ehp lost approaching to the target if you can catch up... |
|
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:38:00 -
[311] - Quote
PinkKnife wrote:Quote:Before we start looking at armor tanking issues or individual ships, Hybrid weapons as a whole need to be boosted up to a level where using them becomes desirable. Highlighted for those who I think glossed over this. However it seems they aren't done with Gallente/Hybrids just yet. Lets not forget how long it took them to look at hybrids in the first place
I guess we'll see them looking at blasterboats around, oh i dont know 2015? (and thats if we're lucky)
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
thoth rothschild
Aliastra Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:39:00 -
[312] - Quote
Celebris Nexterra wrote:Hmmm, I am now motivated to make a stupidly simple analogy for what you're saying about blasters vs all other weapon types.
You give a person a shotgun (Gallente ship with blasters), you give the opponent an assault rifle (Minmatar ship with AC's). You place these two people in an open field at 50m (any place in space where the ships do not land on top of each other). The person with the shotgun is actually Aretha Franklin, while the person with the AR is Usain Bolt. Usain is able to run at full speed while shooting his gun and never missing, while Aretha "runs" while shooting and never hitting. Sure, it'll take a few hits before she goes down, but she has absolutely no chance to ever hit her target. NOW BOOST HER SPEED BY 10%!!!!
And you tell me this is fair?
this is awesome !!!! +1 from me
Could not have sayd it more clear and funny :) You Sir are my hero <3
per request : This Post can be found on Page 11 :> |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
173
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:39:00 -
[313] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Got through about 1/2 of the posts here, and I think many of you need to get on EFT and try some new loadouts, using the new stats, before you rant and rave about the proposed rebalancing.
Spoken like someone who's got no experience flying a hybrid platform. yeah i know eh the thing with pre boosted blasters is on eft they looked awesome... but we need more than just on paper awesome...we need in game awesome and the boost from CCP Tallest will just make them look better on paper but not in practice
Indeed, mainly because we need to evaluate the effects the inertia modification is going to have in game, which is something EFT really can't tell us.
If the accelleration increase is significant enough, the subtle benefits could very well put this thing over the top as far a win factor goes.
One other factor that is very subtle, but could have a significant overall effect would be a reduction for Gallante boats Signature Radius. If it takes a bit longer to target them and get a scram/web on them that lets the better accelleration pay off larger dividends.
Justify it as a function of their organic hull designs, or perhaps an inherent part of all Gallante tech due to their knowledge of Sensor Dampning tech. To kill the enemy and break their toys!
It's not so much a mission statement,-áit's more like a family motto. |
OOooole
nina k Corp
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:41:00 -
[314] - Quote
after 2 yers this OMFG Damage Increase:
All railgun turrets: +10% to Damage modifier
and speed joke boost ? realy
Winter patch will be anothre joke
|
Deviana Sevidon
Jades Falcon Guards
60
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:42:00 -
[315] - Quote
Blasters could still use more damage. Since their optimal and falloff is low and the most often operate in falloff, they need a bigger damage advantage in comparison to pulse lasers, either that or increased optimal and falloff.
The penalties on Void should also be reduced because right now there is no point in even using this ammo. |
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
54
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:45:00 -
[316] - Quote
Pretty pleased with all the listed changes. Looking forward to flying all the web-bonused hybrid platforms this winter.
Love the across the board T2 closerange ammo reform. I'm hard just thinking about it.
One request for an additional change: the Thorax and its derivatives all need an additional mid-slot. This would allow them to do scram/web/booster/propmod in an armor configuration or scram/2x lse/prop in a shield configuration. Both are sort of necessary for their respective roles (a slow armor setup needs that web, an unbonused shield tank needs 2 LSEs to get an acceptable quantity of EHP). Personally I would also apply +1 mid to the Vigilant as well, since its current configuration makes it "useable" rather than "better than average"-- not what you'd expect from an extremely expensive faction cruiser. The Deimos and Thorax definitely need a fourth mid though... like *need* need. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:47:00 -
[317] - Quote
KFenn wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Blaster need more changes for better working.
At least +50% optimal (mega with t2 neutron guns have now 4.5km optimal with antimatter ammo and lvl5 skills) and at least +25% faloff (mega with t2 neutron guns have now 13km faloff with antimatter ammo and lvl5 skills)
After this changes would be 6.75km optimal, with 16.25km falloff. (antimatter)
Stop trying to make blasters like autocannons. They're -NOT- autocannons. Autocannons = Assault Rifles. Blasters = Shotguns. Huge damage at zero range.
Please dont post anymore.
Assault rifle ? Shotgun ? :D megauberlol |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:50:00 -
[318] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote: Spoken like someone who's got no experience flying a hybrid platform.
I suppose so. I've only been flying Gallente gunboats for 3.5 years, with 18 million SP in guns. I apologize for being presumptuous.
|
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:53:00 -
[319] - Quote
Raimo wrote:Valarie Rikeen wrote: We can see that DPS is not too far apart, (768 dps vs 592 dps), yet the speed of a hurricane is 1434 m/s vs the Brutix's 1112 m/s (before the change). Tank is only different by 4k EHP.
thats not really "close" brutix has 25% more damage. also, remember you are comparing a tier 1 BC with a tier 2
Just needed to correct this, read my later post, the real 3 damage mod gank fit overload DPS figures are 965 for Brutix and 905 for Hurricane, sans implants. Also, the tier system is ******** anyway so it's not a good justification, and in the Gallente case, Brutix is the gank BC anyway Myrm. gank DPS vs Cane is even worse, Myrm ganks for only 868 so fix Hybrids AND Drones, eh?
Yeah, dont come to me for fits, I lost my database and have only rumbled back from my slumber BECAUSE of the possibility of where this patch could go. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
20
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:58:00 -
[320] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote: Spoken like someone who's got no experience flying a hybrid platform.
I suppose so. I've only been flying Gallente gunboats for 3.5 years, with 18 million SP in guns. I apologize for being presumptuous.
I would have stuck with having no experience, tbh. You don't help you case by proving you have no excuse to be so ignorant. |
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
25
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 20:59:00 -
[321] - Quote
One of my friends and I came up with what I think is an interesting solution based on the RP of what a blaster and rail gun are supposed to be
Right now we have projectiles which have versatile ammo uses and lasers and hybrids which trade damage for range.
Our idea is to change hybrid ammo so that it trades range for cap usage but keeps the damage the same.
So the damage on all large ammo caldari navy L ammo (for instance) would be 23 thermal 32.2 kinetic, but antimatter would have -50% optimal and no cap cost increase, and Iron would have +70% optimal and +120% cap usage
This would mean that gallente ships are still the close range choice and Amarr are still the kings of damage projection, but gallente ships can get out to the range of conflag lasers, they just cost around 2x as much cap to do it.
The RP reason for this is that blasters are basically a ball of plasma generated by the round being fired, and it costs more cap to heat the ammo and keep the plasma hot over that long a distance.
For Rails, the extra cap is used to fire the projectile faster off the rail achieving a better time on target and thus more range but the shell is lighter resulting in the same damage.
Thoughts?
|
PhantomTrojan
Shadows of Fornax E C L I P S E
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:01:00 -
[322] - Quote
Alex Harumichi wrote:KFenn wrote: Stop trying to make blasters like autocannons. They're -NOT- autocannons.
Autocannons = Assault Rifles. Blasters = Shotguns. Huge damage at zero range.
Agree on this. Problem is, when talking about medium and large blasters: 1) The ships need to be fast and nimble enough to be able to apply that zero range damage effectively. They aren't. 2) The damage that blasters do when in their optimal needs to be large enough to compensate for their tiny operational envelope. It isn't. ACs are strictly better than blasters in almost all situations (talking about actual pvp here, not laboratory conditions), even more so considering the hulls that use them are also significantly faster than blaster hulls. This buff, unfortunately, does not change that equation (especially since it also contains a huge AC buff, which I see no reason for). agreed
Blaster barely have more damage than autocannon y they have way less range than anything else. Blasters needs something around 40% damage boots to compensate for their crappy range and tracking at that range. |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
31
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:07:00 -
[323] - Quote
Quote:** Exceptions: Light Electron Blasters, Light Ion Blasters, 125mm Railguns, 75mm Railguns (they already have very low Powergrid requirements.)
Light Electron Blaster II: PG 4 Light Ion Blaster II: PG 7 200mm Autocannon II: PG 4 150mm Autocannon II: PG 2 125mm Autocannon II: PG 1
Really? Best 200mm autocannon has (half,same) PG of (Ions,Electrons) and (Ions,Electrons) have very low PG requirements?
|
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
212
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:13:00 -
[324] - Quote
I approve of this improvement. |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:16:00 -
[325] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Quote:** Exceptions: Light Electron Blasters, Light Ion Blasters, 125mm Railguns, 75mm Railguns (they already have very low Powergrid requirements.) Light Electron Blaster II: PG 4 Light Ion Blaster II: PG 7 200mm Autocannon II: PG 4 150mm Autocannon II: PG 2 125mm Autocannon II: PG 1 Really? Best 200mm autocannon has (half,same) PG of (Ions,Electrons) and (Ions,Electrons) have very low PG requirements? Shhh, its because blasters do so much more damage then ac's
Oh wait......
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:21:00 -
[326] - Quote
I think I managed to replicate the fit Raimo was talking about,
I stuck 2 nano's in the lows of the hurricane though.
What we end up with, CCP Tallest is this comparison:
965 dps vs 810 dps + 2 medium neuts 8-9km effective range vs 13-14km 1,112m/s vs 1400+ (with 2 nanos and MWD on I get 1552 m/s) Cap usage vs 0 cap usage Oh, and very very similar tank.
Now, honestly CCP Tallest, 1v1, which one would you use.
I think it is clear that a mere +20% tracking and a reduction in cap usage will not resolve the issues blasters have at the moment. The buff needs to go deeper . An increase to DPS on top, 10-20% would make blasters competetive. These comparisons are 1v1 at close range, very idealistic conditions for the blasters, yet they're still losing. What does this say. |
Garbad theWeak
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:21:00 -
[327] - Quote
So I plugged in the changes into pyfa and compared a hellcat vs. a new and improved blaster thron. Both have standards you would expect -- heavy cap booster, mwd, and web + scram.
Megathron: 1245 DPS (928 excluding ogres) 105k EHP 2x as good tracking as the abby (~.06) a heavy neut almost cap stable, with the booster can run mwd + neut for several minutes ~40% faster with MWD on
Abby: 918 DPS (760 excludign drones) 177k EHP, also has much better resist profile (better reps) can fire to 45k using scorch not at all cap stable
So the mega is faster, does substantially more dps, tracks better, is cap stable, and can neut out to 25k. The abby has far, far more EHP and range but has cap issues. In a fleet, you can reasonably expect a damnation improving resists, further magnifying the EHP gap. You can also expect reps from a gaurdian, who has energy to waste, reducing or eliminating the cap problems of the abby.
So which would you rather have: ~30% more dps at close range or up to 5x as much range and 2x as much ehp? I think the hellcat clearly wins. |
SilverTrav
Aequitas Legare
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:23:00 -
[328] - Quote
Zerkuron wrote:I don`t use Missiles or rockets so I can`t say anythig about this. I didn`t take E-War into account, but I think ECM is good as it is, but the other E-WAR should use a look at. Especially Dampener need an overhaul. (Maybe a fall-off or opti reduction instead of longer tergeting time, which only assist ecm but is in no way a standalone effect for use)
This doesn't seem like the right forum thread for an EWAR post... but in case you didn't know, dampeners have scripts which DO reduce the range at which you can effectively attack at by decreasing the max targeting range with one type of script, or reduce scan resolution (lock time) with the other type of script. With no scripts they affect both. Who cares if your falloff is 60+ km if you can only target 3km (stupid serpentis missions.....) and if it takes you 40 seconds to lock something then they have that much more time to be dishing out damage to you before you can return fire (provided you aren't using weaponry that doesn't require a target lock of course) so I don't agree that they don't work as a stand-alone effect.
TL/DR
What does EWAR have to do with hybrid boost? |
Perdition64
The Xenodus Initiative. ORPHANS OF EVE
12
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:25:00 -
[329] - Quote
Garbad theWeak wrote:
So which would you rather have: ~30% more dps at close range or up to 5x as much range and 2x as much ehp? I think the hellcat clearly wins.
Many comparisons CCP, all showing the changes to be somewhat lacklustre. Your move. :)
Would be nice to get CCP Tallest's ideas following feedback, pretty soon. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:31:00 -
[330] - Quote
A few insights and ideas regarding Hybrids, solutions on how they could be fixed, and further elaboration on some of the notions provided in earlier pages.
1) Sniper Mechanics (Probing) and Railguns
It is relatively pointless to have a weapon system based around 150km+ range using today's mechanics. As it is, you can warp directly to any target that is at least 50km from you by having a warp-to anchor at least 150km in line with your opponent. Whether that is a covert ops that entered system, warped away, dropped probes, then warped to 100 on the hostiles sitting off gate, or simply a bookmark in the general direction of your opponents, long range pilots are screwed if the close range hostiles are well prepared. If longer away than 150k, a warp to zero warp-in is easily done and adios long range fleet.
I assume these mechanics are intentional by CCP, and until they are changed there's not much hope for Railguns beyond killmail whoring with a non-zero damage entry on a killmail, or trying to pick off ships at ultra long range while aligned to warp (non-fleet, as any fleet will tank the damage and repair).
2. Blasters and their Niche
Autocannons provide an immense amount of DPS, most notably with their ability to switch ammo types to what can punch a hole through hostile's tanks the best and hit out even past Pulse ranges. Even if blasters had a 10% advantage over projectiles, they don't have the ability to adapt to the situation and remain inferior.
How I would fix blasters: Give medium/large blasers about a 30%+ boost to damage, an optimal under web range, virtually no falloff, and ungodly tracking. A battleship could hit a cruiser afterburning with a single web under 10k at max traversal (maybe not for full). A cruiser the same with a frigate. A frigate, while WMDing, should be able to in a tight orbit hit full force against larger ships with small blasters, and/or remain effective against other frigates in a knife fight. Keep Gallente ships slow and fat (no change), and allow blasters to provide a zone of death around the fleet. Any hostile that enters that zone should effectively bend over and kiss its ass goodbye. That's a niche that is missing from EVE, and would fit nicely with teh blaster paradigm. Slow, Fat, and up close the deadliest motherf*cker you've ever seen.
This would allow them to keep their armor bonuses as well, as active tanks would be beneficial for solo/small gang warfare. It wouldn't fix their viability in larger fleet warfare however, but below might be a start.
3. Fixing Gallente ships: Drone viability in PvP
If you did (2) above, the only thing missing would be the pvp viability of larger drones. Small/Medium/ECM drones have good viability in combat, but Heavy's should actually be expected to outrun Battleships (and even Battlecruisers) within the drone control range of ships. Boost Heavy's to about the speed of Mediums, Mediums slightly faster, and keep lights where they are at. Increase the effectiveness of utility drones so that they aren't useless. Add light/medium webbing drones so that Gallente ships could, in theory, catch targets that are outside their own web range. Yes, this would also be a double edged sword, as web drones would ALSO act as an achilles heal of Gallente ships for kiting purposes... see #2. Further, why the hell doesn't the Myrmidon have a 100m bandwidth and the Hyperion/Proteus have (or the ability to have) 125m bandwidth?
Allow heavier drones to play a larger role in Nullsec warfare with fleets rolling across grid, and nuance some of the smaller drone bays of Gallente ships slightly larger, and suddenly having a complement of Gallente ships around could be rather beneficial.
4. Balancing Hybrids
One of EVE's greatest attributes is that it has vast differences between common uses of game mechanics, compared to other MMO's which in many instances simply change the graphics and/or buttons for DPS classes and call them different. Hybrids need their niche, and while Railguns have always had theirs (max range, even though game mechanics make it useless in practice), blasters have lost theirs. Give them a new one (see #2 above for an idea), and not just a "bleh" second rate damage system that can't outdamage Projectiles in practice, nor get their weapons in optimal ranges. If you just boost the speed of Gallente ships as a crutch for a broken weapon system, you aren't really fixing the problem, and gallente ships will either remain pointless or pass a tipping point where they invalidate one or more other races comparable ship types. |
|
Jane Idoka
LoneStar Industries Comatose Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:36:00 -
[331] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:I approve of this improvement.
i do not |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:41:00 -
[332] - Quote
Garbad theWeak wrote:So I plugged in the changes into pyfa and compared a hellcat vs. a new and improved blaster thron. Both have standards you would expect -- heavy cap booster, mwd, and web + scram.
Megathron: 1245 DPS (928 excluding ogres) 105k EHP 2x as good tracking as the abby (~.06) a heavy neut almost cap stable, with the booster can run mwd + neut for several minutes ~40% faster with MWD on
Abby: 918 DPS (760 excludign drones) 177k EHP, also has much better resist profile (better reps) can fire to 45k using scorch not at all cap stable
So the mega is faster, does substantially more dps, tracks better, is cap stable, and can neut out to 25k. The abby has far, far more EHP and range but has cap issues. In a fleet, you can reasonably expect a damnation improving resists, further magnifying the EHP gap. You can also expect reps from a gaurdian, who has energy to waste, reducing or eliminating the cap problems of the abby.
So which would you rather have: ~30% more dps at close range or up to 5x as much range and 2x as much ehp? I think the hellcat clearly wins. This is a very odd comparison. Why would you compare a solo, cap-stable, mega to a cap-UNstable abby, with support ships? |
Cerlin
Imperium Technologies F0RCEFUL ENTRY
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:42:00 -
[333] - Quote
I feel that these changes will be a good start to changing the balance of hybrids for the better.
And as someone who has a majority of his weapon training in hybrids I say thank you. I look forward to seeing how these changes work in the field (Gets back to his gallente cross training.) |
zulrock
Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:48:00 -
[334] - Quote
What do you think of as a different way of balancing Hybrids to nerf ACs take away EMP and Phased Plasma ammo types and make projectiles strictly explosive/kinetic damage. The amarr are only em thermal and galent are only thermal kinetic, why should minmitar which the projectiles already don't use cap like the other turret types being able to switch damage types seems like too much.
oh and too give the ACs a buff now seems stupid even if hail really isnt any better than rep fleet EMP which most people use.
Do you guys ever do any really world PvP or just on test servers. |
Haulin Aussie
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:55:00 -
[335] - Quote
Large hybrid ammo is also way too many m3 compared to others. could this be looked at too please? |
ben babiroussa
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:57:00 -
[336] - Quote
me like! |
Jamil Torres
BatahvKalse
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:58:00 -
[337] - Quote
At least mini is still a win button : ) Also im a gall and havent flown a gall ship in years other than the enyo. This will not change that. |
Useful Alt
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 21:59:00 -
[338] - Quote
what is missing is more range for blaster
go in a battleship with blaster only do not move and try to shot down an orbiting npc battleship at 21-23km which happen in mission
have fun. |
xAbsocold
BOAE INC BricK sQuAD.
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:02:00 -
[339] - Quote
Most Gallente ships get +10 to speed, including the already zippy Vigilant, but the Myrmidon doesn't even get a +5?!
Poor Myrmidon, repeatedly hit with the nerf bat, ignored by the buff fairy.
I've got $10 that says after this change goes live that the Hybrid buff not going far enough plus the Myrmidon not getting a speed boost means that this poor Gallente ship will still be equipped with Minmatar guns. And will still suck :( |
Narjack
CragCO
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:02:00 -
[340] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:Great to see CCP address the issue and obviously they are tracking on the fact that the ships using them are all jacked up. Unless this is addressed all these changes are frankly a minor band-aid, but I'll add a few more 2 cents on the table:
1) Why is the Mrym and the Ishkur not gettting the speed/agility boost? You can't tell me they are too fast already and the poor Myrm needs some help.
2) Since all the other weapon systems seem to have a unique capability such as either not using cap, or no ammo needed, change of damage type, or missiles don't miss (for the most part); how about giving Hybrids something special as well. Like INSTANT AMMO changes like scripts. This would help in shifting ammo types to deal with ranging which is not realistic now with that 10 second delay.
3) Will all these tracking increases make frigs unable to tackle without being popped?
I find the idea of that no delay ammo change and interesting one, as it fits the hybrid T1 ammo concept of different ranges well. Interesting idea.
What about VOID ammo? Seems like that needs some serious attention as well, or maybe I missed it. But its hardly used due to the tracking penalty. Remove that and that would make blaster boats even more face meltingly appealing. |
|
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:02:00 -
[341] - Quote
Haulin Aussie wrote:Large hybrid ammo is also way too many m3 compared to others. could this be looked at too please?
not empty quoting. |
M1AU
Rheintal Underground Rising
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:06:00 -
[342] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:MeBiatch wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Got through about 1/2 of the posts here, and I think many of you need to get on EFT and try some new loadouts, using the new stats, before you rant and rave about the proposed rebalancing.
Spoken like someone who's got no experience flying a hybrid platform. yeah i know eh the thing with pre boosted blasters is on eft they looked awesome... but we need more than just on paper awesome...we need in game awesome and the boost from CCP Tallest will just make them look better on paper but not in practice Indeed, mainly because we need to evaluate the effects the inertia modification is going to have in game, which is something EFT really can't tell us. If the accelleration increase is significant enough, the subtle benefits could very well put this thing over the top as far a win factor goes. One other factor that is very subtle, but could have a significant overall effect would be a reduction for Gallante boats Signature Radius. If it takes a bit longer to target them and get a scram/web on them that lets the better accelleration pay off larger dividends. Justify it as a function of their organic hull designs, or perhaps an inherent part of all Gallante tech due to their knowledge of Sensor Dampning tech. I actually think the lowering of the signatur radius could be a viable improvement. Longer locking time for others and harder to hit. In theory sounds much like what a blaster boat could need. |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:07:00 -
[343] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Perdition64 wrote: hurricane vs brutix this is a good summary of why pvp'ers generally stick with AC platforms. - incredible falloff - better tracking - no cap use - minnie ships are the fastest - while tank remains on par with all other ships this is overpowered. you have to give people a reason NOT TO fly an AC boat at medium/close ranges. remember, one scram and the blaster boat is dead in the water....AC boat is still doing significant damage at 25km, medium blasters dont work past 10km.
WOW couldnt have put it better myself |
Schwester Minotaur
Tobruk Heavy Industries Shadow of xXDEATHXx
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:14:00 -
[344] - Quote
Sorry, me again ....
i read the probe thing and sniping battleships.
But hey, there are ways to reduce this problematic. Like having an interceptor wich is flying top speed - in any direction to give the fleet an instant warpout, if enemy is warping in.
But back to my Caldarian Thinking.
What defines a Sniper Battleship like the Rokh. The Rokh is a specialised Platform, or better the platfom i would like to see. With that optimal Bonus it is THAT ship for sniping actions.
As i said, a improvement of the hardcap will be fine. What did you do against a fleet, you cant lock ? - Right- RUN !
I do not want that overhelimgubar ROKH.
I know that i never will have that damage a megathron has. I know that i will never have the capstableness and tanking ability like a dominix. I know that the Rokh is not fast enough, to kite a neuting megathron.
But i love this ships, and i love my blasters and rails.
Please - give the Rokh more love in your thinkings.
|
EmmerTemp
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:16:00 -
[345] - Quote
Everything must have an upside and downside. Good example there, but still... once that Blasterboat does get in range of ur ugly AC boat, you better start running. You can't make every weapon/ship/race the same... |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:16:00 -
[346] - Quote
Simply Not enough.
Hybrids still have all the disadvantages of every weapon system with no advantage to speak of. Lasers get unlimited ammo and insta load but use cap, Projectiles get damage type, plus range modifiers, and no cap, but have 10 second load time. Missles get damage type and no cap, but have 10 second laod time. Hybrids get range selection that can not be fully be utilsed because of 10 seconds load time and nerfing dps. But for that they get cap usage, and 10 second load time. This load time should be reduced from 10 seconds to 5 seconds, If you need to justify this hybrid ammo is smaller than projectile ammo and missles so it would make sense that it could load faster, they need an inert advantage here.
Another problem was being able to apply your dps. +10 m/s and agility will not solve this. Someone earlier suggested having ammo trade cap for range instead of DPS for range. This makes sense, currently Blaster which can only be used in extremley short range are penalised for using them in extremly short range because it cost them more cap to do so. That does not make sense, the longer the range the more cap you use, this is how hybrids should work. This should also be combined with reducing hybrid ammo load time from 10 to 5 seconds so that they can easier switch out ammo to actually utilize this while fighting.
until then Blasters will still be useless in fleets because they cant engage/DPS at normal fleet ranges, Rails will still be useless because their DPS is sub-par at normal sniper fleet ranges. SImply the negatives still outweigh the positives by a large factor. |
Little Fistter
Ordo Rosa Crux Templaris
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:18:00 -
[347] - Quote
JC Anderson wrote:.....Taranis.
I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot more of them.
Taranis? Its a throwaway tackler. Dosen't do as much damage as any other ceptor and ceptors suck compared to faction frigates and Assault Ships.
Enyo is a better blaster ship.
Taranis lacks defenses, die in seconds, only two drones and no power or cpu for good guns.
Taranis is a fail-mobile!
Should have a 100% damage bonus and some dam armor to give it half a chance of not getting alphaed! |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:24:00 -
[348] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote: Spoken like someone who's got no experience flying a hybrid platform.
I suppose so. I've only been flying Gallente gunboats for 3.5 years, with 18 million SP in guns. I apologize for being presumptuous. Well ive flown blasterboats for over 8 years, and have allmost twice your sp in gunnery, so that argument kinda fails
And this buff is not even close to enough to fixing blasterboats tbh.
Our ships are slow as hell, and becomes even slower once u put on the standard buffer or active tank fits. Our dps is also not good enough considering the rather ****** range we have compared to the other races.
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
Max Von Sydow
Droneboat Diplomacy
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:25:00 -
[349] - Quote
Little Fistter wrote:JC Anderson wrote:.....Taranis.
I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot more of them. Taranis? Its a throwaway tackler. Dosen't do as much damage as any other ceptor and ceptors suck compared to faction frigates and Assault Ships. Enyo is a better blaster ship. Taranis lacks defenses, die in seconds, only two drones and no power or cpu for good guns. Taranis is a fail-mobile! Should have a 100% damage bonus and some dam armor to give it half a chance of not getting alphaed!
wat |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
41
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:29:00 -
[350] - Quote
Svennig wrote:Haulin Aussie wrote:Large hybrid ammo is also way too many m3 compared to others. could this be looked at too please? not empty quoting. also this
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
|
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
29
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:32:00 -
[351] - Quote
Good changes, long overdue.
One last "Gallente buff" would be to look at drone bandwidth again, and promote more drone specialised ships again.
75 mw on the Eos and Myrmidon could/should be returned to 125 mw, perhaps at the expense of turret hardpoints.
Cheers. |
Joelleaveek
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:32:00 -
[352] - Quote
i disagree that blasters need more range. Short range in their niche. What may help is if the current ammos that give increased range did a reasonable amount of damage. Then maybe I'd consider using them over antimatter.
The proposed 10 m/s speed increase isn't enough though, as has already been stated. Minmatar ships will still be able to maintain range. |
Little Fistter
Ordo Rosa Crux Templaris
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:34:00 -
[353] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Pretty pleased with all the listed changes. Looking forward to flying all the web-bonused hybrid platforms this winter.
Love the across the board T2 closerange ammo reform. I'm hard just thinking about it.
One request for an additional change: the Thorax and its derivatives all need an additional mid-slot. This would allow them to do scram/web/booster/propmod in an armor configuration or scram/2x lse/prop in a shield configuration. Both are sort of necessary for their respective roles (a slow armor setup needs that web, an unbonused shield tank needs 2 LSEs to get an acceptable quantity of EHP). Personally I would also apply +1 mid to the Vigilant as well, since its current configuration makes it "useable" rather than "better than average"-- not what you'd expect from an extremely expensive faction cruiser. The Deimos and Thorax definitely need a fourth mid though... like *need* need.
I always find myself shedding a tear for the Deimos in particular-- with another mid it would be such a fantastic workhorse HAC for people who are hard for closerange obliteration, but as it is it's just too useless. It wants a scram/web/sensor booster or injector (depending on the type of armor tank you use) in an armor setup and a scram/dual LSE/prop configuration for a shieldtanked nano setup. Either of these would be very practical and fun to fly. Instead, with its current layout, the Deimos' only use is as a dirt-cheap, second-class citizen sniper HAC approximation that is outperformed significantly by every other HAC but at least manages to be cheap.
THIS is TRUE! 'Rax needs mid slots, some speed and a better drone range. Used to be a "Rax was a great drone boat. Now it just a bit too old and slow for much of anything. More drone bandwidth! A Gila has 125 drobe BW, why not a Rax?
And Deimos and its siblings, if you're not going to fix them take them out of the game, they are useless as-is! |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
35
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:37:00 -
[354] - Quote
Your forum software is ****, CCP.
/me starts again... less coherent this time though.
It's good to see you looking at hybrids, but these changes still don't give people a reason to use them on the cruiser and BS scale. You've hardly addressed the problem of actually getting into blaster range against faster, long-ranged AC ships, although I am glad to see you acknowledge it. Nor have you given blasters a sufficient damage advantage close up, over Pulse and ACs, to make them worth using, to compensate the difficulty and danger inherent to going into web range. Currently, ACs can do blasters' job about as well as blasters, with no cap use, selectable damage types and immense falloff to boot, and your problem is that the blaster changes don't alter this fact.
There's still no reason to use rails. They have no role - or rather, their role can be performed almost as well by other, more flexible weapons. Long-range work doesn't really exist, thanks to the 249 km cap, instant probing and on-grid warping. And if it did exist, Tachyons on optimal-bonused hulls would still do the job just as well, but with far greater flexibility and more damage at closer ranges. At closer range, Caldari railboats, the supposed rail specialists, will be outdamaged by the Gallente hulls, and both offer no significant advantage over the much more flexible artillery and optimal-bonused Scorch.
Small hybrids are basically fine, don't touch them.
To get people using hybrids again, you've got to make them worth using. You can argue that hybrids are actually well balanced, because they have well-defined roles; it's the power-creep of the other weapons, encroaching into blasters' niche (AC hull speed, AC damage, tracking and ammos, Pulse tracking) and rails' niche (Tachyons, optimal-bonused hulls, impossibility of maintaining range) that are causing the problems.
In my mind, you can't fix hybrids without significant nerfs to projectiles and lasers. If I'm right, this "fix" will fail. At least if that does happen, you'll then have the evidence you need to rebalance the other weapons... although hopefully you won't wait another two years. |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:37:00 -
[355] - Quote
Excellent!!!!!
But.... as a side note, SINCE Gallente ships are Drone specialists, could you at least increase the drone bandwidth for the Myrmidon(and drone proteus fit) to 125? kthxbai |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:39:00 -
[356] - Quote
xAbsocold wrote:Most Gallente ships get +10 to speed, including some already zippy ships, but the Myrmidon doesn't even get a +5?!
Poor Myrmidon, repeatedly hit with the nerf bat, ignored by the buff fairy.
I've got $10 that says after this change goes live that the Hybrid buff not going far enough plus the Myrmidon not getting a speed boost means that this poor Gallente ship will still be equipped with Minmatar guns. And will still suck :( Calling it now, a Myrmidon will still be better using its current fit with Projectiles, than with Hybrid even after the changes...
Vyktor Abyss wrote:Good changes, long overdue.
One last "Gallente buff" would be to look at drone bandwidth again, and promote more drone specialised ships again.
75 mw on the Eos and Myrmidon could/should be returned to 125 mw, perhaps at the expense of turret hardpoints.
Cheers. Add the Hyperion to this list, as 100 bandwidth basically makes this a pre-gimped battleship, and the Proteus as its pointless to have a Drone T3 with only 4x Heavy's... |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:44:00 -
[357] - Quote
Considering this "buff" took the better part of 2 years to get. The buffs are so weak and in the case of blasters completly sidestep the issue, to top it all off they buff projectiles also. I'm so disappointed in ccp i am tempted to cancel my accounts and wait the 2+ years for ccp to finally realize how to fix this :( |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
89
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:45:00 -
[358] - Quote
Joelleaveek wrote:i disagree that blasters need more range. Short range in their niche. What may help is if the current ammos that give increased range did a reasonable amount of damage. Then maybe I'd consider using them over antimatter.
When the reload time is fixed to 10 sec
Then your tactic is just change ammo to scratch paint from longer distances?
You can't fix blasters if you're not able to pick the only available choices, and those are hard:
- Give them enough range to be usefull in close/med range combat
- Give them nuclear warheads dps and keep the crap distance
- Increase significantly speed with AB or MWD bonus (one of them not both oc)
- Give them bonus to web and scram range or strgth for web only
Now you have to pick 2 of the above like it or not.
If you don't everything you're doing is some makeup, by the same time you buff projectiles even more. Now the hybrids buff looks like what?
I'll still be flying Minmatar over my first race tbh hybrids buff or not at the current state. Sure I'll fly some here and there just for lulz but when I get back to serious business, I'll pick Minmatar and Angel (my Cyna will love the projectiles buff, he was not overpowered enough) |
Galmas
United System's Commonwealth
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:48:00 -
[359] - Quote
Many thanks and best regards from a dedicated gallente pilot. Keep going, you are making it better and better again.
|
Tore Vest
Vikinghall
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:48:00 -
[360] - Quote
Not enough. Not eaven half way there... I fly minmatar after patch.... i guess |
|
VonKolroth
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:49:00 -
[361] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Re the ammos: To paraphrase from here... https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=14433Rails should fill in the performance gaps leaving alpha and dps to the other weapon systems but doubling down on what is left... Quote:Ammo: Railgun base damage increased by 10%
Spike base damage increased by 25%
Tech 2 Ammo now receives short range variants that alter the behaviour of the turrets (beyond additional dps, or range) either compensating for short falls or improving strengths of the turrets in very different ways. - Quake - 25% increase to Artillery alpha, 5% Less damage than RF EMP and 33% less range and fall off. - Gleam - Increases damage - 15% more damage than Navy Multifreqency and 33% less tracking and 33% less optimal range. - Javelin - Increases tracking by 50% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 50% increased capacitor usage.
Hybrid Ammo receives reorganisation into 4 parts: Antimatter remains unchanged Iron base damage increased by 20%
Plutonium - (Same as current plutonium except: ), 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage Uranium - -(Same as current plutonium except: ), 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal damage
Thorium - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal Lead - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Iridium - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal Tungsten - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Railguns now do more damage, and much more damage at longer ranges. True to the RP nature of what most of us consider railguns to be like, ultra high muzzle velocity means, damage attenuates much less at long to ultra long range. This picture should help explain the changes: http://www.theskyunion.com/railguns.jpg
I have always had a hard time suspending my belief that railguns shouldn't be the volley kings of turrents on the sole principle of how a rail gun works... |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:52:00 -
[362] - Quote
Tore Vest wrote:Not enough. Not eaven half way there... I fly minmatar after patch.... i guess You aren't already?
Late to the party is better than not showing up, I guess |
Eiyla Rindour
Truth Behind Omega
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:53:00 -
[363] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:2. Blasters and their Niche
Autocannons provide an immense amount of DPS, most notably with their ability to switch ammo types to what can punch a hole through hostile's tanks the best and hit out even past Pulse ranges. Even if blasters had a 10% advantage over projectiles, they don't have the ability to adapt to the situation and remain inferior.
How I would fix blasters: Give medium/large blasers about a 30%+ boost to damage, an optimal under web range, virtually no falloff, and ungodly tracking. A battleship should hit a cruiser afterburning with a single web under 10k at max traversal (maybe not for full). A cruiser the same with a frigate. A frigate, while MWDing, should be able to in a tight orbit hit full force against larger ships with small blasters, and/or remain effective against other frigates in a knife fight. Keep Gallente ships slow and fat (no change), and allow blasters to provide a zone of death around the fleet. Any hostile that enters that zone should effectively bend over and kiss its ass goodbye. That's a niche that is missing from EVE, and would fit nicely with teh blaster paradigm. Slow, Fat, and up close the deadliest motherf*cker you've ever seen.
THIS. Would make blasters useful, but not OP. +1 |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:56:00 -
[364] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:You can't fix blasters if you're not able to pick the only available choices, and those are hard:
- Give them enough range to be usefull in close/med range combat
- Give them nuclear warheads dps and keep the crap distance
- Increase significantly speed with AB or MWD bonus (one of them not both oc)
- Give them bonus to web and scram range or strgth for web only
Now you have to pick 2 of the above like it or not.
1, 3, and 4 would all have downsides that affect other aspects of EVE. The nuclear option is the best option, and if anything else is needed its maybe some extra EHP goodness built directly into the hull (all those ugly layers of armor should be good for something, right?), so their PvP survivability increases whether they have their active tank equipped or not. |
Tore Vest
Vikinghall
44
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 22:57:00 -
[365] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Tore Vest wrote:Not enough. Not eaven half way there... I fly minmatar after patch.... i guess You aren't already? Late to the party is better than not showing up, I guess
I fly minmatar pretty well ..... ty |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:00:00 -
[366] - Quote
Instant or drastically faster reload times for hybrids could be a decent "fix" too. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:03:00 -
[367] - Quote
Raimo wrote:Instant or drastically faster reload times for hybrids could be a decent "fix" too. And an indirect nerf to Amarr, as that is one of their few advantages. |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:05:00 -
[368] - Quote
Eiyla Rindour wrote:Digital Gaidin wrote:2. Blasters and their Niche
Autocannons provide an immense amount of DPS, most notably with their ability to switch ammo types to what can punch a hole through hostile's tanks the best and hit out even past Pulse ranges. Even if blasters had a 10% advantage over projectiles, they don't have the ability to adapt to the situation and remain inferior.
How I would fix blasters: Give medium/large blasers about a 30%+ boost to damage, an optimal under web range, virtually no falloff, and ungodly tracking. A battleship should hit a cruiser afterburning with a single web under 10k at max traversal (maybe not for full). A cruiser the same with a frigate. A frigate, while MWDing, should be able to in a tight orbit hit full force against larger ships with small blasters, and/or remain effective against other frigates in a knife fight. Keep Gallente ships slow and fat (no change), and allow blasters to provide a zone of death around the fleet. Any hostile that enters that zone should effectively bend over and kiss its ass goodbye. That's a niche that is missing from EVE, and would fit nicely with teh blaster paradigm. Slow, Fat, and up close the deadliest motherf*cker you've ever seen.
THIS. Would make blasters useful, but not OP. +1
+1. This is what blasters should be.
|
lloyd bank
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:17:00 -
[369] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:here are the fixes for hybrids:
blasters:
concept shotguns (short range arties...)
1. Increase base damage by 50% 2. Decrease rate of fire by 30% 3. Increase falloff by 15% 4. increase tracking by 37.5%
railguns: Concept long range auto cannons
1. Increase base damage by 15% 2. Increase rate of fire by 15% 3. decrease activation cost by 40% 4. increase tracking by 37.5%
ammo:
Simular boost that projectile ammo got
concept choice between what damage type you want to do between thermal and Kinetic (i.e. antimater does 80% thermal damage 20% kin damage, uranium does 80% kin damage and 20% thermal damage)
also include a tracking bonus built into the ammo
Caldari boost: remove the optimal range bonus for hybrid turrets and replace with a rate of fire bonus
gallente boost: remove the falloff bonus and tracking bonus and replace with a speed pulpusion moduel mass reduction per level
change the internal rep bonus to include a bonus incomming remote rep
General fix: change the speed reduction affect on armor rigs and replace with an agility reduction change reload time from 10 seconds to 5 seconds
THIS well for rails if they dont fix probbing
Pattern Clarc wrote:Re the ammos: To paraphrase from here... https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=14433Rails should fill in the performance gaps leaving alpha and dps to the other weapon systems but doubling down on what is left... Quote:Ammo: Railgun base damage increased by 10%
Spike base damage increased by 25%
Tech 2 Ammo now receives short range variants that alter the behaviour of the turrets (beyond additional dps, or range) either compensating for short falls or improving strengths of the turrets in very different ways. - Quake - 25% increase to Artillery alpha, 5% Less damage than RF EMP and 33% less range and fall off. - Gleam - Increases damage - 15% more damage than Navy Multifreqency and 33% less tracking and 33% less optimal range. - Javelin - Increases tracking by 50% - 5% Less damage than CN Antimatter and 50% increased capacitor usage.
Hybrid Ammo receives reorganisation into 4 parts: Antimatter remains unchanged Iron base damage increased by 20%
Plutonium - (Same as current plutonium except: ), 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage Uranium - -(Same as current plutonium except: ), 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal damage
Thorium - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal Lead - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to tracking, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Iridium - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 80% Kinetic, 20% Thermal Tungsten - (Same as current thorium except: ) 0% increase to optimal, 20% increase to falloff, 20% Kinetic, 80% Thermal damage
Railguns now do more damage, and much more damage at longer ranges. True to the RP nature of what most of us consider railguns to be like, ultra high muzzle velocity means, damage attenuates much less at long to ultra long range. This picture should help explain the changes: http://www.theskyunion.com/railguns.jpg
this for rails if they do fix probbing... |
Steve4c
DeckardsDisciples ORPHANS OF EVE
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:19:00 -
[370] - Quote
Just face it, this is yet another stealth nerf.
+10 to speed indeed, -5 to agility - woopidoo.
how does this address hyrbid blasters>?
Optimal range + falloff is the issue
powergid could be argued due to not being able to fit a full compliment of wepons especially in pvp terms with 1 large active rep.
Hyrbid wepons will still have no validity with the proposed changes.
I have made one post to this thread, players who use hybrid blaster platforms have waited far too long for a rebalance, since the super nerf of drones back in Eve's early days.
If CCP wants to listen to its players, now is the time.
I find it ludicrous how one faction has been ruled out of the game.
You know as well we all do, if you can't improvise with the means you have, you will look to obtain the means to do so another way.
e.g go on the character bazaar and just buy ship that can hit out a range where the dps is required, in this case another faction but Gallente.
if only the changes by the OP get implented theres little to no chance the optimal range & fall off will be addressed at a later date.
Address the issue - keep to the subject we are dealing with Hybrids (do not work around it) Hyrbids lack oprimal & fall off, resolve this.
if you can't hit something you are doing no dps.
no ship can fly faster than a projectile/missle/laser - so speed boost is nothing.
how can gallente hybrid blasters be competive at such small optimal ranges?
The other underlying issue is calibration, we would have the ability to gain dps if we did not have rely on boosting optimal range in the way hybrid blasters do. Even when boosting the ships max optimal it is far too ineffective for trying to push this stat as comprimises elsewhere can not be made.
This is my second post on this thread, i hope it does not get overlooked. |
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:19:00 -
[371] - Quote
Kumq uat wrote:Eiyla Rindour wrote:Digital Gaidin wrote:2. Blasters and their Niche
Autocannons provide an immense amount of DPS, most notably with their ability to switch ammo types to what can punch a hole through hostile's tanks the best and hit out even past Pulse ranges. Even if blasters had a 10% advantage over projectiles, they don't have the ability to adapt to the situation and remain inferior.
How I would fix blasters: Give medium/large blasers about a 30%+ boost to damage, an optimal under web range, virtually no falloff, and ungodly tracking. A battleship should hit a cruiser afterburning with a single web under 10k at max traversal (maybe not for full). A cruiser the same with a frigate. A frigate, while MWDing, should be able to in a tight orbit hit full force against larger ships with small blasters, and/or remain effective against other frigates in a knife fight. Keep Gallente ships slow and fat (no change), and allow blasters to provide a zone of death around the fleet. Any hostile that enters that zone should effectively bend over and kiss its ass goodbye. That's a niche that is missing from EVE, and would fit nicely with teh blaster paradigm. Slow, Fat, and up close the deadliest motherf*cker you've ever seen.
THIS. Would make blasters useful, but not OP. +1 +1. This is what blasters should be. As a follow-up and to re-iterate someone elses idea posted a few pages back... the idea of introducing cap stability into the ammunition would make for an interesting twist to the ammunition type. You could make all ammo have the +60% range (or +0% range, balance accordingly for desired optimals on Railguns/Blasters) and have ammo that ranges in cap usage and damage. Similar to Amarr being able to control range and quickly swap between crystals, Gallente could use the highest damage ammunition that lets them remain cap stable (further improving their viability for active tanks), and switch to the highest damage ammunition (Antimatter) when cap stability goes to hell and its time to deliver the pain. Variation in ammunition would also support varied levels of preferred cap stability when using MWD's and whatnot, further making capacitor usage a key decision factor in Gallente fighting tactics. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:21:00 -
[372] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote: Spoken like someone who's got no experience flying a hybrid platform.
I suppose so. I've only been flying Gallente gunboats for 3.5 years, with 18 million SP in guns. I apologize for being presumptuous. Well ive flown blasterboats for over 8 years, and have allmost twice your sp in gunnery, so that argument kinda fails Who was arguing? I was apologizing for my noob standing. :) |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:22:00 -
[373] - Quote
Kumq uat wrote:Eiyla Rindour wrote:Digital Gaidin wrote:2. Blasters and their Niche
Autocannons provide an immense amount of DPS, most notably with their ability to switch ammo types to what can punch a hole through hostile's tanks the best and hit out even past Pulse ranges. Even if blasters had a 10% advantage over projectiles, they don't have the ability to adapt to the situation and remain inferior.
How I would fix blasters: Give medium/large blasers about a 30%+ boost to damage, an optimal under web range, virtually no falloff, and ungodly tracking. A battleship should hit a cruiser afterburning with a single web under 10k at max traversal (maybe not for full). A cruiser the same with a frigate. A frigate, while MWDing, should be able to in a tight orbit hit full force against larger ships with small blasters, and/or remain effective against other frigates in a knife fight. Keep Gallente ships slow and fat (no change), and allow blasters to provide a zone of death around the fleet. Any hostile that enters that zone should effectively bend over and kiss its ass goodbye. That's a niche that is missing from EVE, and would fit nicely with teh blaster paradigm. Slow, Fat, and up close the deadliest motherf*cker you've ever seen.
THIS. Would make blasters useful, but not OP. +1 +1. This is what blasters should be.
Um no -100.
This would make Blasters even more useless. Why? because now all you need to do is stay at 15km and Gallente dies every time. Kiting is already an issue so you want to make it worse? Sure you will be better off in the 10% of situations you start off in optimal, but now you will be completly owned in the 90% you do not. Not to mention now you have 0 purpose in any fleet except for gate camps and even then still outshinned by AC's because the chance they come in next to you is less then them coming at the other side of the gate. By the time you burn to them they are already melting.
DPS in range is not the issue its the lack of range or being able to apply the DPS that was the issue. Increasing dps and shortening range makes Gallente even more niche, a very small one. They would be relegated to high sec station games and useless in all other situations if you made that change. |
Wu Phat
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:23:00 -
[374] - Quote
LetGÇÖs work in a + 15 % tracking buff for antimatter. Void should get the same tracking buff as Javelin has and have the falloff penalty taken off. I wonder how Null would be with a 75% buff to falloff with no optimal range buff or penalty but with a larger tracking penalty. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:28:00 -
[375] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:Um no -100.
This would make Blasters even more useless. Why? because now all you need to do is stay at 15km and Gallente dies every time. Kiting is already an issue so you want to make it worse? Sure you will be better off in the 10% of situations you start off in optimal, but now you will be completly owned in the 90% you do not. Not to mention now you have 0 purpose in any fleet except for gate camps and even then still outshinned by AC's because the chance they come in next to you is less then them coming at the other side of the gate. By the time you burn to them they are already melting.
DPS in range is not the issue its the lack of range or being able to apply the DPS that was the issue. Increasing dps and shortening range makes Gallente even more niche, a very small one. They would be relegated to high sec station games and useless in all other situations if you made that change. So you want long range blasters? Would you like that at Scorch range or EMP range?
What I described would actually fit what blasters are SUPPOSED to be, as well as provide a niche that an intelligent pilot could exploit. Amarr ships are great if you can control range, but they aren't the fastest so you need a smart pilot. Caldari ships are great if you can MAINTAIN range (and somehow figure out how to keep the guy on grid), but have crap for DPS and are useless up close. Minmatar have amazing kiting ability with their speed and falloff giving amazing flexibility with range and damage type while on grid.
What do I want with Gallente? I want a ship that when I get a warp in, or the opponent makes a mistake, I can drop a scram and web on him and eat him alive. I would prefer that EVE Online never has a Jack of all Trades ship that can truly own everything (though at times the Vagabond has come pretty damn close), and for that matter I'd like to see Gallente truly excel at one specific area while on grid. I described it as creating a zone of death, and I think that metaphor fits quite nicely for what blasters *could* be if CCP agrees. |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:30:00 -
[376] - Quote
No matter how much you buff tracking/damage on blasters it will not fix them. If your enemy is flying faster than you and out of your range you could have 100,000 dps and if you cannot hit him 100,000 x 0 is still 0 |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:38:00 -
[377] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff tracking/damage on blasters it will not fix them. If your enemy is flying faster than you and out of your range you could have 100,000 dps and if you cannot hit him 100,000 x 0 is still 0 Umm... warp out?
Jump/Dock?
Have your friend fly over and web him?
Overload your web/scram if your warp-in is bad so you don't get into this situation in the first place?
Use your drones to put DPS on him, and your active armor tank to take his hits...
--- oh, this is Nullsec ---
Tell your prober that he screwed up, and while your fleet warps off grid, tell him to get his act together and provide a better warp-in
--- oh, you're being ganked, have a long range point on you, and can't catch him, and aren't near a gate or station because you got your ass pointed while in a belt ratting in low/null sec ---
QQ
I proposed a way for you to kill him when he IS in range.
It's your piloting skills that needs to figure out how to make that happen. |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:40:00 -
[378] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Imawuss wrote:Um no -100.
This would make Blasters even more useless. Why? because now all you need to do is stay at 15km and Gallente dies every time. Kiting is already an issue so you want to make it worse? Sure you will be better off in the 10% of situations you start off in optimal, but now you will be completly owned in the 90% you do not. Not to mention now you have 0 purpose in any fleet except for gate camps and even then still outshinned by AC's because the chance they come in next to you is less then them coming at the other side of the gate. By the time you burn to them they are already melting.
DPS in range is not the issue its the lack of range or being able to apply the DPS that was the issue. Increasing dps and shortening range makes Gallente even more niche, a very small one. They would be relegated to high sec station games and useless in all other situations if you made that change. So you want long range blasters? Would you like that at Scorch range or EMP range? What I described would actually fit what blasters are SUPPOSED to be, as well as provide a niche that an intelligent pilot could exploit. Amarr ships are great if you can control range, but they aren't the fastest so you need a smart pilot. Caldari ships are great if you can MAINTAIN range (and somehow figure out how to keep the guy on grid), but have crap for DPS and are useless up close. Minmatar have amazing kiting ability with their speed and falloff giving amazing flexibility with range and damage type while on grid. What do I want with Gallente? I want a ship that when I get a warp in, or the opponent makes a mistake, I can drop a scram and web on him and eat him alive. I would prefer that EVE Online never has a Jack of all Trades ship that can truly own everything (though at times the Vagabond has come pretty damn close), and for that matter I'd like to see Gallente truly excel at one specific area while on grid. I described it as creating a zone of death, and I think that metaphor fits quite nicely for what blasters *could* be if CCP agrees.
What you just described is a Single situation where gallente are good and that is when you warp to 0 on top of your enemy, but wait at those ranges neuts would suck you dry and even at reduced cap blasters still use cap.
Every other situation is less dependent on YOUR skill as a pilot and requires the opponent to make a mistake which in my opinion makes it useless. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:48:00 -
[379] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:What you just described is a Single situation where gallente are good and that is when you warp to 0 on top of your enemy, but wait at those ranges neuts would suck you dry and even at reduced cap blasters still use cap.
Every other situation is less dependent on YOUR skill as a pilot and requires the opponent to make a mistake which in my opinion makes it useless. Do you spend your entire day ganking Curses and Ashimuu's? If someone fits a Neutralizer and you are in a cap-dependent ship, umm... good choice on their part?
Positioning yourself in your weapon system's range is as much dependent on you being smart as your opponent being dumb. In mortal combat, your prowess on the field of battle will be weighed and measured against your opponents. Give me the ship I described, pick any ship you want, start the combat at 1km away from each other, and I will own you. Position ourselves off grid from each other, give us a common objective, and lo and behold we might have a real fight on our hands. If I choose to fly blaster, I am making the assumption that I can and will be able to position myself within range of your ship. That's on me. If you make a mistake, you will just be making my job easier.
What is going to suck if the original proposed changes go through is that even if I get within range, there's no guarantee that my blaster ship will even own the field against a like-opponent, and/or get the job done before he is able to find a way to break range. Hence, why I fully endorse the following:
Digital Gaidin wrote:2. Blasters and their Niche
Autocannons provide an immense amount of DPS, most notably with their ability to switch ammo types to what can punch a hole through hostile's tanks the best and hit out even past Pulse ranges. Even if blasters had a 10% advantage over projectiles, they don't have the ability to adapt to the situation and remain inferior.
How I would fix blasters: Give medium/large blasers about a 30%+ boost to damage, an optimal under web range, virtually no falloff, and ungodly tracking. A battleship should hit a cruiser afterburning with a single web under 10k at max traversal (maybe not for full). A cruiser the same with a frigate. A frigate, while MWDing, should be able to in a tight orbit hit full force against larger ships with small blasters, and/or remain effective against other frigates in a knife fight. Keep Gallente ships slow and fat (no change), and allow blasters to provide a zone of death around the fleet. Any hostile that enters that zone should effectively bend over and kiss its ass goodbye. That's a niche that is missing from EVE, and would fit nicely with teh blaster paradigm. Slow, Fat, and up close the deadliest motherf*cker you've ever seen. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:50:00 -
[380] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:If your enemy is flying faster than you and out of your range you could have 100,000 dps and if you cannot hit him 100,000 x 0 is still 0 Well, um, this is actually true for all of the guns (as well as missiles and drones), not just blasters. So, what is your point? That all guns should have infinite range and tracking speed? |
|
Acac Sunflyier
Burning Star L.L.C.
22
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:53:00 -
[381] - Quote
I feel as if rails should get a bigger dmg boost. And blasters should get a range boost. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
89
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:57:00 -
[382] - Quote
Acac Sunflyier wrote:I feel as if rails should get a bigger dmg boost. And blasters should get a range boost.
At least with those changes my Cynabal autocanons will be buffed. It was time he was so underpowered ... |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:57:00 -
[383] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Dunmur wrote:What you just described is a Single situation where gallente are good and that is when you warp to 0 on top of your enemy, but wait at those ranges neuts would suck you dry and even at reduced cap blasters still use cap.
Every other situation is less dependent on YOUR skill as a pilot and requires the opponent to make a mistake which in my opinion makes it useless. Do you spend your entire day ganking Curses and Ashimuu's? If someone fits a Neutralizer and you are in a cap-dependent ship, umm... good choice on their part? Positioning yourself in your weapon system's range is as much dependent on you being smart as your opponent being dumb. In mortal combat, your prowess on the field of battle will be weighed and measured against your opponents. Give me the ship I described, pick any ship you want, start the combat at 1km away from each other, and I will own you. Position ourselves off grid from each other, give us a common objective, and lo and behold we might have a real fight on our hands. If I choose to fly blaster, I am making the assumption that I can and will be able to position myself within range of your ship. That's on me. If you make a mistake, you will just be making my job easier. What is going to suck if the original proposed changes go through is that even if I get within range, there's no guarantee that my blaster ship will even own the field against a like-opponent, and/or get the job done before he is able to find a way to break range. Hence, why I fully endorse the following: Digital Gaidin wrote:2. Blasters and their Niche
Autocannons provide an immense amount of DPS, most notably with their ability to switch ammo types to what can punch a hole through hostile's tanks the best and hit out even past Pulse ranges. Even if blasters had a 10% advantage over projectiles, they don't have the ability to adapt to the situation and remain inferior.
How I would fix blasters: Give medium/large blasers about a 30%+ boost to damage, an optimal under web range, virtually no falloff, and ungodly tracking. A battleship should hit a cruiser afterburning with a single web under 10k at max traversal (maybe not for full). A cruiser the same with a frigate. A frigate, while MWDing, should be able to in a tight orbit hit full force against larger ships with small blasters, and/or remain effective against other frigates in a knife fight. Keep Gallente ships slow and fat (no change), and allow blasters to provide a zone of death around the fleet. Any hostile that enters that zone should effectively bend over and kiss its ass goodbye. That's a niche that is missing from EVE, and would fit nicely with teh blaster paradigm. Slow, Fat, and up close the deadliest motherf*cker you've ever seen.
What you are describing would be good for 1v1 or small group pvp only, good luck doing that in a larger fleet. Oh and unlike high-sec station games its kinda hard to warp out and warp back in at 0 when you have dicter bubbles in 0.0. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:59:00 -
[384] - Quote
Dunmur wrote: What you just described is a Single situation where gallente are good and that is when you warp to 0 on top of your enemy, but wait at those ranges neuts would suck you dry and even at reduced cap blasters still use cap.
Does every ship in the game fit neuts?
No? Well, then I guess you, too, are describing a Single situation - that is when you warp to 0 on top of your enemy and your enemy has neuts.
Digital Guidin wrote: Do you spend your entire day ganking Curses and Ashimuu's? If someone fits a Neutralizer and you are in a cap-dependent ship, umm... good choice on their part?
lol
|
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:59:00 -
[385] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Dunmur wrote:If your enemy is flying faster than you and out of your range you could have 100,000 dps and if you cannot hit him 100,000 x 0 is still 0 Well, um, this is actually true for all of the guns (as well as missiles and drones), not just blasters. So, what is your point? That all guns should have infinite range and tracking speed?
my point is the shortest range ship, should be able to catch its target |
Acac Sunflyier
Burning Star L.L.C.
23
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 23:59:00 -
[386] - Quote
Also, I'd like to ask how the Talos is going to fit in. Part of my preponderance comes from the deployment schedule. Will the Talos deploy at the same time as hybrids? Will hybrids deploy before hand so this change doesn't mean anything? Is the talos being build with the change in mind? |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:00:00 -
[387] - Quote
Acac Sunflyier wrote:I feel as if rails should get a bigger dmg boost. And blasters should get a range boost. If blasters get a range boost, Projectiles have insane range even if most of it is in falloff, and missiles being missiles, how do you see a range boost changing the landscape? You really want to nerf Amarr badly, don't you?
Rails getting a bigger damage boost? Again, what would be the point of Amarr weaponry?
Missiles have their niche. Projectiles do Alpha and cap warfare best. What you describe just took the advantages of Amarr (minus the fast reload time) and smacked them onto Gallente. Not a good choice, in my opinion. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:05:00 -
[388] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:What you are describing would be good for 1v1 or small group pvp only, good luck doing that in a larger fleet. Oh and unlike high-sec station games its kinda hard to warp out and warp back in at 0 when you have dicter bubbles in 0.0. I regularly warp in for bombing runs in very hostile environments surrounded by bubbles. Proper alignment for warp-ins is essential, and while hostiles bubbling their own fleet to protect from a warp-to-zero (or 30) will stop you from getting the absolute best warp-in, they just freaking bubbled themselves...
Gallente shouldn't be a new FOTM that owns everything else. They should have their tactics that, when the hostiles are forced to fight on their terms, the Gallente should win hands down. Caldari missile fleets have this. Amarr AHAC and Hellcat fleets have this. Minmatar Alpha fleets have this. Gallente...
Amarr and Minmatar DPS curves fight it out for the mid-range combat, and Missile damage and Artillery owns long range. Blasters have their niche in close range, and that is where they should be insanely deadly.
Acac Sunflyier wrote:Also, I'd like to ask how the Talos is going to fit in. Part of my preponderance comes from the deployment schedule. Will the Talos deploy at the same time as hybrids? Will hybrids deploy before hand so this change doesn't mean anything? Is the talos being build with the change in mind? T3 BC's are all about breaking the mold. If Gallente ships are fat and slow while being insanely deadly at close range, the Talos becomes the Fast but paper thin deadly at close range ship. Especially with the design being slightly un-Gallente, it fits in perfectly with not only its role but its tactics-shift away from other blaster boats.
Just my thoughts. |
DarkAegix
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
202
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:09:00 -
[389] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Dunmur wrote:If your enemy is flying faster than you and out of your range you could have 100,000 dps and if you cannot hit him 100,000 x 0 is still 0 Well, um, this is actually true for all of the guns (as well as missiles and drones), not just blasters. So, what is your point? That all guns should have infinite range and tracking speed? Wrong! Try again! Other weapons operate further than the warp disruptor range of 24km. A Minmatar ship could kite a Gallente one at 23km. The Gallente one will be doing next to no DPS, and die a slow and painful death.
In an engagement where the the enemy has a faster ship (Read: Almost all the time) and are using railguns, arties, autocannons, pulse lasers, beam lasers, guided or unguided missiles you'll find that blasters will lose every single time. |
Amro One
One.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:14:00 -
[390] - Quote
I cant fit hybrids on my mimitar ships.
No need to train hybrids. |
|
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers Galactic-Rangers
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:20:00 -
[391] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Tristan North wrote:Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it. The agility change is an agility buff. The ships will be more agile.
Many thanks for clarifying this , had my head hurting for a while that one ^_^ |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:21:00 -
[392] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Dunmur wrote:What you are describing would be good for 1v1 or small group pvp only, good luck doing that in a larger fleet. Oh and unlike high-sec station games its kinda hard to warp out and warp back in at 0 when you have dicter bubbles in 0.0. I regularly warp in for bombing runs in very hostile environments surrounded by bubbles. Proper alignment for warp-ins is essential, and while hostiles bubbling their own fleet to protect from a warp-to-zero (or 30) will stop you from getting the absolute best warp-in, they just freaking bubbled themselves... Gallente shouldn't be a new FOTM that owns everything else. They should have their tactics that, when the hostiles are forced to fight on their terms, the Gallente should win hands down. Caldari missile fleets have this. Amarr AHAC and Hellcat fleets have this. Minmatar Alpha fleets have this. Gallente... Amarr and Minmatar DPS curves fight it out for the mid-range combat, and Missile damage and Artillery owns long range. Blasters have their niche in close range, and that is where they should be insanely deadly. Acac Sunflyier wrote:Also, I'd like to ask how the Talos is going to fit in. Part of my preponderance comes from the deployment schedule. Will the Talos deploy at the same time as hybrids? Will hybrids deploy before hand so this change doesn't mean anything? Is the talos being build with the change in mind? T3 BC's are all about breaking the mold. If Gallente ships are fat and slow while being insanely deadly at close range, the Talos becomes the Fast but paper thin deadly at close range ship. Especially with the design being slightly un-Gallente, it fits in perfectly with not only its role but its tactics-shift away from other blaster boats. Just my thoughts.
I still don't think these changes are gonna make much of a difference the hybrids lack the versatility/utility of the other guns. Yes they have their perks but in pvp versatility trumps all.
They can ether buff blasters by giving them more range but this will just cause the differences in the gun types to blur
or
They can significantly buff the speed on blaster boats
or
They can ...GASP... nerf autocannons/pulse lasers to where they have a damn hard time tracking stuff in blaster ranges
Otherwise they have given no real incentive for people to switch to using blasters.
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:21:00 -
[393] - Quote
DarkAegix wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Dunmur wrote:If your enemy is flying faster than you and out of your range you could have 100,000 dps and if you cannot hit him 100,000 x 0 is still 0 Well, um, this is actually true for all of the guns (as well as missiles and drones), not just blasters. So, what is your point? That all guns should have infinite range and tracking speed? Wrong! Try again! Other weapons operate further than the warp disruptor range of 24km. A Minmatar ship could kite a Gallente one at 23km. The Gallente one will be doing next to no DPS, and die a slow and painful death. In an engagement where the the enemy has a faster ship (Read: Almost all the time) and are using railguns, arties, autocannons, pulse lasers, beam lasers, guided or unguided missiles blasters will lose every single time. *GASP*
My **INSERT_SHIP_TYPE_HERE** doesn't work at 23km! FIX ME!
If someone is orbiting a blaster ship at 23km and the blaster pilot doesn't have a means to defend himself, he deserves to die... regardless of what changes go through. Name one situation where a blaster ship will be located against a single tackler and wouldn't have a means of escape within 60 seconds (via jump, breaking 24km range, docking, ECM drone jam got a cycle off, etc.). |
Buzzmong
Aliastra Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:22:00 -
[394] - Quote
ITT:
General consensus that the hybrid changes are good but are akin to weeing into the wind when compared to the overwhelming superiority of projectiles in their current states.
General agreement that one weapon system is towering over the others, ergo normal balancing techniques should apply: Projectiles should feel the nerf bat. Preferably delivered by TomB or Oveur as they're the biggest hitters and they haven't had a chance to swing it for a while.. |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:23:00 -
[395] - Quote
CCP Tallest come on, read this thread, you can obviously see that 99% of people see this as NOT ENOUGH BY A LONGSHOT |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:26:00 -
[396] - Quote
Dunmur wrote: I still don't think these changes are gonna make much of a difference the hybrids lack the versatility/utility of the other guns. Yes they have their perks but in pvp versatility trumps all.
They can ether buff blasters by giving them more range but this will just cause the differences in the gun types to blur
or
They can significantly buff the speed on blaster boats
or
They can ...GASP... nerf autocannons/pulse lasers to where they have a damn hard time tracking stuff in blaster ranges
Otherwise they have given no real incentive for people to switch to using blasters.
Or they could do what I've been saying for 2 pages now that you conveniently left off your list.
We don't need *another* versatile weapons system. Artillery can't track worth hell. Autocannons are very versatile. Pulses are only good if you can use Scorch, else hope you are in blaster range. Beams and Railguns suck because they can't get the job done in real 'verse situations. Blasters currently suck but might not soon. Heavy Missiles are great if you have an army of them impacting at the same time, and are under 84km. Short range missiles are decent when used properly.
No one excels in the 10km and under range right now. Blaster ships don't need to be a jack of all trades (like Autocannons, T2 Pulses, or Heavy missiles), but they do need to have a purpose on the battlefield. They might not be good for all situations (few ships are, and usually only completented by support ships), but they should be damn good at something. If you are flying Gallente and need something to mission run in, either MWD after your targets and blast them or use Railguns and deal with fast movers using drones. This is the perfect opportunity for a weapon system to be designed to fill a void, and it would be a shame if it came off mediocre to appeal to the "I want this one system to do everything" crowd. |
Yvan Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:27:00 -
[397] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Dunmur wrote: What you just described is a Single situation where gallente are good and that is when you warp to 0 on top of your enemy, but wait at those ranges neuts would suck you dry and even at reduced cap blasters still use cap.
Does every ship in the game fit neuts? No? Well, then I guess you, too, are describing a Single situation - that is when you warp to 0 on top of your enemy and your enemy has neuts. Digital Guidin wrote: Do you spend your entire day ganking Curses and Ashimuu's? If someone fits a Neutralizer and you are in a cap-dependent ship, umm... good choice on their part?
lol
LMAO so what your saying is its ok for hurricane to still be the do-all able to kill every gallante ship right? as i can fit autos and 2 medium neuts on there and destroy every gallante ship with this buff as it stands (maybe not the talos but it'd be close) |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:30:00 -
[398] - Quote
Yvan Ratamnim wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Dunmur wrote: What you just described is a Single situation where gallente are good and that is when you warp to 0 on top of your enemy, but wait at those ranges neuts would suck you dry and even at reduced cap blasters still use cap.
Does every ship in the game fit neuts? No? Well, then I guess you, too, are describing a Single situation - that is when you warp to 0 on top of your enemy and your enemy has neuts. Digital Guidin wrote: Do you spend your entire day ganking Curses and Ashimuu's? If someone fits a Neutralizer and you are in a cap-dependent ship, umm... good choice on their part?
lol LMAO so what your saying is its ok for hurricane to still be the do-all able to kill every gallante ship right? as i can fit autos and 2 medium neuts on there and destroy every gallante ship with this buff as it stands (maybe not the talos but it'd be close) Put forward my proposed change, get within Neutralizer range, and lets see who wins
One dead Hurricane coming up... |
oldmanst4r
oldmanst4r's Corporation
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:33:00 -
[399] - Quote
This really isn't that complicated, there are three main issues with blasters
Not that much more ]damage than other turrets even in optimal circumstances and...
They are combined with slow-arse ships and have no range.
In order to fix these problems you need to buff two out of three
1. Ship speed
2. Damage (inc tracking)
3. Range
Now Amarr already have the damage/range niche so really a buff to optimal and damage would really just make amarr the worse gallente which no one wants.
On the other hand, buffing the base speed/agility of gallente ships makes them start moving over onto the minmatar niche which isn't great either because gallente ships don't need to kite they need apply dps.
So what's my idea:
Gallente:
Every ship that can fit a blaster should get
1. Mwd Speed Bonus
2. Agility penalty when using mwd
Essentially making it such that with good piloting you should be able to catch even a minmatar pilot who isn't on his toes. Although since blasters use cap you'll have to be careful or you'll cap out before you catch him and won't be able to use your weapons.
Caldari:
1. Railgun damage bonus
Caldari platforms are supposed to be rail platforms so just give them crazy good rails. I think any Rokh pilot would trade his 50% range bonus for a 37.5% damage bonus.
Lastly
Blasters should get the following buff
+20% damage
+37.5% tracking
This makes both gallente and caldari significantly more powerful while leaving them both with significant weaknesses. Caldari rail boats will still be slow and easy to catch, with only rails as a buffer.
Gallente ships will be fast with mwd on but will have a difficult time maneuvering to catch minmatar ships. They will have fantastic damage within web range but will be vulnerable to cap warfare and have no damage type flexibility.
Caveat: numbers may be off, and this is just my opinion.
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:49:00 -
[400] - Quote
DarkAegix wrote: Other weapons operate further than the warp disruptor range of 24km. A Minmatar ship could kite a Gallente one at 23km. The Gallente one will be doing next to no DPS, and die a slow and painful death.
Sure, and I agree that is a valid strategy for the Minmatar ship pilot.
But, you are talking about disruptors, not scrams, and staying just inside of disruptor range and outside of blaster range at MWD speeds is a bit tricky. A mistake one way, and you are getting webbed and pummelled - a mistake the other way, and your target warps away.
And, don't forget that most of the Gallente boats pack drones, too.
DarkAegix wrote: In an engagement where the the enemy has a faster ship (Read: Almost all the time) and are using railguns, arties, autocannons, pulse lasers, beam lasers, guided or unguided missiles you'll find that blasters will lose every single time.
Not true. The standard tactic for a blaster ship pilot is to warp to 0 on the target (and not at max disruptor/scram range), web/scram the target, drop drones and apply overheated blasters before the target can putter away at webbed speeds.
Ofc, this worked better (actually too well) prior to the web nerf, when 90% web was possible - nowadays, you really need to multi-web the target to guarantee the kill.
Oh, wait, that's how you kill Drams.... |
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:53:00 -
[401] - Quote
Yvan Ratamnim wrote:CCP Tallest come on, read this thread, you can obviously see that 99% of people see this as NOT ENOUGH BY A LONGSHOT Well, 99% of the people in the US are overweight, and in debt, too. That doesn't make it smart.
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
81
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:53:00 -
[402] - Quote
here is a boost for gallente make it so remote sensor damps also reduce the ships sensor strength so its easier to lock them down with multi specs... (would also make sence why gal have information warfare links)
this would make ships like the lechasis/arazu used more then just a long point or scram... |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:06:00 -
[403] - Quote
Digital Gaiden has my full support. The man is amazing. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:07:00 -
[404] - Quote
Dunmur wrote: my point is the shortest range ship, should be able to catch its target
All of the time? Then, everyone would be flying Gallente ships next year.
The whole point of "balancing" is to avoid creating a sure win for one particular weapon, ship, or strategy.
In general: Minmatar ships are faster - kiting is a valid strategy, and AC stats support this strategy. Gallente ships are DPS beasts - warping to 0 is valid strategy, and blaster stats support this strategy.
If the Minmatar ship can kite the Gallente, then the Minmatar ship should have the advantage. If the Gallente ship drops right on the Minmatar ship, then the Gallente ship should have the advantage. But, in either case, it should never be a sure win. |
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:09:00 -
[405] - Quote
So, one again CCP chooses to boost T2 turret ammo while making sure T2 missile ammo retains its negative ship bonuses?
Any chance this blatant favoritism will stop?
T2 Missiles should loose the ship speed and sig bloom penalties NAO!
Failing to do so just solidifies the bias. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:12:00 -
[406] - Quote
But, more seriously, CCP Tallest -
What about a buff to the graphics and sound effects for blasters and railguns? |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Dark Solar Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:17:00 -
[407] - Quote
+1 to the idea to make range = more cap use (and not range = less dps) that would make both blasters and rails have their niche again other than that
blaster ships should be the fastest in a straight line faster than mini by at least 20%
blasters should out dps anything by 50% in their optimal
I think web bonus in any sense is bad since it is situational overpowered and would imbalance certain faction and specialized t2-3 hulls (why fly a rapier when you can have a gallente hull that gets that bonus 100mil cheaper? etc) |
Kamuria
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:21:00 -
[408] - Quote
Even with those changes i still think the hybrids deserve another boost.
You can either boost falloff a little bit, or give them quicker reload. The Amarr get to reload fast, I think hybrid guns should reload quicker to, due to their poor range you're constantly adjusting. Unlike projectile ammo, you barely get to 50% of web range with antimatter on medium hybrid blasters, the only type of ammo requiring several ammo type under 10km... |
Solomon XI
Hidden Souls
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:22:00 -
[409] - Quote
@ CCP Developers,
This is an extremely good start to fixing the Hybrid platform. As a capsuleer who uses Hybrid weaponry quite often - I do think more is needed. I remember vividly the day blaster platforms ceased being useful. It was a dark day when the new scram was introduced (IE: shutting off a MicroWarpDrive) and the Stasis Webifier nerfed into oblivion.
Dedicated Gallente Blaster platforms should have a web bonus (<3 Vindi/Kronos) and immunity from the scram side-effect which turns MWD's off. Ships which meet this criteria are Thorax, Deimos, Megathron, Hyperion, and related.
Blasters also need a slight optimal boost. |
DarkAegix
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
202
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:26:00 -
[410] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote: The standard tactic for a blaster ship pilot is to warp to 0 on the target
And that's why blasters just don't work. |
|
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:29:00 -
[411] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote: I think web bonus in any sense is bad since it is situational overpowered and would imbalance certain faction and specialized t2-3 hulls (why fly a rapier when you can have a gallente hull that gets that bonus 100mil cheaper? etc)
Cause we speak about a bonus on the efficiency of the web, not the range...... |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
111
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:32:00 -
[412] - Quote
Quote:Feedback
If you have issues with this balancing plan, please post your feedback in the comment thread. We are listening.
you want feedback? ok here's feedback:
proposed blaster fixes on the devblog are half-assed. I can comprehend the armour tanking balancing a bit, but blasters are supposed to be something akin to shooting nukes at someone's face at point blank ranges. this does not happen today because their damage is marginally better than "the next best thing(TM)", and even at some cases it is actually surpassed (a gank torp raven, theoredically, outdamages a gank neutron megathron btw). Also said marginally better damage is only better in perfect conditions.
my proposal is to boost (M and L) blasters dps on the 50% range. tracking change is actually not bad and I don't mind the fittings change. For sake of balancing I don't even mind cutting down the blasters' optimal and falloff further so that they do no more than paint scratching beyond the 10-15km range or thereabouts.
In the blasters' case, the damage projection mechanism should be solely the ships themselves, and not the guns, so the speed and agility boosts aren't actually bad, altho I would boost them a bit more.
in sum, I don't mind blasters getting even shorter ranges if A) they get the means to get there and B) get overwhelming damage to compensate said ranges.
And , in my opinion, proposed changes are only half way there tbh. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Dark Solar Empire
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:33:00 -
[413] - Quote
Jeffrey Powel wrote:Crazy KSK wrote: I think web bonus in any sense is bad since it is situational overpowered and would imbalance certain faction and specialized t2-3 hulls (why fly a rapier when you can have a gallente hull that gets that bonus 100mil cheaper? etc)
Cause we speak about a bonus on the efficiency of the web, not the range......
sigh so if the mega got a 90% strength bonus why would I want to pay 10times the price for a vindicator? |
Sol Mortis
An Heroes
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:33:00 -
[414] - Quote
It is obvious that these changes are not sufficient in any way. Blasters need more damage if you are going to keep their range as short as it is, which I think should happen. They really should be the short range artillery as many others have indicated, inflicting massive alpha and high sustained DPS but with a low rate of fire. As it stands, Autocannons do almost the same amount of damage, and when you consider the range at which they project that damage and ESPECIALLY that they can switch to any damage type the slight damage advantage blasters have is completely overshadowed.
I think another possible fix would be to divide blaster damage 3 ways so that it inflicts roughly 33% each of EM, Thermal, and Kinetic; which would make scientific sense as they are plasma weapons and plasma certainly has a lot of EM energy; if you did this blasters would still be viable with the same damage they have now since people couldn't just stack more kin/therm resist on top of already decent kin/therm resists (especially for Tech 2 ships).
No matter how you look at it, blasters need either more damage, or the damage they have needs to be more effective in some way; and just improving the tracking is not going to cut it. For the Record I can fly all races near perfectly and pretty much only participate in PvP when I play, and have been using mostly minmatar for a long long time now. I was excited that blasters might be better soon, but this is not going to make me use them again when I can still choose any damage type I need and do that damage at kite range in the fastest ships in the game. There is just still no reason to choose blasters.
Again, to recap, at least two of these three changes are needed.
1. Give blasters alpha comparable to artillery.
2. Give blasters more DPS.
3. Give blasters EM damage in addition to Kinetic and Thermal while keeping their current DPS. (this is still inferior to projectiles because 67% of your damage will not be against their weakest resist, unlike projectiles where almost 100% of their damage is the perfect type to destroy their target). |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:38:00 -
[415] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Not true. The standard tactic for a blaster ship pilot is to warp to 0 on the target (and not at max disruptor/scram range), web/scram the target, drop drones and apply overheated blasters before the target can putter away at webbed speeds. ....
And your forget the "to pray" parts. Pray you will land at 0 and not a 5km, pray to don't be jammed cause you will be unable to hit or run after a falcon, pray the target don't have neutz cause your gun don't work whithout a lot of cap, pray they don't have a logistic cause at 50km you simply can't do anything, pray it's not a trap cause if it is you can't escape cause you always fight at web/scramble range ect, ect.... |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:41:00 -
[416] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Imawuss wrote:Um no -100.
This would make Blasters even more useless. Why? because now all you need to do is stay at 15km and Gallente dies every time. Kiting is already an issue so you want to make it worse? Sure you will be better off in the 10% of situations you start off in optimal, but now you will be completly owned in the 90% you do not. Not to mention now you have 0 purpose in any fleet except for gate camps and even then still outshinned by AC's because the chance they come in next to you is less then them coming at the other side of the gate. By the time you burn to them they are already melting.
DPS in range is not the issue its the lack of range or being able to apply the DPS that was the issue. Increasing dps and shortening range makes Gallente even more niche, a very small one. They would be relegated to high sec station games and useless in all other situations if you made that change. So you want long range blasters? Would you like that at Scorch range or EMP range? What I described would actually fit what blasters are SUPPOSED to be, as well as provide a niche that an intelligent pilot could exploit. Amarr ships are great if you can control range, but they aren't the fastest so you need a smart pilot. Caldari ships are great if you can MAINTAIN range (and somehow figure out how to keep the guy on grid), but have crap for DPS and are useless up close. Minmatar have amazing kiting ability with their speed and falloff giving amazing flexibility with range and damage type while on grid. What do I want with Gallente? I want a ship that when I get a warp in, or the opponent makes a mistake, I can drop a scram and web on him and eat him alive. I would prefer that EVE Online never has a Jack of all Trades ship that can truly own everything (though at times the Vagabond has come pretty damn close), and for that matter I'd like to see Gallente truly excel at one specific area while on grid. I described it as creating a zone of death, and I think that metaphor fits quite nicely for what blasters *could* be if CCP agrees.
So basically, you want Gallente to be to be useful only in small fleet vs 1 ship gank situations? Because you need to have 1500 dps in one ship for that to work right... all other situations you will be kited and killed @15km becuase you are slower and cant get into web range without help from another ship. In fleet situations your are useless. If this happens Gallente will only be useful in 5% of combat situations. I'm sorry not acceptable.
I would like to see ammo lose its dps for range stats and instead some sort of cap for range stat and reduce ammo load times from 10 seconds to 5 or instant. Then on top of that something like this would be more useful:
MeBiatch wrote: here are the fixes for hybrids:
blasters:
concept shotguns (short range arties...)
1. Increase base damage by 50% 2. Decrease rate of fire by 30% 3. Increase falloff by 15% 4. increase tracking by 37.5%
railguns: Concept long range auto cannons
1. Increase base damage by 15% 2. Increase rate of fire by 15% 3. decrease activation cost by 40% 4. increase tracking by 37.5%
|
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 01:41:00 -
[417] - Quote
Crazy KSK wrote:Jeffrey Powel wrote:Crazy KSK wrote: I think web bonus in any sense is bad since it is situational overpowered and would imbalance certain faction and specialized t2-3 hulls (why fly a rapier when you can have a gallente hull that gets that bonus 100mil cheaper? etc)
Cause we speak about a bonus on the efficiency of the web, not the range...... sigh so if the mega got a 90% strength bonus why would I want to pay 10times the price for a vindicator?
Cause if the mega get this bonus, the vindicator going to have a 4th bonus different, cause the DPS bonus, cause the 8th gun, cause the agility, cause the skin, cause the 5th med slot, ect.... |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
142
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:02:00 -
[418] - Quote
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1431186&page=1#1
My assembly hall post before the old forum got shut down had about 70% thumbs up.
The idea is to make blasters shotgun damage. Meaning the closer you are, the more raw dps they do. This would mean medium do 20-30% more damage when within 50% of optimal. The same dps when outside of optimal.
And then , instead of falloff decreasing the chance to hit, it would only reduce the damage blasters deal. Because shotgun blasters as we all know move in a cone. So the closer you are the more hits you take, the farther away you are the less hits you take.
Think the way they balance shotguns for any fps title. |
Andreus Ixiris
Mixed Metaphor
154
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:15:00 -
[419] - Quote
Patri Andari wrote:So, one again CCP chooses to boost T2 turret ammo while making sure T2 missile ammo retains its negative ship bonuses?
Any chance this blatant favoritism will stop?
T2 Missiles should loose the ship speed and sig bloom penalties NAO!
Failing to do so just solidifies the bias.
Have you read the data dump? You know the changes you're petulantly demanding are actually happening, right? Andreus Anthony LeHane Ixiris CEO, Mixed Metaphor
Animated Corporate Logos |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
82
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:21:00 -
[420] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote:http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1431186&page=1#1
My assembly hall post before the old forum got shut down had about 70% thumbs up.
The idea is to make blasters shotgun damage. Meaning the closer you are, the more raw dps they do. This would mean medium do 20-30% more damage when within 50% of optimal. The same dps when outside of optimal.
And then , instead of falloff decreasing the chance to hit, it would only reduce the damage blasters deal. Because shotgun blasters as we all know move in a cone. So the closer you are the more hits you take, the farther away you are the less hits you take. However the cool part of this plan is optimal range is based on the size of the target. If your trying to shoot a target with larger sig radius than your guns, than their effective optimal range is greater. Since the cone of damage gets larger as it travels, damage is directly linked to how far away the target is, and how big it is.
Think the way they balance shotguns for any fps title.
If your in a frigate trying to hit a battleship, then hell why not, you now have 12-15km range on your small blasters. Which allows you to tackle and still put on some dps.
the problem with that is that falloff is in the chance to hit formula... but that is only half of the applied damage formula...
pretty much chance to hit = 0-1 and it goes against x which is a random generated number between 0-1.... if x is greater then chance to hit you miss... |
|
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:22:00 -
[421] - Quote
Jeffrey Powel wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Not true. The standard tactic for a blaster ship pilot is to warp to 0 on the target (and not at max disruptor/scram range), web/scram the target, drop drones and apply overheated blasters before the target can putter away at webbed speeds. .... And your forget the "to pray" parts. Pray you will land at 0 and not a 5km, pray to don't be jammed cause you will be unable to hit or run after a falcon, pray the target don't have neutz cause your gun don't work whithout a lot of cap, pray they don't have a logistic cause at 50km you simply can't do anything, pray it's not a trap cause if it is you can't escape cause you always fight at web/scramble range ect, ect....
couldn't have put it better myself
|
Sorran Tor
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:24:00 -
[422] - Quote
Wait wait wait
...since when was the Ishtar a blaster boat? |
Stumanum
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:34:00 -
[423] - Quote
Just wonderful! I especially like the tracking boost to blasters.
Stum |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
144
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:37:00 -
[424] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:MotherMoon wrote:http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1431186&page=1#1
My assembly hall post before the old forum got shut down had about 70% thumbs up.
The idea is to make blasters shotgun damage. Meaning the closer you are, the more raw dps they do. This would mean medium do 20-30% more damage when within 50% of optimal. The same dps when outside of optimal.
And then , instead of falloff decreasing the chance to hit, it would only reduce the damage blasters deal. Because shotgun blasters as we all know move in a cone. So the closer you are the more hits you take, the farther away you are the less hits you take. However the cool part of this plan is optimal range is based on the size of the target. If your trying to shoot a target with larger sig radius than your guns, than their effective optimal range is greater. Since the cone of damage gets larger as it travels, damage is directly linked to how far away the target is, and how big it is.
Think the way they balance shotguns for any fps title.
If your in a frigate trying to hit a battleship, then hell why not, you now have 12-15km range on your small blasters. Which allows you to tackle and still put on some dps. the problem with that is that falloff is in the chance to hit formula... but that is only half of the applied damage formula... pretty much chance to hit = 0-1 and it goes against x which is a random generated number between 0-1.... if x is greater then chance to hit you miss...
but that isn't how the missile formula works. My idea is to make blasters a thrid weapon system, finally adding more than 2 weapon types to eve. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:45:00 -
[425] - Quote
Xenuria wrote:Consider the following... You have a pilot with all skills at 5
A single tech 2 medium drone with ship bonuses does more damage in 1 hit Than A single tech 2 medium Hybrid Blaster with ship bonuses and tech 2 ammo
Should something like a drone be doing more damage then a single blaster?
Yea of course. You can only have 5 drones, but you can have up to 8 blasters. Also, you can use a magstab, there is no equivalent for medium drones (or any drones, except the sentry damage rig, but no module). Drones are supposed to be a primary weapon system (I really wonder when this is gonna be reflected by modules...), they need to do as much damage as other weapon systems but are hard-limited to 5 (sub capital at least) vs. 8 for guns.
Sorry, really bad comparison.... |
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Industrial Group Rage Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:46:00 -
[426] - Quote
I will admit first that i did not read all the threads but I did read 12 pages.
What i suggest is keep the current boost that you are planing. I can agree with them, keep the speed boost I can agree with that. But when you look at boosting the Gal. ships make them different than any other race in the game that you cover that giant explosion hole in their armor. Bosst the base to 25 in stead of ten. Now while this seems extreme, it will give the Gal pilots that extra hp to get into fights and to be good in PvP again. |
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:49:00 -
[427] - Quote
Ugleb wrote:Quote:Javelin, Gleam and Quake (all sizes): Removed tracking speed penalty, added 25% tracking speed bonus
Hail (all sizes): Removed falloff penalty Speaking as a Minmatar, I hereby declare my love for CCP Tallest. Very nice to see CCP identifying an related issue and taking the time to address it there and then. Good stuff.
He's right! Way to go CCP. This buff to Minmatar is actually more of the real story here than the improvement to hybrids. The more I look at that, it makes them absolutely dominating. Well, they already were but now..... |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
82
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 02:50:00 -
[428] - Quote
MotherMoon wrote:
but that isn't how the missile formula works. My idea is to make blasters a thrid weapon system, finally adding more than 2 weapon types to eve.
i dunno sounds like you want directional smart bombs... it could be cool... but remember shotguns have more then one ammo type... you have slugs too..
so how about making some of the ammo types directional smart bombs that have a 30 degree arc and the others are traditional ammo types...? |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 03:11:00 -
[429] - Quote
Thorax, Brutix and Deimos all have 50m3 drone bays and as such can field 5 x ec-600 ecm drones. If they can get in range in a small fight, they'll usually have the upper hand if fit like that. Simply comparing blaster range ignores some of the other features and weakness of blaster ships.
Also with the changed fitting requirements to hybrids, instead of switching to a full Neutron gank fit, one could of course stick to Ions and fit a better tank.
Additionally, the Thorax and Deimos, with their strange MWD bonus and now a slight speed and agility bonus seem to be crying for kiting rail fits, now that rails do more damage.
The Eagle might, with some imagination, make a fine kiter using rails and TDs in the mids.
I think the hybrid changes are not perfect, but they need a chance to play out in game before the get changed again. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 03:16:00 -
[430] - Quote
I'm disapointed with CCP yet again. With all the ideas that have been put forth by the community, ie: short range arty long range AC's or extremely short range deathrays that kill all out to 10km but not any further or changing falloff mechanics to work like a shot gun where you always hit but do less damage or changing ammo to work on more cap for more range instead of less damage for more range. Wether you like these ideas or not they are at least unique in their own ways and add to the diversity (or increase their niche effectivness) of the hybrid weapon system as well as make them more useful.
So what does CCP give us? something that could be done by 1 developer in 1 day. They boost a few stats on the weapon system while not even addressing the main issue with them. As someone put it, its akin to rebuilding an aluminum a car out of carbon fiber and adding a spoiler to reduce weight and handling while forgetting you designed the thing with square wheels and saying that the new features make it viable in races. How much work does it take to go in and change those stats?
99% have spoken these changes dont go far enough, the community has given many great and varied ideas on fixing hybrids. Now CCP lets see if you are truly listening to the community as you say you are now doing.
|
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 03:21:00 -
[431] - Quote
To those who questioned earlier why the blaster changes wouldn't just be for 1v1 engagements, I propose to view it through the following lens: Think of all the roams you've gone on with 4-8 pilots looking for small gangs to kill, or for the midsize roams of 20v20 where you hit that magic moment where a "real" fight happens... you know, where one side isn't just ganking the other but a true match-up of skill has arrived? The fights where one side feints as if running, hostiles pursue through the gate to follow, you about face and engage and have a rolling battle 10-40km off the gate. Yea... those.
If blasters are given the option to be the end-all be-all of close range combat, we introduce a weapon system that could seriously shake up everything from solo to small gang warfare to larger fleet tactics. Give numbers of blaster ships the ability to actually break the tank of a Logistics supported Battlecruisers/Battleships. Give them the ability in small gang warfare to significantly pressure a few logistics ships and push them to their edge of capability by themselves. Sure, Gallente ships using my proposed changes wouldn't be any faster than they are today, but the idea is that when they catch you there should be significant pain brought forth the likes of which EVE has not seen in a long while. Ships should melt under blaster fire (even with Kin/Therm tanks), but that should only occur when Gallente ships catch their prey. Sure they can be kited, as that WOULD be the ideal way to tank a blaster ships' DPS. A good move by the blaster pilot or a bad move by the kiter should either provide the blaster pilot the opportunity for a kill or for a hasty exit. THIS would provide versatility in the combat sphere across frigate, cruiser, and battleship classes without hurting existing weapon systems. This *might* provide a shake-up of the Alpha or Highly tanked setups that exist today, and if anything can do it, it just might be this.
I only ask that CCP doesn't try to stick blasters in the same box as Projectiles and Pulses. Missiles are a monster all their own, and easily left out of this discussion. With Pulses and Autocannons, there is reason enough to use over the other, but if blasters get shoved into the "mid range" envelope with increased range and DPS, something is going to break. With the versatility and flexibility provided by Autocannons, they will still be used the same way they are today. The trouble with blasters vs. pulses however is that one simple question will be asked: which is better? The one that is not will never be used except by the stupid pilot who trained the wrong skill. |
Collin Dow
Free People of Earth Red Dwarf Racketeering Division
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 03:41:00 -
[432] - Quote
The concept of CCP taking it slowly, and not turning hybrids into OMGWTFBBQPWN machines is nice in theory, but I just worry that we'll get a set of sort of, kind of buff that will make our weapons just a little bit less worthless, and then CCP will forget about hybrids for another few years, and maybe boost ACs and arty some more.
The Gallente shall rise again! |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 03:52:00 -
[433] - Quote
[quote=Digital Gaidin] I only ask that CCP doesn't try to stick blasters in the same box as Projectiles and Pulses. [quote]
I fully get this, i just dont prefere your plan to others. Its not a bad an idea i just think some of the other ideas suggested keep the uniqueness of Blasters while adding more survivabilty/versatility and use less warp to 0 and pray tactics.
I do however prefere your plan over what CCP has put out, which i feel is half assed and probably took 1 dev 30 minutes to come up with and then maybe a few hours to implement. |
Turnap
RED MASHINE Red Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 04:13:00 -
[434] - Quote
-ô-+-ü-+-+-¦-+!!! -í-í-ƒ -¦-ï -ç-é-+ -é-¦-+-Ç-+-é-¦? -» -+-+-+-+-+-¦-Ä -ç-é-+ -ì-é-+ -¦-¦-ê-¦ -+-¦-Ç-¦ -+ -¦-¦-+ -Ç-¦-ê-¦-é-î -ç-é-+ -¦-¦-+-¦-é-î -+-+ -¦-¦-+-Ä-ç-¦-¦-é-¦ -¦-+-+-+-¦-â,-é-¦-¦-+-¦ -ç-â-¦-é-¦-+ -ç-é-+ -¦-ï -+-¦ -+-¦-Ç-¦-¦-é-¦ -¦ -¦-¦-â. -Ü-¦-¦-+-¦ -ü-+-ï-ü-+ -¦-â-ü-é-+-é-î -é-Ç-¦-¦-+-+-¦ -¦-ü-+-+ -+-¦-¦-¦-é-Ç-+-+ -¦-¦-¦ -+-+ -+-+-¦ -+-+-¦-+-¦-+ -¦-+-¦-+-¦-é-î -é-¦-¦ -+ -+-¦ -ü-+-+-¦-¦-é, -Ç-¦-+-+-¦-¦-+-ï????? -ƒ-+-¦-¦ -¦-Ç-é-¦ -¦ -¦-¦-ê-+-à -+-¦-¦-¦-à -¦-â-¦-¦-é -¦-¦-¦-¦-é-î -é-¦-¦-â-Ä -¦-+-î-ä-â -+-Ç-+ -Ç-¦-¦-+-ï -+-¦-¦-ü-+-+-+-+-+-é -+-+-¦-é-+,-+-+-ç-¦-+-â -+-¦ -+-+-+-¦-+-+-é-¦ -ü-+-¦-¦-¦? -ú -¦-¦-ü -+-+ -+-¦ -ì-é-+-¦-+ -¦-+-+-+-+-¦-¦-é-¦ -¦ -¦-Ç-ü-+-+-ü-¦ -+-¦ -+-¦-é-¦-Ä-é -+-¦-é-¦-Ç-ü-¦-+-¦ -+ -¦-¦-+-¦-ï-Ç-ü-¦-+-¦ -¦-¦-+-+-é-¦-+! -Æ-ï -ì-é-+-¦-+ -+-¦ -¦-+-¦-¦-é-¦? -ù-¦-ç-¦-+ -â-+-â-ç-ê-¦-é-î -à-¦-+-+ -+-¦-é-Ç-+-+??? -P-+ -ü-¦-+ -+-+ -ü-¦-¦-¦ -à-+-Ç-+-ê -¦ -é-¦-+-¦-Ç-î-+-+ -¦-¦-¦-¦ -ä-Ç-¦-¦-å-+-Ä -+-¦-Ç-¦-+-+-Ä-+-¦-é,-+-+-ç-¦-+-â -+-¦ -â-+-â-ç-ê-+-é-î -¦-+-é-+-+-¦-é-¦-Ç-+-Ä??? -ò-ü-+-+ -¦-ï -¥-É-í-ó-P-¢-¼-Ü-P -+-¦ -+-Ä-¦-+-é-¦ -¦-¦-+-¦-+-é-+-¦ -¦-ï-¦-+-¦-+-é-¦ -+-à-+-+ -+-¦-Ç-ï -é-+ -ç-é-+ -¦-ï -ü -é-¦-¦-+-¦ -à-+-+-¦-é-+-+-ü-é-î-Ä -+-é-+-+-ü-+-é-¦-ü-î -¦ -¦-¦-¦ -¦-¦-+ -ç-¦-ü-é-+ -+-¦ -¦-¦-+-¦-¦-é. |
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 04:22:00 -
[435] - Quote
CCP Tallest:
The tracking increase resolves some of the issues that the web nerf uncovered. Compared to the original 90% webs, a 60% web with a 20% increase in tracking is back to around the effectiveness of an 80% web with no tracking bonus, so that's about where it should be.
This still doesn't fix the lack of DPS. The 5-10% more peak DPS that blasters have over lasers and ACs doesn't make up for the incredibly short range. The answer isn't to increase the range but to drastically increase the damage. Blasters need to deal massive *massive* DPS at very short range.
I used blasters pretty much exclusively for a little under five years. When the web nerf showed up, I put away my Hyperion, never to be used again. Give blasters a role, a very narrow niche, where they excel far beyond anything else. Right now there's just "too much of the same". You're creating the gaming equivalent of oatmeal.
Also, I thought this was supposed to be a blaster thread. Of all the T2 ammo you choose to fix, you pick PROJECTILE ammo? What about Void? It's the most useless ammo in the game! Remove the tracking penalty, increase the DPS and increase the cap use.
As has been said before- The posted changes could have been knocked out in an afternoon by a single dev. So far this expansion feels very last minute and thrown together. |
Prester Tom
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 04:26:00 -
[436] - Quote
Hello 400 dps Enyo |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 04:36:00 -
[437] - Quote
One change that might be needed also to the ammo itself, would be the m3 each unit of ammo uses.
as an example, projectile ammo uses half as much m3 as hybrid ammo http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Hail_L vs http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Void_L
While artilery fires much slower than railguns... (and in ofc autocannons are faster than blasters) but I personly think it would be ballanced to make the hybrid ammo just as "small" as projectile ammo... 0.025 m3 (instead of 0.05 m3)
I heard others suggest this before, main reason being to add some ballance to the gallante ships in regards to how many cap booster they can carry |
Gynoceros
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 04:36:00 -
[438] - Quote
These changes are a nice start, but, as others have already said, I don't think you can truly fix blasters as long as armor tanking has such a huge impact on speed and agility.
BTW, while you are looking at T2 ammo, Null needs a buff. Null only gives a 25% boost to effective (optimal + falloff) range while the 50% bonuses to optimal and falloff for Scorch and Barrage, respectively, represent ~40% boost to total optimal + falloff. For example:
Heavy Pulse Laser II (Base): 15km + 5km Heavy Pulse Laser II (Scorch): 22.5km + 5km Total boost to optimal + falloff: 37.5%
425mm AutoCannon II (Base): 3km + 12km 425mm AutoCannon II (Barrage): 3km + 18km Total boost to optimal + falloff: 40%
Null either needs a boost to its range bonuses, or some other bonus to bring it in line with Scorch and Barrage. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
83
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 04:39:00 -
[439] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:CCP Tallest:
The tracking increase resolves some of the issues that the web nerf uncovered. Compared to the original 90% webs, a 60% web with a 20% increase in tracking is back to around the effectiveness of an 80% web with no tracking bonus, so that's about where it should be.
you forget that when a mwd is turned on your sig radius ballons... it was not just the 90% web it was the fact there was an active mwd... now if you are under 10km there is a garentee there are scrams so so sig radius bloom:(
thats why you need more 37.5% or more for blaster to work without scrams on...
Mors Sanctitatis wrote: This still doesn't fix the lack of DPS. The 5-10% more peak DPS that blasters have over lasers and ACs doesn't make up for the incredibly short range. The answer isn't to increase the range but to drastically increase the damage. Blasters need to deal massive *massive* DPS at very short range.
I used blasters pretty much exclusively for a little under five years. When the web nerf showed up, I put away my Hyperion, never to be used again. Give blasters a role, a very narrow niche, where they excel far beyond anything else. Right now there's just "too much of the same". You're creating the gaming equivalent of oatmeal.
right now imagine that hyperion with the megathrons tracking and 8% more dps with 50% more alpha and 15% more falloff...
or put in the script that turn it from slug to bird shot... and now you have a shotgun effect directional smartbomb that hit for max damage inside optimal range but looses damage fast in falloff...
Mors Sanctitatis wrote: As has been said before- The posted changes could have been knocked out in an afternoon by a single dev. So far this expansion feels very last minute and thrown together.
I know eh? ever since the nefarious fearless leak it seems that CCP have been tamed and are now the cowardly lion from the wizard of oz
We want a ccp that is not afraid to try new things... be bold and let us the players test out and help change the game in a positive way...
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 04:56:00 -
[440] - Quote
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:As has been said before- The posted changes could have been knocked out in an afternoon by a single dev. So far this expansion feels very last minute and thrown together. To be fair, a metric @%*#-ton of changes have happened at CCP in the last few weeks, including EVE getting a major refocusing as far as company attention went. In may be being thrown together a little fast, but for the most part I think we can all agree that this much attention towards this upcoming expansion is a welcome change from the past few.
To those at CCP... you have made a kick ass game. We speak up because we care, as cheesy as that sounds, and all these :words: that we put down on this forum are just us trying to say "what you showed us is cool, but we think you can do better!"
If you are still listening on this thread, a little nod that says "Hey, these changes are final! It's better than it was and we'll re-evaluate after we see this in action" or "Hey, we're talking about this some and evaluating a few more ideas" wouldn't hurt... |
|
Hyrath Rotineque
Atlas Research Group Vanguard Venture Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 05:20:00 -
[441] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:If you just boost the speed of Gallente ships as a crutch for a broken weapon system, you aren't really fixing the problem, and gallente ships will either remain pointless or pass a tipping point where they invalidate one or more other races comparable ship types. Pretty much sums up my thoughts.
|
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 05:26:00 -
[442] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Mors Sanctitatis wrote:As has been said before- The posted changes could have been knocked out in an afternoon by a single dev. So far this expansion feels very last minute and thrown together. To be fair, a metric @%*#-ton of changes have happened at CCP in the last few weeks, including EVE getting a major refocusing as far as company attention went. In may be being thrown together a little fast, but for the most part I think we can all agree that this much attention towards this upcoming expansion is a welcome change from the past few. To those at CCP... you have made a kick ass game. We speak up because we care, as cheesy as that sounds, and all these :words: that we put down on this forum are just us trying to say "what you showed us is cool, but we think you can do better!" If you are still listening on this thread, a little nod that says "Hey, these changes are final! It's better than it was and we'll re-evaluate after we see this in action" or "Hey, we're talking about this some and evaluating a few more ideas" wouldn't hurt...
Digital-
It's a good start. The only way we'll know for sure if this is the start of something good is to be here two years from now and look back on it.
|
Vrabac
Zawa's Fan Club
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 05:29:00 -
[443] - Quote
While blaster/gallente boost was something badly needed and generally speaking I like it's finally happening, I got to admit I was disapointed with the lack of understanding of the issue shown in the devblog. Not surprised mind you, ccp keeps showing they don't know anything about their game, but still disapointed.
Tracking? Really? Repeating the line which was repeated over and over, I suppose ccp thinks that just because many people say something it's true. Since they apparently have no actual knowledge of their own to base their changes off, they are going for this sort of "safe bets" that aren't safe at all. Tracking. ffs
"Hail sticks out as terribly underpowered"... this is just... idk what to say really. Hail was the single useful close range t2 ammo even before the silly dominion change. Terribly underpowered... Maybe the person who came up with this brilliant conclusion was the same who concluded projectiles needed their ridiculous dominion boost? Are you aware autocannons with hail loaded are by far better blasters than blasters are? How about you sack these people instead of the community team? Community team at least had no clue or influence over game's development and was harmless as such.
Boosting rail's dmg looks good to me. Is it too much or no I honestly don't know, haven't used them much. Blasters however, while reducing their grid requirement obviously enables fitting larger guns and doing more dmg, imo will still suck. Reason is that their damage simply won't be better than other close range turrets. This is mostly due to dmg types they do (they are close to useless against 2 out of 4 t2 resits while also being less than stellar against both shield and armor t1 tanks), lack of low slots on the ships that more often than not prevents usage of 3 dmg mods, shielf buffer glass cannons aside, and the difficulty of fitting largest guns. Only 1 of the 3 issues will be solved with this change. So while it is a step in the right direction it's not enough to make them competitive. Autocannon boat will still shred a blaster boat to pieces at close range, doing close to equal or equal dps of more favourable type while at the same time having good kiting potential giving it options. Blaster boat will still be close range only, as it should be, and once it does get into its range and get it's target "where it wants it" it will still be only equal at best, without any advantage to speak of.
So yeah, gallente boost is good, I'm just hoping it's done properly.
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 05:36:00 -
[444] - Quote
O hell ya this is awsome man!!!
And I love the way your not only going to help fix Hybird Tech 2 ammo but all of them. Thx u! Thx u! Thx u!
I realy think this is a very good way to balance this as well. Nothing all to radical at once just a hand full of small twikes.
Awsome awsome job guys |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 05:40:00 -
[445] - Quote
Jeffrey Powel wrote: And your forget the "to pray" parts. Pray you will land at 0 and not a 5km, pray to don't be jammed cause you will be unable to hit or run after a falcon, pray the target don't have neutz cause your gun don't work whithout a lot of cap, pray they don't have a logistic cause at 50km you simply can't do anything, pray it's not a trap cause if it is you can't escape cause you always fight at web/scramble range ect, ect....
lol... you must do a lot of praying, then. This nonsense happens to every ship in the game, not just blaster boats.
Warp to 0 does not literally mean exactly 0 km. But, if you prefer "warp to target, within blaster range", then fine. And, jumping to any range is imprecise, so if you are just as likely to miss landing within disrupter or scram range, if you try to cut it too close in order to also stay out of range of your opponent's weapons.
A falcon will jam any solo ship in the game, except for titans and super carriers. And falcons always run away from drones, which most blaster boats carry.
Neuts will also shutdown ABs, MWDs, armor/shield reppers, invul fields, scrams and disruptors, lasers, etc. - not just blasters. The Curse is a pain-in-the-arse for most ships (except perhaps for the passive shield tanked Drake or Myrmidon).
If one ship is being supported by a logi, and the other is not, then it probably would not matter if the solo ship is blaster fit or fit with autocannons.
If it is a trap, then what's the point? It doesn't matter what guns you fit, or what distance you warp to, or how fast your ship may be, or how awesome you can tank. Why? Because it is a trap, stupid! |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 05:57:00 -
[446] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:Thorax, Brutix and Deimos all have 50m3 drone bays and as such can field 5 x ec-600 ecm drones. If they can get in range in a small fight, they'll usually have the upper hand if fit like that. Simply comparing blaster range ignores some of the other features and weakness of blaster ships.
Also with the changed fitting requirements to hybrids, instead of switching to a full Neutron gank fit, one could of course stick to Ions and fit a better tank.
Additionally, the Thorax and Deimos, with their strange MWD bonus and now a slight speed and agility bonus seem to be crying for kiting rail fits, now that rails do more damage.
The Eagle might, with some imagination, make a fine kiter using rails and TDs in the mids.
I think the hybrid changes are not perfect, but they need a chance to play out in game before the get changed again. Exactly. The significant change in the fitting reqs for hybrids opens the door for completely new loadouts, and new surprises - which will become more evident once the changes go live and players get creative. |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
184
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 06:06:00 -
[447] - Quote
Dierdra Vaal wrote:Quote:Before we start looking at armor tanking issues or individual ships, Hybrid weapons as a whole need to be boosted up to a level where using them becomes desirable. What made you decide the weapons themselves were the issue, rather than the ships (hybrid ship maneuvrability, tracking bonuses, engagement ranges, etc)? I'd be very interested to see what research process you guys use to find the 'weak spots' in current balancing/game design problems.
That, and also two more things: 1) I really hope that CCP will monitor this carefully and actually iterate on it (hybrid as well as ship changes), especially at 3 and 6 months period after release. (not their usual "maybe in 3 years" approach). 2) As other people pointed out regarding the ammo, it is a dull approach as it makes the races more similar. That same goes for ships, if Gallente ships gets too agile and too fast, suddenly where's the racial differences?
It's interesting changes for sure, I have several pilots myself with t2 large hybrids - but unlike other people I actually use them and think they are strong today. These changes will make me even more happy. I'd actually preferred a look at the drone boats, they need more love than the blasters did. But rails, they really needed love. Noone snipes anymore and they're (at best) underwhelming in PvE. A rail buff would've made sense, kept blasters as they were, and a look at the drone boats (imho). this is a signature |
J T Kirk
New Eden Research And Design School
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 06:12:00 -
[448] - Quote
I like how someone before was comparing a hurricane to the brutix, and complaining that the hurricane was still substantially better. Try comparing the Brutix to the CYCLONE... you know tier 1 battlecruiser with tier 1 battlecruiser. I dare say the Brutix will come out on top (but I'm just guessing here)
Or I guess you could all just continue to nut off about changes that we haven't even had a chance to try in action yet. Yeah that's probably the more sensible thing to do :)
|
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 06:18:00 -
[449] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Bomberlocks wrote:Thorax, Brutix and Deimos all have 50m3 drone bays and as such can field 5 x ec-600 ecm drones. If they can get in range in a small fight, they'll usually have the upper hand if fit like that. Simply comparing blaster range ignores some of the other features and weakness of blaster ships.
Also with the changed fitting requirements to hybrids, instead of switching to a full Neutron gank fit, one could of course stick to Ions and fit a better tank.
Additionally, the Thorax and Deimos, with their strange MWD bonus and now a slight speed and agility bonus seem to be crying for kiting rail fits, now that rails do more damage.
The Eagle might, with some imagination, make a fine kiter using rails and TDs in the mids.
I think the hybrid changes are not perfect, but they need a chance to play out in game before the get changed again. Exactly. The significant change in the fitting reqs for hybrids opens the door for completely new loadouts, and new surprises - which will become more evident once the changes go live and players get creative.
Back in the day, Hammerhead, in his infinite wisdom, decided to add +2 CPU to T2 EANMs. What this did was specifically cripple a very decent T2 Neutron Megathron fit. The choice was to then use (very expensive at the time) True Sansha EANMs for their better CPU, or drop one T2 EANM for a T2 ANM and lose a huge amount of EHP and RR endurance.
Now that the CPU requirement has been reduced, I think we'll see more effective and less expensive fits for blaster ships. I'm really looking forward to seeing how far I can push things. |
Otto Schultzky
Steller Exiles Inc Fade 2 Black
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 06:47:00 -
[450] - Quote
Posted stats are an improvement, but I am afraid no amount of buffing/ boosting will make Dual 150mm and Dual 250mm rail guns useful. So they might as well just get rid of them or drastically redesign their role. |
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
224
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 07:02:00 -
[451] - Quote
ATTAKowl wrote:I want to see the Rokh with a better drone bay. It is a battleship and should perform like one. Got to say having looked at the numbers this wouldn't be a bad idea. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
153
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 07:06:00 -
[452] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:MotherMoon wrote:
but that isn't how the missile formula works. My idea is to make blasters a thrid weapon system, finally adding more than 2 weapon types to eve.
i dunno sounds like you want directional smart bombs... it could be cool... but remember shotguns have more then one ammo type... you have slugs too.. so how about making some of the ammo types directional smart bombs that have a 30 degree arc and the others are traditional ammo types...? or how about making it a script? put it in and you have the bird shot... turn it off and you have slug... edit: you know what directional smart bombed based ammo is an outstanding idea... check it out... blaster nieche could be warping in on a blob and making the logi pilots nuts doing 800 dps in a 30 degree arc out to 10km where at like 0-1km its doing 1k dps and as it goes out to 10km it goes down to 400dps... think disco domi with a new "direction" in life
That;s brilliant. Also you got my idea spot on. Directional smartbombs.
I also like your ideas on how you could switch scripts. Maybe what blasters need is a completely new idea. Ok hear me out. What if blasters and hybrids get a debuff even, and are on purpose weaker than all other weapon systems.
HOWEVER, all hybrids can change between blaster and railgun Mode. Thus they would be the lowest end damage wise, and other ways, but they would be about to dock in the ship, and come out as the other type.
Being able to choose range and dps to that degree would make it wroth being so weak? |
Berendas
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 07:07:00 -
[453] - Quote
These buffs are minor at best. Gallente ships are still going to be way too slow and vulnerable to take advantage of hybrids (which will still suck anyway). CCP better make some bigger changes than this meager bone they are throwing us. |
Kai Lae
Shiva Morsus Mihi
33
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 07:22:00 -
[454] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Your forum software is ****, CCP. /me starts again... less coherent this time though. It's good to see you looking at hybrids, but these changes still don't give people a reason to use them on the cruiser and BS scale. You've hardly addressed the problem of actually getting into blaster range against faster, long-ranged AC ships, although I am glad to see you acknowledge it. Nor have you given blasters a sufficient damage advantage close up, over Pulse and ACs, to make them worth using, to compensate the difficulty and danger inherent to going into web range. Currently, ACs can do blasters' job about as well as blasters, with no cap use, selectable damage types and immense falloff to boot, and your problem is that the blaster changes don't alter this fact. There's still no reason to use rails. They have no role - or rather, their role can be performed almost as well by other, more flexible weapons. Long-range work doesn't really exist, thanks to the 249 km cap, instant probing and on-grid warping. And if it did exist, Tachyons on optimal-bonused hulls would still do the job just as well, but with far greater flexibility and more damage at closer ranges. At closer range, Caldari railboats, the supposed rail specialists, will be outdamaged by the Gallente hulls, and both offer no significant advantage over the much more flexible artillery and optimal-bonused Scorch. Small hybrids are basically fine, don't touch them. To get people using hybrids again, you've got to make them worth using. You can argue that hybrids are actually well balanced, because they have well-defined roles; it's the power-creep of the other weapons, encroaching into blasters' niche (AC hull speed, AC damage, tracking and ammos, Pulse tracking) and rails' niche (Tachyons, optimal-bonused hulls, impossibility of maintaining range) that are causing the problems. In my mind, you can't fix hybrids without significant nerfs to projectiles and lasers. If I'm right, this "fix" will fail. At least if that does happen, you'll then have the evidence you need to rebalance the other weapons... although hopefully you won't wait another two years.
This, and lol at Gypsio for not writing out his poasts in word before posting them because of CCP's horrible forum software. More than a few of us have been going over blaster/hybrid issues in https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=14433&find=unread - have the devs been even paying attention to this, or have they once again done a :CCP:? It's not just tracking for blasters, and damage for rails. There are multiple interlocking issues requiring adjustment:
1. Blaster damage - you've got to have the facemeltingGäó aspect to compensate for the disadvantages of the weapon system. Currently you don't got it.
2. Mobility of the blaster platform. If you can't catch it, you'll never kill it. On the other hand, it can't be sustained mobility because this is the realm of minmatar. Gallente need dash speed - a short, high speed sprint to target, followed by facemeltingGäó. They can't have sustained high speed or everything and anything will get caught and there's no counter to it. In addition the simple fact is that currently speed is such an issue that only ships generally of cruiser size and smaller with blasters are viable because the bigger you get, the slower you get, and the worse off this becomes. 850m/s MWD speed on a battleship doesn't cut it.
3. Rails with super fast probing, 250km lock limit, and 150km warp range aren't useful as they once were. Even if they didn't have these issues, they still could use ammo changes so that as range increases, the damage compared to other weapons becomes proportionally better.
4. Something that all gallente players know, but CCP has so far refused to acknowledge, is the horrible imbalance that armor rigs add to the game with regards to amarr/gallente playbalance. Currently armor rigs nerf speed, which for any gallente ship is a killer. You can't take an already slow ship overall (especially in larger hull classes) and then make it even slower. This makes a bad situation even worse. Conversely, an amarr ship literally doesn't care, because while it's quite slow, huge EHP and the ability to hit the target well out to mid ranges with pulse lasers mean that it doesn't need speed, it can hit you without needing to get close. The speed penalty to the rigs needs to be dropped - change it to shield HP reduction. Shield rigs also need similar treatment but that's another topic.
5. Active tanking? Plates/rigs slow down ships, which is a no-no for gallente. Can't catch it, can't kill it. This means that active tanking becomes default in many cases for gallente ships, because it doesn't reduce speed - plus of course the ship bonuses that "advantage" these fits. This also needs to be addressed to make gallente more viable.
6. EW? Do CCP honestly think that after nerfing the crap out of damps - which was needed because of burn eden ravens and similar fits - that the fact that the actual EW gallente ships are ineffective at their supposed task, that this is a good idea? No one fits damps routinely other than bombers, which ought to tell you something about the utility of the module.
7. Drones? How about fixing the moronic stacking mechanics of non jamming drones so that they actually are useful? What about the fact that there are really only 2 flavors of useful damage drones - thermal, and explosive?
8. Ships - alluded to many times but you need to actually look at the ships as well. Myrmidon needs to become a BC sized domi. The drone variant of the proteus needs to actually be a drone variant, not a half/half setup like it is now. Deimos needs addressing, etc, etc.
In short, while the proposed changes are, well, a start, they're " a bit short". There's a hell of a lot more that needs addressing than what you've just covered.
|
Draahk Chimera
Interstellar eXodus
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 07:23:00 -
[455] - Quote
This is probably nice for lo-sec pirates, the people that hunt them and for faction warfare I guess? For 0.0 it doesent matter what you do to hybrids because of the difference between dps and alpha. Since the current setup-of-the-day is to use buffer and 20+ logistics in your fleets you can never rely on weapon systems with dps as opposed to alpha. In order to break say a drake supported by 20 scimitars you might need 50 or so canes, 30 tempests or 200 megas. Provided the latter could even catch the drake, witch they can't. [IMG]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s302/nattravn/EVE/draakhchimeranaglfar.png[/IMG] |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:02:00 -
[456] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff tracking/damage on blasters it will not fix them. If your enemy is flying faster than you and out of your range you could have 100,000 dps and if you cannot hit him 100,000 x 0 is still 0 Umm... warp out? Jump/Dock? Have your friend fly over and web him? Overload your web/scram if your warp-in is bad so you don't get into this situation in the first place? Use your drones to put DPS on him, and your active armor tank to take his hits... --- oh, this is Nullsec --- Tell your prober that he screwed up, and while your fleet warps off grid, tell him to get his act together and provide a better warp-in --- oh, you're being ganked, have a long range point on you, and can't catch him, and aren't near a gate or station because you got your ass pointed while in a belt ratting in low/null sec --- QQ
I proposed a way for you to kill him when he IS in range. It's your piloting skills that needs to figure out how to make that happen.
Oh man. :D
"Have your friend fly over and web him?"
And what happen if he have friend too and his friend using a web on you too ? :DDD Bring friend to webing your enemies a fail idea, that's not fixing blaster weakness to long distance. (Long distance for blaster is 15-20km LOL)
Blasters not need more damage, just need better damage to farther distance. Or need their boats other bonuses like: + 5% scram range/lvl or 5%web range/lvl, or need better ability to move shorther distance to enemies, or blaster needs better optimal or falloff ranges.
Other solutions: change hybrids overheat effects to +25% falloff or something, which help shot the farther targets. (but this is a worst solution, because hybrid will lost + damage from overheat)
You talking earlier about, easy warping to 0 km. Realy ?? When aligning with ab or mwd an enemy he changing his position. When you warping from far distance, and enemy fleet aligning something, you get a handicap instantly, because you will there too far to using your blasters with full damage. Incoming winter patch wont be enough to fix blasters and gallentean ships. Medium ships will still unuseable against other equal class size ships just in very short range (because too shot firerange), but easily die when they meet with good enemy pilot who just keep distance.
This changes not enough. Blaster ships will still useable for docking warriors, but not enough for real fighters who want to fight not just at the stations |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:05:00 -
[457] - Quote
Gynoceros wrote:These changes are a nice start, but, as others have already said, I don't think you can truly fix blasters as long as armor tanking has such a huge impact on speed and agility.
BTW, while you are looking at T2 ammo, Null needs a buff. Null only gives a 25% boost to effective (optimal + falloff) range while the 50% bonuses to optimal and falloff for Scorch and Barrage, respectively, represent ~40% boost to total optimal + falloff. For example:
Heavy Pulse Laser II (Base): 15km + 5km Heavy Pulse Laser II (Scorch): 22.5km + 5km Total boost to optimal + falloff: 37.5%
425mm AutoCannon II (Base): 3km + 12km 425mm AutoCannon II (Barrage): 3km + 18km Total boost to optimal + falloff: 40%
Null either needs a boost to its range bonuses, or some other bonus to bring it in line with Scorch and Barrage.
This is a good point, bringing Null in line with the other long range T2 ammos somehow. And if Hail really gets a boost that it doesn't need, include Void too.
And I still think Blasters need a general 10-20% more DPS, and/or the previously mentioned much better overload DPS.
And FWIW I think rigs and rig drawbacks really need looking into very soon though I understand that it's not going to happen in this patch. But armor rig penalties are a big problem for orthodox fitted Gallente, and damage rigs could use a calibration reduction as well. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:07:00 -
[458] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:
This changes not enough. Blaster ships will still useable for docking warriors, but not enough for real fighters who want to fight not just at the stations
Oh and please Tallest, try to weed through the massive amounts of trolling ITT. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:42:00 -
[459] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote: ...but not enough for real fighters...
Real fighters? This *is* a computer game, you know. lol |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:50:00 -
[460] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote: How many blaster and rail ship flying in 0.0 fleets. 0.0001 percent ? Just ask it from yourself why not using them.
Umm... because supercarriers don't fit blasters? |
|
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:51:00 -
[461] - Quote
where is the dislike button ? becuse this boost is nowhere near enough to bring hybrid ships near projectile or laser ships in efficiency thx ccp for the huge nothing , i bet you think you did a good job and freeze balance issues for another 3 years dont mind hybrids still will be underused and poorest choice for every situation
"Feedback
If you have issues with this balancing plan, please post your feedback in the comment thread. We are listening." no you arent |
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:51:00 -
[462] - Quote
I'm fine with blasters having extremely short range, I don't really want to see them turned into ACs.
What we need is to have blasters do significantly more damage than they do now, enough to make them worth risking. Enough that they actually melt ships if you manage to get in close and keep your target in place. Enough to make up for the time you'll spend doing effectively zero damage while closing in.
No, +10-20% or such compared to ACs doesn't cut it, looking at all the other advantages ACs have (huge range in comparison, damage type selection, zero cap use, minimal fitting reqs).
Blasters need to melt stuff.
|
Nyla Skin
Pew Pew Corp Behold.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 08:59:00 -
[463] - Quote
Not sure if thats enough to fix the blasterboats, but I am still pretty sure that T2 blaster ammo needs its tracking penalty adjusted downwards. Unless that happens, I would (hypothesis) still use faction blaster ammo.
Its great that CCP is looking at hybrids regardless.. |
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 09:20:00 -
[464] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:Its great that CCP is looking at hybrids regardless..
Oh yes.
I'm just a bit concerned that some of the changes seem to be driven by illusions about how the weapons are supposed to perform, instead of how they actually perform at the moment.
In narrative, there persists the idea that blasters do huge damage up close, when in reality ACs nowadays are pretty close while having tons of other advantages. Especially with the (weird) AC boost that's also introduced here. An already-good t2 ammo for a borderline-overpowered weapon system, made even better? Huh?
|
Nyla Skin
Pew Pew Corp Behold.
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 09:27:00 -
[465] - Quote
Alex Harumichi wrote:
In narrative, there persists the idea that blasters do huge damage up close, when in reality ACs nowadays are pretty close while having tons of other advantages. Especially with the (weird) AC boost that's also introduced here. An already-good t2 ammo for a borderline-overpowered weapon system, made even better? Huh?
Indeed. For all practical purposes autocannons have comparable damage to blasters, while at the same time having a bunch of other advantages and supposed to be fit on ships that have a meaningful slot layout. CCP needs to get their head out of their arses and realize that gallente arent performing anything like "they were supposed to be".
buffs of about 20% are 'getting there' when for example t2 blaster ammo tracking penalty is in the range of -25% if memory serves. |
Darth Felin
Monkey Attack Squad Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 09:36:00 -
[466] - Quote
Well some more thoughts after I write off all advantages/disadvantages for hybrids. "Hybrid problem" is really complex and you just can not fix it by mega buff to hybrid weapons.
IMHO the problem consist of 4 parts:
1) hybrid weapon sucks - it is more or less fixed by you change. 2) tracking enchanters - they give really overwhelming 30% bonus to falloff and only 15% to optimal. This is the main reason why many pilots think that projectiles are overpowered. 2-3 Tracking enchanters on minmatar ship and you can shoot at really crazy distances, drop it to 15% and gun balance is much better now. 3) Many hybrid platform are just bad, especially t2 one. Eagle, Deimos, Astarte. They need rework of their bonuses 4) Armor rigs and armor tanking. Gallente ships are armor tankers, but they can not use active armor tank as it is really bad even on bonused hulls and armor rigs decrease their small speed even more. It is easy to fix rigs by switching speed penalty to shield amount one or maybe even cargo amount one.
But now you fix 25% of the problem and pretend it is ok now - you are wrong. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 10:15:00 -
[467] - Quote
J T Kirk wrote:I like how someone before was comparing a hurricane to the brutix, and complaining that the hurricane was still substantially better. Try comparing the Brutix to the CYCLONE... you know tier 1 battlecruiser with tier 1 battlecruiser. I dare say the Brutix will come out on top (but I'm just guessing here)
Or I guess you could all just continue to nut off about changes that we haven't even had a chance to try in action yet. Yeah that's probably the more sensible thing to do :)
I'm sorry, but he's dead, Jim.... lol.
The person doing the comparison is probably a Minmatar pilot and may never have even flown a Brutix or trained hybrids. With the player bias towards Minmatar ships and autocannons, this is quite common and a simple "tier 1 vs tier 2" mistake is understandable.
And, don't underestimate the Cyclone - it is a pretty nasty ship, too, although it has long been eclipsed by the Hurricane.
I've notice a peculiar trend in this thread, though.
It seems as though the most vocal detractors - the ones who think the posted balancing sucks and that Gallente ships and hybrid guns need even more of a buff - actually do not currently fly Gallente ships nor currently use hybrid guns (although a few may have done so in the long forgotten past).
Whereas, the supporters - who think that the posted balancing is a good place to start, good enough as is, and/or that an additional damage buff might even be too much (although they would not argue against a range buff, too) - seem to be the ones who actually are currently flying Gallente and using hybrids.
You'd think it would be the other way around. Go figure. |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 10:18:00 -
[468] - Quote
Gynoceros wrote:These changes are a nice start, but, as others have already said, I don't think you can truly fix blasters as long as armor tanking has such a huge impact on speed and agility.
BTW, while you are looking at T2 ammo, Null needs a buff. Null only gives a 25% boost to effective (optimal + falloff) range while the 50% bonuses to optimal and falloff for Scorch and Barrage, respectively, represent ~40% boost to total optimal + falloff. For example:
Heavy Pulse Laser II (Base): 15km + 5km Heavy Pulse Laser II (Scorch): 22.5km + 5km Total boost to optimal + falloff: 37.5%
425mm AutoCannon II (Base): 3km + 12km 425mm AutoCannon II (Barrage): 3km + 18km Total boost to optimal + falloff: 40%
Null either needs a boost to its range bonuses, or some other bonus to bring it in line with Scorch and Barrage. The comparison is interesting, but not good. Scorch Pulses will always outrange others. That's the way it is. Deal with it. What Null possibly does need, however, is a damage buff. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 10:18:00 -
[469] - Quote
Well, it's a start, but I wish CCP were using their imaginations to fix this properly the way they did with projectiles rather than a bland and less than useful change to a few stats.
1. 20% blaster tracking improvement MIGHT work for small weapons, but will not be enough for medium or large. IF you get into range and IF you manage to web a target you still find that a small amount of transversal means misses within 1-2km which is ridiculous - this is where these weapons are supposed to operate!
2. If I am being kited and have to resort to the longer range blaster ammo it takes me 10 seconds to switch. That can be a lifetime in a pvp fight, and all my target has to then do is close by 4-5km (maybe 2-3seconds of his time) and my ammo choice is wrong again! I then have to either live with poor damage from the wrong ammo or wait another 10s to switch again, by which time they move back out 4-5km and the dance of gallente fail starts all over again. Hybrids need the ammo change timer to be dropped to 3.5seconds, otherwise having different ammo types is a waste of space.
3. The ships are essentially all armour tankers. This means the tank they fit slows them down. Your speed and agility changes don't do anything to change the dynamics of a fight for them. Gallente ships will still be kited, still be unablke to close and still unable to apply any of their damage - blasters remain too short range and inflexible with the ammo change timer whilst rails will still be so mediocre damage-wise that the chances of being successful versus missiles or projectiles/lasers (who will be in range to use short range higher damage weapons) are still nil.
You've begun to look at the issues with hybrids which have been caused entirely by the changes CCP has made to the game over the years without fully thinking balance through. These changes are nowhere near enough. Please CCP, do this right the first time or nothing will change. |
OOooole
nina k Corp
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 10:36:00 -
[470] - Quote
Rikki Sals wrote:I hope that this is just the beginning and that balance in general gets fine tuned more frequently. These changes look pretty good. yes 3y on 10% another 4-5y nest 10% |
|
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 10:39:00 -
[471] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote: It seems as though the most vocal detractors - the ones who think the posted balancing sucks and that Gallente ships and hybrid guns need even more of a buff - actually do not currently fly Gallente ships nor currently use hybrid guns (although a few may have done so in the long forgotten past).
Whereas, the supporters - who think that the posted balancing is a good place to start, good enough as is, and/or that an additional damage buff might even be too much (although they would not argue against a range buff, too) - seem to be the ones who actually are currently flying Gallente and using hybrids.
You must be reading some alternate version of this thread, perhaps one existing only in your head. The people criticizing this change are, by and large, criticizing it because they have experience with hybrids (blasters, especially), and are all too familiar with their problems (which have been reiterated time and time again here).
Railguns may well be fine now. Blasters are anything but. Sure, they are better after this, but ACs still outperform them by a vast margin (especially since they, too, are getting buffed). Some of this has to do with ship hulls and shield tanks vs armor tanks (and the associated speed penalties), some are inherent in the weapons themselves. Blasters simply do not do enough damage (even in optimal range) to make up for their numerous problems when compared with ACs.
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 10:43:00 -
[472] - Quote
Darth Felin wrote: 2) tracking enchanters - they give really overwhelming 30% bonus to falloff and only 15% to optimal. This is the main reason why many pilots think that projectiles are overpowered. 2-3 Tracking enchanters on minmatar ship and you can shoot at really crazy distances, drop it to 15% and gun balance is much better now.
I think you mean tracking enhancers, but I won't disagree with you here. The disparity is actually worse than you stated.
Tracking enhancers are low-slot mods, best suited for shield-tanked gunships, ie. mostly Minmatar projectile boats. Tracking computers are mid-slot mods, best suited for armor-tanked gunships, ie. mostly Gallente hybrid and Amarr laser boats.
T2 tracking enhancers give a 30% bonus to falloff, great for projectiles. T2 tracking computers give a 7.5% bonus to optimal, not so great for hybrids and lasers.
Keep in mind that range = optimal + 2 x falloff. This makes it even more ridiculous.
And, to add insult to injury, tracking computers also require more than double the CPU of tracking enhancers (35 vs 15).
A fix, please, CCP Tallest. |
Captain Africa
GRIM MARCH SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 10:47:00 -
[473] - Quote
After reading through most posts here and being a cross trained Gallente pilot myself here is my two cents:
Firstly I would hate to see all ships become replicas in terms of their capabilities , God forbid how boring Eve would be, its important to keep the racial differences and FFS stop comparing the Brutix to the Hurricane , every race has there own Rock Stars !
I am double Amarr and I love the look of the ships but I donGÇÖt fly them at all because I donGÇÖt like their capabilities , so I trained Minmatar and Gallente cause of their niches that appeals to me. I think the same should be said for Gallente pilots ...fly the role of the race, if you donGÇÖt like it train for something else.
Gallentes role or niche is short range fights (between 0and 10 km) and then the drones. When you are caught in that 10 km range against a blaster boat the chance of getting away or winning the fight should be 20% or less. The 0-10 km is the Gallente Blaster zone. I do believe the damage done by blasters should be significantly more to solidify the Gallente Blaster Zone.
The second very obvious issue is how to get your enemy in that zone of 0-10 km. In high sec or gate camping this wouldnGÇÖt be that much of a big deal. So in a way Gallente blaster boats already rule High sec and gate camps ! But with conventional null sec fleets and tactics it causes a problem for the Gallente blaster boats.
I love that Eve video GÇ£Real spmething GÇ¥ where the Gallente fleet gets melted into scrap metal by a Amarr fleet and then a Gallente frig pilot breakes away and fly directly towards the Amaarr fleet enabeling the gallente fleet to warp in at 0 and burn the Amarr alive ! ThatGÇÖs what appeals to me ...now whether that is practically possible in 50% of the scenarios , I honestly donGÇÖt know. But I think as far as Blaster boats go we need to look more at tactics to get into that Zone than to try and replicate other races roles. I do believe that Gallente is in a disadvantage here when it comes to null sec warfare. (at the same token it should be very difficult for them to be able to get in that zone to balance things out overall).
So here is an idea in its infant stage
CCP why not create a drone that you as a blaster boat can warp to ? You release the drone or five drones and send them to the enemy ...once in range you warp to the drone and fleet can warp to you. Of course the drone stats need to be balanced out to make the task of the drone to reach its destination hard and relatively easy for enemy ships to shoot it down. The bigger the gallente fleet the more drones to shoot down by the enemy.....think this might be an option to enable blaster boats to get into blaster zone whether you are a fleet or solo pilot ...and its in line with Gallente culture .
Hope my idea can solve some problems for us..or maybe look at a new gallente frig with desent speed and a brutal tank to make that video mentioned above more a reality than anything else. |
Torei Dutalis
Enigmatic Goat Herders
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:00:00 -
[474] - Quote
As much as I'd like to go see winmatar go eat a bag of dicks for six months or so, and let gallente be the top dawg, I think I'd like to see some follow up to this devblog in the form of specifics on hull redesigns before I subscribe to the rampant power creep in this thread. Not that I'm opposed to giant space penises becoming the new FotM. |
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:11:00 -
[475] - Quote
Torei Dutalis wrote:As much as I'd like to go see winmatar go eat a bag of dicks for six months or so, and let gallente be the top dawg, I think I'd like to see some follow up to this devblog in the form of specifics on hull redesigns before I subscribe to the rampant power creep in this thread. Not that I'm opposed to giant space penises becoming the new FotM.
Yeah. I don't want to see Gallente become FotM, that would just need some more balancing down the road.
I just want to see blaster boats become an at least somewhat competitive option. Yes, that would need some power creep on the blaster side (or a total rethink of the hulls and/or armor tanks) -- but the other option is to nerf ACs and minmatar hulls (and maybe Scorch while we're at it). Not sure I want to see that happen, either, at least not on a large scale.
|
Shamefuldirty
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:26:00 -
[476] - Quote
Razor Blue wrote:Like i posted in Ships & Modules forum:
Can you not take look at the T1 hybrid charges too?
Like you did with projectiles
I would like to see these looked at too. Not enough damage from these at all. Sausages anyone?? |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:26:00 -
[477] - Quote
Lets look at some numbers this rebalance will give us shall we? Since T2 Ammo is also getting a buff lets focus there by comparing Blasters to Autocannons using their respective t2 short range ammo types. No skills added or ship bonuses just turret + ammo.
Neutron Blaster II with Void Range: 10,400m Tracking: .03637 DPS: 32
800mm Repeating Artillery with Hail Range: 21,600m Tracking:.03024 DPS: 25.28
Heavy Neutron Blaster II with void Range: 5,200m Tracking: .84 DPS: 24.64
425mm Autocannon with Hail Range: 10,800m Tracking: .0739 DPS: 18.99
So Large and Medium Autocannons have 207% more range than Blasters. Large Blasters will have 27% more DPS and 20% more Tracking than Large Autocannons Medium Blasters will have 30% more DPS and 13% better tracking than Medium autocannons.
So ships that are faster and more agile with comparable tanks have over 207% more range over Blaster boats while doing only 27% less DPS. And in practise they will have much higher range becuase TE's and TC's will benefit Autocannons much more becuase of the much higher starting stats they have. So how quickly can you cover 5 to 15 km to actually apply that massive 27% more DPS to actually win the fight while in web/scram range chasing down faster ships...? i bet that extra 10 m/s will really help out in that? Look we dont need Gallente to become Mimatar ships or blasters to become Autocannons. Plenty of good and varied ideas to fix this have been told to you (CCP) by the community now please use them and not this half assed attempt.
Congrats CCP in the same patch to buff Hybrids you have also managed to make them obsolete with this Hail buff (removing the .5x falloff modifier). |
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:33:00 -
[478] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:So ships that are faster and more agile with comparable tanks have over 207% more range over Blaster boats while doing only 27% less DPS. And in practise they will have much higher range becuase TE's and TC's will benefit Autocannons much more becuase of the much higher starting stats they have. So how quickly can you cover 5 to 15 km to actually apply that massive 27% more DPS to actually win the fight while in web/scram range chasing down faster ships...?
Thanks for the numbers. Yes, that's precisely the problem: ACs on minmatar hulls massively outperform blasters on Gallente hulls, in real pvp (and this is *after* the proposed changes, note).
Imawuss wrote: Congrats CCP in the same patch to buff Hybrids you have also managed to make them obsolete with this Hail buff (removing the .5x falloff modifier).
Yes, that buff is really bizarre. It's not like ACs weren't too good already.
|
Quantes IQ
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:39:00 -
[479] - Quote
Captain Africa wrote:After reading through most posts here and being a cross trained Gallente pilot myself here is my two cents: Firstly I would hate to see all ships become replicas in terms of their capabilities , God forbid how boring Eve would be, its important to keep the racial differences and FFS stop comparing the Brutix to the Hurricane , every race has there own Rock Stars ! I am double Amarr and I love the look of the ships but I donGÇÖt fly them at all because I donGÇÖt like their capabilities , so I trained Minmatar and Gallente cause of their niches that appeals to me. I think the same should be said for Gallente pilots ...fly the role of the race, if you donGÇÖt like it train for something else. Gallentes role or niche is short range fights (between 0and 10 km) and then the drones. When you are caught in that 10 km range against a blaster boat the chance of getting away or winning the fight should be 20% or less. The 0-10 km is the Gallente Blaster zone. I do believe the damage done by blasters should be significantly more to solidify the Gallente Blaster Zone. The second very obvious issue is how to get your enemy in that zone of 0-10 km. In high sec or gate camping this wouldnGÇÖt be that much of a big deal. So in a way Gallente blaster boats already rule High sec and gate camps ! But with conventional null sec fleets and tactics it causes a problem for the Gallente blaster boats. I love that Eve video GÇ£Real spmething GÇ¥ where the Gallente fleet gets melted into scrap metal by a Amarr fleet and then a Gallente frig pilot breakes away and fly directly towards the Amaarr fleet enabeling the gallente fleet to warp in at 0 and burn the Amarr alive ! ThatGÇÖs what appeals to me ...now whether that is practically possible in 50% of the scenarios , I honestly donGÇÖt know. But I think as far as Blaster boats go we need to look more at tactics to get into that Zone than to try and replicate other races roles. I do believe that Gallente is in a disadvantage here when it comes to null sec warfare. (at the same token it should be very difficult for them to be able to get in that zone to balance things out overall). So here is an idea in its infant stage CCP why not create a drone that you as a blaster boat can warp to ? You release the drone or five drones and send them to the enemy ...once in range you warp to the drone and fleet can warp to you. Of course the drone stats need to be balanced out to make the task of the drone to reach its destination hard and relatively easy for enemy ships to shoot it down. The bigger the gallente fleet the more drones to shoot down by the enemy.....think this might be an option to enable blaster boats to get into blaster zone whether you are a fleet or solo pilot ...and its in line with Gallente culture . Hope my idea can solve some problems for us..or maybe look at a new gallente frig with desent speed and a brutal tank to make that video mentioned above more a reality than anything else.
Has anyone thought about this? A specialized drone that a ship can warp to at any range. I can already see fifty drones from a ten man fleet swarming towards our fleet at medium speed and the anxiety to try and kill them ....before they reach their target. + 10 for this idea and tons of other uses for this type of drone....I hope CCP takes note !
This would also take care of the range issues and speed issues .....Make the blaster boats heavy and brutal!!! |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:39:00 -
[480] - Quote
Alex Harumichi wrote: You must be reading some alternate version of this thread, perhaps one existing only in your head.
On a philosophical note... the only reality exists in your head. |
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
93
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:43:00 -
[481] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote: How many blaster and rail ship flying in 0.0 fleets. 0.0001 percent ? Just ask it from yourself why not using them.
Umm... because supercarriers don't fit blasters?
No just because you're dumb and think you made an interesting comment.
Low sec: Gallente ships are close to useless because everything else can do it better, you're dumb if you keep that route. every single frigate/cruiser/BC/BS/recon/logistic/assault/heavy assault and whatever you can fly WILL be better, no doubt
Null sec: Gallente are bad overall, terribly bad, exception made for Lachesis, Arazu, every thing else is completely useless. Even the heavy dictor is unwanted and very often out of the reimbursement programs.
You should move from jita 4-4 undock sometimes
So you comments about diversity and "race" you can keep them for silly cheeps not having brains to think by them selves.
Your such a troll. |
Jill Antaris
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:50:00 -
[482] - Quote
The changes so far doesn't even try to fix the giant mess QR left behind, be it as a blaster ship specific tweak like a web strength bonus or a overall change in the tracking formula or scram/web design. 20% more tracking isn't going to get you anywhere at point blank in situations a blaster ship would be actually useful. You really have to address close range if you want to see blaster ships bigger than frigs in the open, meaning outside of jump and dock range, again.
The fitting changes are not very necessary, given that the concept of limited fitting on gallente hulls was and should be a balance aspect as soon close range pvp actually gets addressed and blasters got reasonable damage advantage that you don't need to put neutrons on anything to archive something. The cap use changes on the other hand should be rather fixed on the base capacitor size and recharge, since this also gives them a better chance to operate under neutralizers, what they often have to in her small gang/solo environment.
Overall right now you only give hybrid frigs a buff and don't really address the baseline issues of the larger hulls(close range mechanics) or specific hulls, like the Ferrox, Eagle, Astarte, Diemost that really need a helping hand beyond the basic issues with hybrid turrets.
I also don't think that 10% more damage alone will fix rails, since her niche of sniping isn't this useful and they are still trapped between the higher tracking and dps of beams and the raw alpha of artillery on the battlefield. |
Mr J Vudu
GRIM MARCH SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:55:00 -
[483] - Quote
Quantes IQ wrote:Captain Africa wrote:After reading through most posts here and being a cross trained Gallente pilot myself here is my two cents: Firstly I would hate to see all ships become replicas in terms of their capabilities , God forbid how boring Eve would be, its important to keep the racial differences and FFS stop comparing the Brutix to the Hurricane , every race has there own Rock Stars ! I am double Amarr and I love the look of the ships but I donGÇÖt fly them at all because I donGÇÖt like their capabilities , so I trained Minmatar and Gallente cause of their niches that appeals to me. I think the same should be said for Gallente pilots ...fly the role of the race, if you donGÇÖt like it train for something else. Gallentes role or niche is short range fights (between 0and 10 km) and then the drones. When you are caught in that 10 km range against a blaster boat the chance of getting away or winning the fight should be 20% or less. The 0-10 km is the Gallente Blaster zone. I do believe the damage done by blasters should be significantly more to solidify the Gallente Blaster Zone. The second very obvious issue is how to get your enemy in that zone of 0-10 km. In high sec or gate camping this wouldnGÇÖt be that much of a big deal. So in a way Gallente blaster boats already rule High sec and gate camps ! But with conventional null sec fleets and tactics it causes a problem for the Gallente blaster boats. I love that Eve video GÇ£Real spmething GÇ¥ where the Gallente fleet gets melted into scrap metal by a Amarr fleet and then a Gallente frig pilot breakes away and fly directly towards the Amaarr fleet enabeling the gallente fleet to warp in at 0 and burn the Amarr alive ! ThatGÇÖs what appeals to me ...now whether that is practically possible in 50% of the scenarios , I honestly donGÇÖt know. But I think as far as Blaster boats go we need to look more at tactics to get into that Zone than to try and replicate other races roles. I do believe that Gallente is in a disadvantage here when it comes to null sec warfare. (at the same token it should be very difficult for them to be able to get in that zone to balance things out overall). So here is an idea in its infant stage CCP why not create a drone that you as a blaster boat can warp to ? You release the drone or five drones and send them to the enemy ...once in range you warp to the drone and fleet can warp to you. Of course the drone stats need to be balanced out to make the task of the drone to reach its destination hard and relatively easy for enemy ships to shoot it down. The bigger the gallente fleet the more drones to shoot down by the enemy.....think this might be an option to enable blaster boats to get into blaster zone whether you are a fleet or solo pilot ...and its in line with Gallente culture . Hope my idea can solve some problems for us..or maybe look at a new gallente frig with desent speed and a brutal tank to make that video mentioned above more a reality than anything else. Has anyone thought about this? A specialized drone that a ship can warp to at any range. I can already see fifty drones from a ten man fleet swarming towards our fleet at medium speed and the anxiety to try and kill them ....before they reach their target. + 10 for this idea and tons of other uses for this type of drone....I hope CCP takes note ! This would also take care of the range issues and speed issues .....Make the blaster boats heavy and brutal!!!
Digggg this idea !!!!! |
Ash MAXIE
GE Holdings Grim Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 11:59:00 -
[484] - Quote
Mr J Vudu wrote:Quantes IQ wrote:Captain Africa wrote:After reading through most posts here and being a cross trained Gallente pilot myself here is my two cents: Firstly I would hate to see all ships become replicas in terms of their capabilities , God forbid how boring Eve would be, its important to keep the racial differences and FFS stop comparing the Brutix to the Hurricane , every race has there own Rock Stars ! I am double Amarr and I love the look of the ships but I donGÇÖt fly them at all because I donGÇÖt like their capabilities , so I trained Minmatar and Gallente cause of their niches that appeals to me. I think the same should be said for Gallente pilots ...fly the role of the race, if you donGÇÖt like it train for something else. Gallentes role or niche is short range fights (between 0and 10 km) and then the drones. When you are caught in that 10 km range against a blaster boat the chance of getting away or winning the fight should be 20% or less. The 0-10 km is the Gallente Blaster zone. I do believe the damage done by blasters should be significantly more to solidify the Gallente Blaster Zone. The second very obvious issue is how to get your enemy in that zone of 0-10 km. In high sec or gate camping this wouldnGÇÖt be that much of a big deal. So in a way Gallente blaster boats already rule High sec and gate camps ! But with conventional null sec fleets and tactics it causes a problem for the Gallente blaster boats. I love that Eve video GÇ£Real spmething GÇ¥ where the Gallente fleet gets melted into scrap metal by a Amarr fleet and then a Gallente frig pilot breakes away and fly directly towards the Amaarr fleet enabeling the gallente fleet to warp in at 0 and burn the Amarr alive ! ThatGÇÖs what appeals to me ...now whether that is practically possible in 50% of the scenarios , I honestly donGÇÖt know. But I think as far as Blaster boats go we need to look more at tactics to get into that Zone than to try and replicate other races roles. I do believe that Gallente is in a disadvantage here when it comes to null sec warfare. (at the same token it should be very difficult for them to be able to get in that zone to balance things out overall). So here is an idea in its infant stage CCP why not create a drone that you as a blaster boat can warp to ? You release the drone or five drones and send them to the enemy ...once in range you warp to the drone and fleet can warp to you. Of course the drone stats need to be balanced out to make the task of the drone to reach its destination hard and relatively easy for enemy ships to shoot it down. The bigger the gallente fleet the more drones to shoot down by the enemy.....think this might be an option to enable blaster boats to get into blaster zone whether you are a fleet or solo pilot ...and its in line with Gallente culture . Hope my idea can solve some problems for us..or maybe look at a new gallente frig with desent speed and a brutal tank to make that video mentioned above more a reality than anything else. Has anyone thought about this? A specialized drone that a ship can warp to at any range. I can already see fifty drones from a ten man fleet swarming towards our fleet at medium speed and the anxiety to try and kill them ....before they reach their target. + 10 for this idea and tons of other uses for this type of drone....I hope CCP takes note ! This would also take care of the range issues and speed issues .....Make the blaster boats heavy and brutal!!! Digggg this idea !!!!!
Yea very Kewl , but will it work 1vs1 at lets say 20 km range ? |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
1768
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:01:00 -
[485] - Quote
Not nearly enough.
I'd like to think this change would be looked at very soon after the change and re-adjusted, but with the length of time it's taken to get this far, I don't hold out much hope.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:02:00 -
[486] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote: How many blaster and rail ship flying in 0.0 fleets. 0.0001 percent ? Just ask it from yourself why not using them.
Umm... because supercarriers don't fit blasters? No just because you're dumb and think you made an interesting comment. Low sec: Gallente ships are close to useless because everything else can do it better, you're dumb if you keep that route. every single frigate/cruiser/BC/BS/recon/logistic/assault/heavy assault and whatever you can fly WILL be better, no doubt Null sec: Gallente are bad overall, terribly bad, exception made for Lachesis, Arazu, every thing else is completely useless. Even the heavy dictor is unwanted and very often out of the reimbursement programs. You should move from jita 4-4 undock sometimes So you comments about diversity and "race" you can keep them for silly cheeps not having brains to think by them selves. Your such a troll. Ouch, you hurt my feelings, you awful, awful person. Not everyone can be so smart. I feel so bad when people make fun of my utter stupidity. Can I file a petition?
Don't be so silly and dramatic, Tanya - or you'll turn out just like me. lol |
Arkanon Nerevar
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:02:00 -
[487] - Quote
personally, while im ecstatic that hybrids are getting thier rebalancing (only 3 years late), i feel these changes are piddling compared to what is really needed to make hybrids across the board viable for PVE/PVP, the CPU reductions still leave you with gimped fitting choices and the damage increase is negligeble at best, lets not forget that amarr lasers have virtually no ammo/reloading requirments and projectials have no cap reduction/fitting issues, abilitys that seem merely ggod on paper but are a incredible advantage in actual application, just my two cents.
also could a dev confirm that there actually reading our comments and willing to make changes to the upcoming stats accordingly, and a heads up on when this is coming out would be great (flying gallente right now and its painful not to mention embaressing). Trust Not in God, but Have Faith in Antimatter-Gallente capsuleer motto |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:06:00 -
[488] - Quote
That drone idea is terrible.
First, if it's limited to Gallente ships it's an unfair advantage
when you're in combat you don't have drone models on the overview and you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from the 11ty billion other drones out at that time.
It completely makes rails and other ranged attacks useless- you just end up making the pendulum swting in the other direction. Sure you can shoot one or two down, but if everyone has one then likely one is getting through. The ability to probe + warp 150km-250km on grid is already a problem, that idea just makes it worse. |
Aloryan Grave
EFT Academy Ultima Rati0
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:11:00 -
[489] - Quote
I think that the increased speed of the ship is too small
Catch up with ships at the optimal distance 7200m.(Neutron Blaster Cannon II) while sitting in Megatron, it is difficult. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
93
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:13:00 -
[490] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote: How many blaster and rail ship flying in 0.0 fleets. 0.0001 percent ? Just ask it from yourself why not using them.
Umm... because supercarriers don't fit blasters? No just because you're dumb and think you made an interesting comment. Low sec: Gallente ships are close to useless because everything else can do it better, you're dumb if you keep that route. every single frigate/cruiser/BC/BS/recon/logistic/assault/heavy assault and whatever you can fly WILL be better, no doubt Null sec: Gallente are bad overall, terribly bad, exception made for Lachesis, Arazu, every thing else is completely useless. Even the heavy dictor is unwanted and very often out of the reimbursement programs. You should move from jita 4-4 undock sometimes So you comments about diversity and "race" you can keep them for silly cheeps not having brains to think by them selves. Your such a troll. Ouch, you hurt my feelings, you awful, awful person. Not everyone can be so smart. I feel so bad when people make fun of my utter stupidity. Can I file a petition? Don't be so silly and dramatic, Tanya - or you'll turn out just like me. lol
I'm working on it (glad you understood the sarcasm)
I do admit however, and if those changes come live has it stands:
My Daredevil was awesome, now is getting just like crazy.
My Cynabal was already a FOTOM POWN machine, now it's just "OMG"
My vagabond thx so much if those changes come live, he was clearly underpowered
My Hurricane /bows with his shark teeth all out looking at the gallente hulls
My nano pest turns his back to my Hype for lols, he's having some pity for the poor Hype
My Arty Mael doesn't even waste time on looking at my Mega: "Childs playground is --->there, get out kid!"
And at all corners we will still see those "Diemost" mendicants asking more pg and slots...CCP get rid of those !!
|
|
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:14:00 -
[491] - Quote
Aloryan Grave wrote:Catch up with ships at the optimal distance 7200m.(Neutron Blaster Cannon II) while sitting in Megatron, it is difficult.
Optimus Prime will just kite him at range. |
Ash MAXIE
GE Holdings Grim Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:28:00 -
[492] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:That drone idea is terrible.
First, if it's limited to Gallente ships it's an unfair advantage
when you're in combat you don't have drone models on the overview and you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from the 11ty billion other drones out at that time.
It completely makes rails and other ranged attacks useless- you just end up making the pendulum swting in the other direction. Sure you can shoot one or two down, but if everyone has one then likely one is getting through. The ability to probe + warp 150km-250km on grid is already a problem, that idea just makes it worse.
Yea but if you balance the speed and sig of a drone to make it a viable option then it could work well ...and yes make it available for all races but give blaster boats maybe an additional drone speed bonus for this specific drone.
This would eliminate so many problems with blaster boats and increase the probability more to get reds in optimal range without having to compromise other ship stats or change too much base ship attributes , I think itGÇÖs worth consideration ...
|
Tierere
The Corporation of Noble Sentiments
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:28:00 -
[493] - Quote
These changes are just tinkering around the edges, they will make a difference however there is nothing there that will make hybrids desirable or sexy again.
Blasters should be devastating at close range, not just marginally higher dps, something really scary.
Rails are very sick just now and need a bigger boost that what is proposed, it wold be nice if they were viable for solo pilots.
I'm not sure if the tweeks to powegrid and cpu will be enough. Gallente cruiser class ships are currently no where near being able to fit there full compliment of weapons and defensive modules for there class.
There are some imaginative suggestions thought out this feedback post that could update hybrids for modern warfare, these buffs are not inspiring. It should be a weapons race, some sort of significant advancement that redresses' the balance of power and drive new conflicts, for the good of all evekind!
In the current mmo market CCP you need to capture peoples imagination again. Dare to be bold! |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:32:00 -
[494] - Quote
Ash MAXIE wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:That drone idea is terrible.
First, if it's limited to Gallente ships it's an unfair advantage
when you're in combat you don't have drone models on the overview and you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from the 11ty billion other drones out at that time.
It completely makes rails and other ranged attacks useless- you just end up making the pendulum swting in the other direction. Sure you can shoot one or two down, but if everyone has one then likely one is getting through. The ability to probe + warp 150km-250km on grid is already a problem, that idea just makes it worse. Yea but if you balance the speed and sig of a drone to make it a viable option then it could work well ...and yes make it available for all races but give blaster boats maybe an additional drone speed bonus for this specific drone. This would eliminate so many problems with blaster boats and increase the probability more to get reds in optimal range without having to compromise other ship stats or change too much base ship attributes , I think itGÇÖs worth consideration ...
Picture this though... I am in a hurricane and say, want to be at 60km. They launch a drone to warp in range to me, I turn around and launch the drone in the other direction to warp back out of range. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:38:00 -
[495] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:That drone idea is terrible.
First, if it's limited to Gallente ships it's an unfair advantage
when you're in combat you don't have drone models on the overview and you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from the 11ty billion other drones out at that time.
It completely makes rails and other ranged attacks useless- you just end up making the pendulum swting in the other direction. Sure you can shoot one or two down, but if everyone has one then likely one is getting through. The ability to probe + warp 150km-250km on grid is already a problem, that idea just makes it worse.
Same opinion but, the possibility for blaster ships to "warp to" at very small ranges let's say 25km for Med hulls or 35 for BS/BC size would clearly keep the uniqueness of close range combat, uniqueness of very short range weapon and an unique racial trait with this feature.
Would it be overpowered? maybe if it's an instant warp, but delayed and with random chance to land between 0 and 10km with half cap consuming at each use of this feature this could make it really unique and now useful in many scenarios.
Just throwing this stuff out there, since it seems all other choices make blasters look like other weapon systems.
(I know I know this will never happen) |
Lemming Alpha1dash1
Lemmings Online
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:39:00 -
[496] - Quote
maybe the taranis can be the replacement for the dramiel, who knows ?
anything to get me closer to DJ LMP's corpse is an improvement, thx CCP |
Ash MAXIE
GE Holdings Grim Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:45:00 -
[497] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:That drone idea is terrible.
First, if it's limited to Gallente ships it's an unfair advantage
when you're in combat you don't have drone models on the overview and you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from the 11ty billion other drones out at that time.
It completely makes rails and other ranged attacks useless- you just end up making the pendulum swting in the other direction. Sure you can shoot one or two down, but if everyone has one then likely one is getting through. The ability to probe + warp 150km-250km on grid is already a problem, that idea just makes it worse. Same opinion but, the possibility for blaster ships to "warp to" at very small ranges let's say 25km for Med hulls or 35 for BS/BC size would clearly keep the uniqueness of close range combat, uniqueness of very short range weapon and an unique racial trait with this feature. Would it be overpowered? maybe if it's an instant warp, but delayed and with random chance to land between 0 and 10km with half cap consuming at each use of this feature this could make it really unique and now useful in many scenarios. Just throwing this stuff out there, since it seems all other choices make blasters look like other weapon systems. (I know I know this will never happen)
I mean smack a beacon light on each drone so that they become highly visible in space within a 50 km range , so you donGÇÖt have to look at your overview to try and figure out where they are ...just target them in space.
The whole idea of this is to address the "getting into the 10 km optimal range "without screwing with uniqueness of races...I donGÇÖt see any other way tbh.
|
bipbip64bipbip
Erevos Academy
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:51:00 -
[498] - Quote
Hell YEAH !!! i will be back for this ... thank you. |
Ash MAXIE
GE Holdings Grim Enterprises
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 12:55:00 -
[499] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Ash MAXIE wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:That drone idea is terrible.
First, if it's limited to Gallente ships it's an unfair advantage
when you're in combat you don't have drone models on the overview and you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from the 11ty billion other drones out at that time.
It completely makes rails and other ranged attacks useless- you just end up making the pendulum swting in the other direction. Sure you can shoot one or two down, but if everyone has one then likely one is getting through. The ability to probe + warp 150km-250km on grid is already a problem, that idea just makes it worse. Yea but if you balance the speed and sig of a drone to make it a viable option then it could work well ...and yes make it available for all races but give blaster boats maybe an additional drone speed bonus for this specific drone. This would eliminate so many problems with blaster boats and increase the probability more to get reds in optimal range without having to compromise other ship stats or change too much base ship attributes , I think itGÇÖs worth consideration ... Picture this though... I am in a hurricane and say, want to be at 60km. They launch a drone to warp in range to me, I turn around and launch the drone in the other direction to warp back out of range. Or I'll just "send forth thy sabres" and hero bubble them. It's a good idea, yes, but it would never be used as intended.
Well then make this a unique Blaster boat feature, I mean GALLENTE IS AFTER ALL KING OF DRONES. Just make the drone fast enough that it would be 50% chance of getting through to the enemy...I mean its a new concept ..Surely you can play around with it till it works well |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:03:00 -
[500] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:Lets look at some numbers this rebalance will give us shall we? No skills added or ship bonuses just turret + ammo. I like that you took the time to work out some numbers. But, I think you really do need to consider skill and ship bonuses, too, since no one uses a gun, without a pilot or ship - at least, not in Eve.
Seriously, though, DPS should be compared on a per ship basis, not on a per gun basis.
When comparing Gallente blaster boats to Minmatar AC boats, you need to factor in the split weapon systems on Minmatar ships (a Gallente gunship usually has more turrets than the equivalent Minmatar gunship), and the signficantly larger drone capacity/bandwidth on most of the Gallente ships.
Drones have a much higher range than autocannons, too, and, in DPS terms, a flight of 5 medium T2 drones is equivalent to 2 to 3 medium T2 neutron blasters. So, to say that a Gallente blaster boat can do no damage outside of blaster range is obviously incorrect.
Skills must also be considered, because a max DPS Minmatar ship requires max projectile, max missile, and max drone skills; whereas, a max DPS Gallente ship requires only max hybrid and max drone skills. A significant difference in SP. So, comparing a max DPS Gallente pilot to a max DPS Minmatar pilot is probably equivalent to comparing a 2 year old toon to a 3 year old toon. If you consider pilots of the same age, then, in most cases, the Minmatar pilot will have fewer level 5 skills trained up, due to the additional missile skill tree, thus gimping relative performance in some other non-missile area - guns, tank, speed, fitting, etc. |
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
269
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:03:00 -
[501] - Quote
It's a start I suppose but you still got a long way to make Gallente subcaps mainstay ships in fleets. I suggest you guys start working on the Gallente ships themselves next. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:08:00 -
[502] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:Lets look at some numbers this rebalance will give us shall we? Since T2 Ammo is also getting a buff lets focus there by comparing Blasters to Autocannons using their respective t2 short range ammo types. No skills added or ship bonuses just turret + ammo. Neutron Blaster II with Void Range: 10,400m Tracking: .03637 DPS: 32 800mm Repeating Artillery with Hail Range: 21,600m Tracking:.03024 DPS: 25.28 Heavy Neutron Blaster II with void Range: 5,200m Tracking: .84 DPS: 24.64 425mm Autocannon with Hail Range: 10,800m Tracking: .0739 DPS: 18.99 So Large and Medium Autocannons have 207% more range than Blasters. Large Blasters will have 27% more DPS and 20% more Tracking than Large Autocannons Medium Blasters will have 30% more DPS and 13% better tracking than Medium autocannons. So ships that are faster and more agile with comparable tanks have over 207% more range over Blaster boats while doing only 27% less DPS. And in practise they will have much higher range becuase TE's and TC's will benefit Autocannons much more becuase of the much higher starting stats they have. So how quickly can you cover 5 to 15 km to actually apply that massive 27% more DPS to actually win the fight while in web/scram range chasing down faster ships...? i bet that extra 10 m/s will really help out in that? Look we dont need Gallente to become Mimatar ships or blasters to become Autocannons. Plenty of good and varied ideas to fix this have been told to you (CCP) by the community now please use them and not this half assed attempt. Congrats CCP in the same patch to buff Hybrids you have also managed to make them obsolete with this Hail buff (removing the .5x falloff modifier).
and to add insult to injury, now do the same thing to pulses [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:13:00 -
[503] - Quote
Ash MAXIE wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:That drone idea is terrible.
First, if it's limited to Gallente ships it's an unfair advantage
when you're in combat you don't have drone models on the overview and you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from the 11ty billion other drones out at that time.
It completely makes rails and other ranged attacks useless- you just end up making the pendulum swting in the other direction. Sure you can shoot one or two down, but if everyone has one then likely one is getting through. The ability to probe + warp 150km-250km on grid is already a problem, that idea just makes it worse. Same opinion but, the possibility for blaster ships to "warp to" at very small ranges let's say 25km for Med hulls or 35 for BS/BC size would clearly keep the uniqueness of close range combat, uniqueness of very short range weapon and an unique racial trait with this feature. Would it be overpowered? maybe if it's an instant warp, but delayed and with random chance to land between 0 and 10km with half cap consuming at each use of this feature this could make it really unique and now useful in many scenarios. Just throwing this stuff out there, since it seems all other choices make blasters look like other weapon systems. (I know I know this will never happen) I mean smack a beacon light on each drone so that they become highly visible in space within a 50 km range , so you donGÇÖt have to look at your overview to try and figure out where they are ...just target them in space. The whole idea of this is to address the "getting into the 10 km optimal range "without screwing with uniqueness of races...I donGÇÖt see any other way tbh.
tbqh it's better just to give Gallente ships a web bonus in strength (back to 90%) and increase range/optimal. Think of gallente ships as spiders: Play it smart and stay at range and you can manage them, maybe even overpower them easily. But if you get caught in their web, bricks should be shat. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:17:00 -
[504] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote: Has it stands, the buff is there for sure, but it isn't enough and profits even more to projectiles than hybrids once again.
I thought it was an hybrid rebalancing.
Well, we'll find out for certain, after play testing on Sisi, and live on Tranquility.
I think it is a step forward and the extra CPU, PG, and cap makes for some new ways to fit the Gallente ships, in particular. It might not be quite enough, but I'd prefer to see another buff in the future, rather than a nerf.
Hopefully, what we are all really seeing here is just the first of many, and more frequent, ongoing, rebalancing changes to the game. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:17:00 -
[505] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Imawuss wrote:Lets look at some numbers this rebalance will give us shall we? No skills added or ship bonuses just turret + ammo. I like that you took the time to work out some numbers. But, I think you really do need to consider skill and ship bonuses, too, since no one uses a gun, without a pilot or ship - at least, not in Eve. Seriously, though, DPS should be compared on a per ship basis, not on a per gun basis. When comparing Gallente blaster boats to Minmatar AC boats, you need to factor in the split weapon systems on Minmatar ships (a Gallente gunship usually has more turrets than the equivalent Minmatar gunship), and the signficantly larger drone capacity/bandwidth on most of the Gallente ships. Drones have a much higher range than autocannons, too, and, in DPS terms, a flight of 5 medium T2 drones is equivalent to 2 to 3 medium T2 neutron blasters. So, to say that a Gallente blaster boat can do no damage outside of blaster range is obviously incorrect. Skills must also be considered, because a max DPS Minmatar ship requires max projectile, max missile, and max drone skills; whereas, a max DPS Gallente ship requires only max hybrid and max drone skills. A significant difference in SP. So, comparing a max DPS Gallente pilot to a max DPS Minmatar pilot is probably equivalent to comparing a 2 year old toon to a 3 year old toon. If you consider pilots of the same age, then, in most cases, the Minmatar pilot will have fewer level 5 skills trained up, due to the additional missile skill tree, thus gimping relative performance in some other non-missile area - guns, tank, speed, fitting, etc.
Just a couple counter points:
1) With no web bonus the Gallente pilot will be using web drones to help keep you still so that offsets any extra drone DPS, while the minnie pilot still uses combat drones. If a Gallente pilot uses combat drones there is separate tackle or you're no risk of running.
2) Yes minnie has a split weapon system but other than the typhoon current doctrine has all AC or all arty setups.
|
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:19:00 -
[506] - Quote
It seems to me you're making the same mistakes you've been making for years. Trying to force each racial weapon type in to a comparative clone of each other is only going to lead to a state of constant balancing and re-balancing. Rather than doing this you should be thinking about creating specific roles within Eve that specific weapon types (and by extension, specific racial ships) excel at. The two Hybrid weapons themselves are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Let's take Blasters as an example and let's assume Blasters are brought in-line with the fitting requirements and range of Autocannons. Why would I use a Blaster right now when Autocannons do sufficient enough damage to kill a target yet allow me to dictate speed just as easily, if not better, with a Minmatar ship rather than a Gallente, without having to worry about using Cap? If I was a comparatively new player who'd just spent the last year and a half training up Minmatar skills, where is the incentive for me to cross train?
The question here isn't "how do I make Blasters more comparable to Autocannons?", the question should be "how can I give people a reason to use Blasters in some situations where they are better than Autocannons and Pulse Lasers?". The same question applies to Rails vs. Artillery/Beam Lasers. Variety is the spice of life but it's also the key to balancing these weapons rather than the paper, scissors, rock approach that's been taken for years and simply results in over compensation in one weapon type resulting in a preference being given at the expense of the others. There needs to be more variation in PvP, more reason to use different combat types to suit different situations where different weapon systems and racial ships are superior within those situations.
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
269
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:29:00 -
[507] - Quote
If someone brings a Hyperion to an armor fleet it has to be as worthwhile as bringing an Abaddon in its own special way. After all they are both tier 3 battleships the gap between the usefulness of both are just ridiculous. Sadly this injustice applies to every single Gallente ship in the game with exception of frigates and capitals obviously.
|
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:44:00 -
[508] - Quote
Interesting stuff.
Hope to see it work.
Quick reminder, don't forget to change all the "Descriptions" for the T2 Ammo highlighting any relevant penalties.
NOSTRO AURUM NON EST AURUM VULGI |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
184
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:53:00 -
[509] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:Alex Harumichi wrote:
In narrative, there persists the idea that blasters do huge damage up close, when in reality ACs nowadays are pretty close while having tons of other advantages. Especially with the (weird) AC boost that's also introduced here. An already-good t2 ammo for a borderline-overpowered weapon system, made even better? Huh?
Indeed. For all practical purposes autocannons have comparable damage to blasters, while at the same time having a bunch of other advantages and supposed to be fit on ships that have a meaningful slot layout. CCP needs to get their head out of their arses and realize that gallente arent performing anything like "they were supposed to be". buffs of about 20% are 'getting there' when for example t2 blaster ammo tracking penalty is in the range of -25% if memory serves.
AC's almost exclusively operate in falloff, doing a portion of it's potential damage. Blasters will almost always do near max damage, that is, if they catch their target.. this is a signature |
Daedalus Arcova
Havoc Violence and Chaos BricK sQuAD.
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:55:00 -
[510] - Quote
All these one-line posters going 'Woo!! Thanks CCP! This is awesome!' are going to feel pretty let down when they realise these tweaks basically change nothing.
CCP, this is really disappointing. When the Chaos stats were leaked, you told us that they were WIP and may change. Now, it turns out that they were exactly what you were going to implement (apart from correcting your agility nerf to a buff).
Blaster boats will still be outclassed by every other short-range weapon system. They will still be kited by every other type of ship, with their superior versatility of range. If, by some miracle, a blaster platform gets its target into optimal range, its damage output will still not be enough to make up for all the damage being applied by the opponent while it was getting into range.
Right now, blasters are an all-or-nothing weapon, but their 'all' is really quite pitiful compared to the downsides. So the way to fix them is either to a: give them a truly massive increase in damage output at short range, as a trade-off for all the times they'll be outranged, or b: broaden the envelope where they can be partially effective, while still maintaining their slight advantage up-close.
If you're determined that blasters should remain a very short range weapon, then they really have to do a truckload of damage at that range to make up for all the time getting into range, taking damage while doing none. In other words, blasters should do something like twice the damage of ACs if they get in range. Letting a blaster platform get into optimal range before it's at least half-dead already, should mean almost certain death.
If you don't want to give blasters that kind of insane damage, then you have to give them better range. They shouldn't be iwin buttons at longer ranges, but they desperately need more versatility. No other weapon system has such a small envelope in which to operate, and such a steep decline in effectiveness outside of that sweet spot. So fix it with a rebalancing of ammo types to give blasters viable options at ranges beyond Null.
As for rails, you've designed a weapon system that only gains superiority in ranges where the new scanning mechanics make fighting completely impossible. Just give them another 10% damage boost on top of the one you've given them already, and they might become useful.
It would be nice if CCP posted at all in this thread to reassure all those concerned about this supposed 'rebalancing' that the feedback is actually being taken on board, and being acted on. |
|
ConXtionS
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Cascade Imminent
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 13:57:00 -
[511] - Quote
Lets see... Big wig comes out, "we realize we have made mistakes and are going to fix them", then he says "we are going to FIX gallente ships"
So, you have known they are broken for over 2 years and this CRAP is the best you can do?????
Do you people play the game, do you realize the amazing amount of time we have to devote to cross training stupid stuff because of your LOUSY responses to the player base?????
Look.. either fix the game or dont, but stop making promises you dont intend to keep.... If you make a promise then DO IT and DO IT RIGHT for once....
Sheesh I hate this game sometimes.... |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
184
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:01:00 -
[512] - Quote
Darth Felin wrote:Well some more thoughts after I write off all advantages/disadvantages for hybrids. "Hybrid problem" is really complex and you just can not fix it by mega buff to hybrid weapons.
IMHO the problem consist of 4 parts:
1) hybrid weapon sucks - it is more or less fixed by you change. 2) tracking enchanters - they give really overwhelming 30% bonus to falloff and only 15% to optimal. This is the main reason why many pilots think that projectiles are overpowered. 2-3 Tracking enchanters on minmatar ship and you can shoot at really crazy distances, drop it to 15% and gun balance is much better now. 3) Many hybrid platform are just bad, especially t2 one. Eagle, Deimos, Astarte. They need rework of their bonuses 4) Armor rigs and armor tanking. Gallente ships are armor tankers, but they can not use active armor tank as it is really bad even on bonused hulls and armor rigs decrease their small speed even more. It is easy to fix rigs by switching speed penalty to shield amount one or maybe even cargo amount one.
But now you fix 25% of the problem and pretend it is ok now - you are wrong.
This, pretty much. Just highlighting too what you said in #2, why many *think* that projectiles are.. Projectiles operate in falloff, which many don't understand how it works. Extend the falloff and you improve the projectiles alot, decrease the falloff and they're worse. The TE buff was what made projectiles so popular, as you point out. Projectiles in themselves was neither considered good nor bad pre-TE buff.
In my view the major issue is really that Gallente struggles to get in range. At the same time you want the speed and agility on Minmatar, it's their racial role. Same time Minmatar has the web ewar, which would be better suited on Gallente.. and we have the armor rigs with their high calibration and speed nerfing effects. It just all adds up. Gallente works - if they get in range. Which they do, in high- and lowsec (it's probably why I don't think it's an issue with blasters, just rails).
Some dude suggested Gallente should have like a short burst-speedboost somehow, I thought it sounded interesting. Give them a kick, not overall speed over time, just a kick. Might be what's lacking. And fix the damn rigs already. Whole rig layout could use a look at. this is a signature |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:02:00 -
[513] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote: Just a couple counter points:
1) With no web bonus the Gallente pilot will be using web drones to help keep you still so that offsets any extra drone DPS, while the minnie pilot still uses combat drones. If a Gallente pilot uses combat drones there is separate tackle or you're no risk of running.
2) Yes minnie has a split weapon system but other than the typhoon current doctrine has all AC or all arty setups.
How about some counter-counter points?
1) No one uses web drones. As large drones, they require too much bandwidth, are too slow, too easy to hit & kill, and do not provide enough extra web. More commonly, if you need the extra webbing power - say, using a Celestis to kill Drams - you'd fit an extra web in your mids and use the drones for damage or ECM.
2) You are defending my point. Mimmatar ships typically have fewer turret hardpoints than the equivalent Gallente ship. An all AC setup, using the spare highs for utility, means that a Minmatar gunship is sporting 1-2 guns less than the Gallente gunship (and usually 1-2 drones less, as well). So, comparing DPS on a per gun basis is simply wrong - you need to multiply the number of guns by the DPS per gun, and add in the contribution of the drone DPS, in order to compare the relative DPS of the Minmatar ship and the Gallente ship. |
Vedje
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:04:00 -
[514] - Quote
Joelleaveek wrote:i disagree that blasters need more range. Short range in their niche. What may help is if the current ammos that give increased range did a reasonable amount of damage. Then maybe I'd consider using them over antimatter.
The proposed 10 m/s speed increase isn't enough though, as has already been stated. Minmatar ships will still be able to maintain range.
What on earth are you talking about Short range being a niche? clearly you don't do much pvp, That's a disadvantage, means a => bad thing And it was ment to come as a downside of using blasters compared to upsides of blasters.
General idea behind it was Blasters = very short range, but incredible dps. However at this point blasters = very short range, incredible (however not applicable) dps |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:08:00 -
[515] - Quote
ConXtionS wrote:Lets see... Big wig comes out, "we realize we have made mistakes and are going to fix them", then he says "we are going to FIX gallente ships"
So, you have known they are broken for over 2 years and this CRAP is the best you can do?????
Do you people play the game, do you realize the amazing amount of time we have to devote to cross training stupid stuff because of your LOUSY responses to the player base?????
Look.. either fix the game or dont, but stop making promises you dont intend to keep.... If you make a promise then DO IT and DO IT RIGHT for once....
Sheesh I hate this game sometimes....
Relax preppie, it's just a brewskie.
It was mentioned that they were also looking into modifying ships, I am hoping for a web bonus.
They have come out with changes and have made milestones in focusing on a lot of the issues that have been angering bitter vets.
They have kept promises so far, and yes they still suck at communication (really, if a dev posts a blog about making balance changes he/she should be in here actively to respond to comments instead of just saying, "I'm monitoring this thread") but your post is reaching a bit. |
VonKolroth
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:10:00 -
[516] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Tallest, listen brother....
some change is better than no change, i'll give you that. you seem to have a good understanding of what's wrong (you mentioned projectiles, and the possibility of the actual ships needing boosts).
but these changes dont even scratch the surface, not even close. you have to look at it this way:
- why should i use a blaster boat over an AC or pulse boat? - if the role is not changing, then make these guns as desirable as lasers and projectiles - blaster platforms need to be the fastest in the game or have some sort of resistance to scrambling, or more resists to damage, or a really long web, or something, hands down. you cant leave these ships status quo (10m/s boost is nothing, 30m/s boost would be something) - if youre not touching the ships much, then increase blaster range and falloff significantly. i hate to say it, but make them like AC's.
i cant stress this enough, please consider an AC nerf as a viable solution to this mess. then simply balance rails and blasters to pulses at medium range
TLDR: projectiles are simply overpowered, consider nerfing them. blasters need to be as appealing as AC's and pulses in some way. if youre not changing the role of these weapons, blaster boats need some serious buffing; they should be the fastest OR the most resilient in the game.
thanks for listening, this is a great start. im sure some other players will give you a much better breakdown of what i mentioned above because the community is pretty much in agreement.
Could not have said this better. They either need to be faster or the most durable hulls. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:18:00 -
[517] - Quote
I honestly don't think it matters if the immediate changes are enough or not, since I think that is a secondary concern with balancing in general. Naturally you want to hit that perfect balance on the first try, but missing the mark isn't a huge problem. It only becomes a problem, if you aren't willing to monitor the situation and be prepared to revisit the issue after a short time. What I want is for CCP to keep an eye out for how things change with the buff and be willing to do a second round of changes in a month or two after the initial buff has been released, if their design goals haven't been reached. Whatever you do don't sit around with your collective thumbs up your asses for a year or two before revisiting the issue.
PS. +1 to the idea of creating a clear and distinctive role for blasters and rails and making them excell in those roles, instead of trying to make all weapon systems similar. Every weapon system should have some clear advantage over the others. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:25:00 -
[518] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote: Just a couple counter points:
1) With no web bonus the Gallente pilot will be using web drones to help keep you still so that offsets any extra drone DPS, while the minnie pilot still uses combat drones. If a Gallente pilot uses combat drones there is separate tackle or you're no risk of running.
2) Yes minnie has a split weapon system but other than the typhoon current doctrine has all AC or all arty setups.
How about some counter-counter points? 1) No one uses web drones. As large drones, they require too much bandwidth, are too slow, too easy to hit & kill, and do not provide enough extra web. More commonly, if you need the extra webbing power - say, using a Celestis to kill Drams - you'd fit an extra web in your mids and use the drones for damage or ECM. 2) You are defending my point. Mimmatar ships typically have fewer turret hardpoints than the equivalent Gallente ship. An all AC setup, using the spare highs for utility, means that a Minmatar gunship is sporting 1-2 guns less than the Gallente gunship (and usually 1-2 drones less, as well). So, comparing DPS on a per gun basis is simply wrong - you need to multiply the number of guns by the DPS per gun, and add in the contribution of the drone DPS, in order to compare the relative DPS of the Minmatar ship and the Gallente ship.
And a counter-counter point
1) You are right in that unless you have the bandwidth (which you do on specific bonused ships) you will use combat drones but then you are back at the beginning. The DPS of the drones is offset to the fact that you are out of range to bring your blasters to bear. And if you throw on a second web (which is the freaking point of this whole problem) in order to hold a FLIPPIN' BATTLESHIP/BATTLECRUISER in place then you're tossing out boosting mods that your opponent has no need to do. You're throwing out a SEBO, disruptor, or any other mod because you already are filled with a MWD, cap booster, and scram... this means to be viable even against a shield tanker you need to have a minimum of 5 midslots. The diemost has 3. Brutix has 4. Mega has 4.
MWD, booster, scram, web... and for a cruiser you have drop one.
2) Yes but you are also missing the weapon bonus as well, the Tempest's bonus gives it just as much DPS. and you're also throwing in a red herring... Gallente have to train more in drones than a minnie pilot. Even counting in training time missiles takes about 2-3 weeks to be a viable additional weapon system. Not really a huge deal, you'll be running heavies and not cruise on them. |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:29:00 -
[519] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:All these one-line posters going 'Woo!! Thanks CCP! This is awesome!' are going to feel pretty let down when they realise these tweaks basically change nothing.
CCP, this is really disappointing. When the Chaos stats were leaked, you told us that they were WIP and may change. Now, it turns out that they were exactly what you were going to implement (apart from correcting your agility nerf to a buff).
Blaster boats will still be outclassed by every other short-range weapon system. They will still be kited by every other type of ship, with their superior versatility of range. If, by some miracle, a blaster platform gets its target into optimal range, its damage output will still not be enough to make up for all the damage being applied by the opponent while it was getting into range.
Right now, blasters are an all-or-nothing weapon, but their 'all' is really quite pitiful compared to the downsides. So the way to fix them is either to a: give them a truly massive increase in damage output at short range, as a trade-off for all the times they'll be outranged, or b: broaden the envelope where they can be partially effective, while still maintaining their slight advantage up-close.
If you're determined that blasters should remain a very short range weapon, then they really have to do a truckload of damage at that range to make up for all the time getting into range, taking damage while doing none. In other words, blasters should do something like twice the damage of ACs if they get in range. Letting a blaster platform get into optimal range before it's at least half-dead already, should mean almost certain death.
If you don't want to give blasters that kind of insane damage, then you have to give them better range. They shouldn't be iwin buttons at longer ranges, but they desperately need more versatility. No other weapon system has such a small envelope in which to operate, and such a steep decline in effectiveness outside of that sweet spot. So fix it with a rebalancing of ammo types to give blasters viable options at ranges beyond Null.
As for rails, you've designed a weapon system that only gains superiority in ranges where the new scanning mechanics make fighting completely impossible. Just give them another 10% damage boost on top of the one you've given them already, and they might become useful.
It would be nice if CCP posted at all in this thread to reassure all those concerned about this supposed 'rebalancing' that the feedback is actually being taken on board, and being acted on.
Not empty quoting
|
EMPRA
Trident RMBK
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:35:00 -
[520] - Quote
All the other players bring very good points. This better just be the icing on the cake. We don't want anything half assed like usual.
Either make Gallente ships design worthwhile or change the design all together. We are TIRED of being niche pilots.
Fix it. |
|
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:50:00 -
[521] - Quote
Ash MAXIE wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:Ash MAXIE wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:That drone idea is terrible.
First, if it's limited to Gallente ships it's an unfair advantage
when you're in combat you don't have drone models on the overview and you wouldn't be able to distinguish it from the 11ty billion other drones out at that time.
It completely makes rails and other ranged attacks useless- you just end up making the pendulum swting in the other direction. Sure you can shoot one or two down, but if everyone has one then likely one is getting through. The ability to probe + warp 150km-250km on grid is already a problem, that idea just makes it worse. Yea but if you balance the speed and sig of a drone to make it a viable option then it could work well ...and yes make it available for all races but give blaster boats maybe an additional drone speed bonus for this specific drone. This would eliminate so many problems with blaster boats and increase the probability more to get reds in optimal range without having to compromise other ship stats or change too much base ship attributes , I think itGÇÖs worth consideration ... Picture this though... I am in a hurricane and say, want to be at 60km. They launch a drone to warp in range to me, I turn around and launch the drone in the other direction to warp back out of range. Or I'll just "send forth thy sabres" and hero bubble them. It's a good idea, yes, but it would never be used as intended. Well then make this a unique Blaster boat feature, I mean GALLENTE IS AFTER ALL KING OF DRONES. Just make the drone fast enough that it would be 50% chance of getting through to the enemy...I mean its a new concept ..Surely you can play around with it till it works well
I don't really care for the idea so much cuz it sound like a massive change to the code of the game. If so it will give ccp a excuse to sit on the change for another 2+ years while they "work on it" |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:51:00 -
[522] - Quote
Folks needs to stop trying to fly a Gallente blaster boat like a Minmatar kite ship.
Gallente blaster boats do not engage Minmatar ships at distance, and then try to close to blaster range. That is just plain silly.
Gallente blaster boats attempt to jump right on top of Minmatar ships, pin them down, and kill them before they can run away. If you miss blaster range on the jump, then you just get out. If the Minmatar ship looks like it will make it out of blaster range before you can kill it, then you get out. If you get scrammed outside of blaster range, you launch ECM drones and then get out, or launch damage drones and perhaps go down fighting.
At close range, Gallente blaster boats do more damage than Minmatar AC boats - period. Gallente blaster boats typically have more tank, as well. With the hybrid balancing changes, Gallente boats get a choice of even more tank or more gank.
The only thing going for a Minmatar boat is speed. And, a scram, plus dual webs, puts an end to that particular advantage. Once in close range, a scrammed-double-webbed Minmatar boat is going to struggle to survive long enough to get out of blaster range.
Does it work all of the time? Of course not. That would be just plain silly, too. |
Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 14:53:00 -
[523] - Quote
CCP, Please consider SLIGHTLY nerfing Minmatar weapons (mostly autocannons).
- Also, give Gallente blasterboats a web bonus so once someone is within range, there is no question what's about to happen. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:01:00 -
[524] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:
Gallente blaster boats do not engage Minmatar ships at distance, and then try to close to blaster range. That is just plain silly.
.
the issue at hand is this:
when a gallente ship jumps and catches a minnie ship, it still does about the same dps. the only difference - the minnie ship has started applying 100% of its dps and has been hitting you perfectly during your approach. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
84
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:02:00 -
[525] - Quote
what would be so bad as to buff null so that with one or two te you can shoot out to 24km with medium/large nuetrons (mostly in falloff) to hurt kiters?
i mean long range ammo for pulse and autocannons shoots out to 40km |
CRUOR VENATIO
GRIM MARCH SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:02:00 -
[526] - Quote
Captain Africa wrote:After reading through most posts here and being a cross trained Gallente pilot myself here is my two cents: Firstly I would hate to see all ships become replicas in terms of their capabilities , God forbid how boring Eve would be, its important to keep the racial differences and FFS stop comparing the Brutix to the Hurricane , every race has there own Rock Stars ! I am double Amarr and I love the look of the ships but I donGÇÖt fly them at all because I donGÇÖt like their capabilities , so I trained Minmatar and Gallente cause of their niches that appeals to me. I think the same should be said for Gallente pilots ...fly the role of the race, if you donGÇÖt like it train for something else. Gallentes role or niche is short range fights (between 0and 10 km) and then the drones. When you are caught in that 10 km range against a blaster boat the chance of getting away or winning the fight should be 20% or less. The 0-10 km is the Gallente Blaster zone. I do believe the damage done by blasters should be significantly more to solidify the Gallente Blaster Zone. The second very obvious issue is how to get your enemy in that zone of 0-10 km. In high sec or gate camping this wouldnGÇÖt be that much of a big deal. So in a way Gallente blaster boats already rule High sec and gate camps ! But with conventional null sec fleets and tactics it causes a problem for the Gallente blaster boats. I love that Eve video GÇ£Real spmething GÇ¥ where the Gallente fleet gets melted into scrap metal by a Amarr fleet and then a Gallente frig pilot breakes away and fly directly towards the Amaarr fleet enabeling the gallente fleet to warp in at 0 and burn the Amarr alive ! ThatGÇÖs what appeals to me ...now whether that is practically possible in 50% of the scenarios , I honestly donGÇÖt know. But I think as far as Blaster boats go we need to look more at tactics to get into that Zone than to try and replicate other races roles. I do believe that Gallente is in a disadvantage here when it comes to null sec warfare. (at the same token it should be very difficult for them to be able to get in that zone to balance things out overall). So here is an idea in its infant stage CCP why not create a drone that you as a blaster boat can warp to ? You release the drone or five drones and send them to the enemy ...once in range you warp to the drone and fleet can warp to you. Of course the drone stats need to be balanced out to make the task of the drone to reach its destination hard and relatively easy for enemy ships to shoot it down. The bigger the gallente fleet the more drones to shoot down by the enemy.....think this might be an option to enable blaster boats to get into blaster zone whether you are a fleet or solo pilot ...and its in line with Gallente culture . Hope my idea can solve some problems for us..or maybe look at a new gallente frig with desent speed and a brutal tank to make that video mentioned above more a reality than anything else.
I recon this might resolve a lot of problems ...we need something out of the box - THIS IS OUTSIDE THE BOX ! Its unique and with the right balancing it could work well ...increasing the web range or increasing the amount will nullify anyone in that range ....to overpowered ...Gank up the blaster and have a look at alternatives to get into that death zone Gallente was built for ...Oh and stop naging and bitching at CCP - bunch of wet panties ! |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:05:00 -
[527] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Folks needs to stop trying to fly a Gallente blaster boat like a Minmatar kite ship.
Gallente blaster boats do not engage Minmatar ships at distance, and then try to close to blaster range. That is just plain silly.
Gallente blaster boats attempt to jump right on top of Minmatar ships, pin them down, and kill them before they can run away. If you miss blaster range on the jump, then you just get out. If the Minmatar ship looks like it will make it out of blaster range before you can kill it, then you get out. If you get scrammed outside of blaster range, you launch ECM drones and then get out, or launch damage drones and perhaps go down fighting.
At close range, Gallente blaster boats do more damage than Minmatar AC boats - period. Gallente blaster boats typically have more tank, as well. With the hybrid balancing changes, Gallente boats get a choice of even more tank or more gank.
The only thing going for a Minmatar boat is speed. And, a scram, plus dual webs, puts an end to that particular advantage. Once in close range, a scrammed-double-webbed Minmatar boat is going to struggle to survive long enough to get out of blaster range.
Does it work all of the time? Of course not. That would be just plain silly, too.
Alt/10
The SLIGHT increase in DPS of blasters does not come close to making up for all of their downsides (Lack of range, cap sucking weps, Ammo consumption, ammo size, lack of lack of lack of)
Increase the DPS by a lot and you are on to something. If I can get into range and pin them down my blasters should MELT THEIR FACE. I have also seen some pretty sturdy Minny tanks so I don't know what you are on about. |
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:05:00 -
[528] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:
Gallente blaster boats do not engage Minmatar ships at distance, and then try to close to blaster range. That is just plain silly.
.
the issue at hand is this: when a gallente ship jumps and catches a minnie ship, it still does about the same dps. the only difference - the minnie ship has started applying 100% of its dps and has been hitting you perfectly during your approach.
And the clever minds of this thread argue (i should say the clever trolls) for tricking getting the minmie ship nearest you can. A minmie ship that always goes faster than you. That's the real stupid thing. I only point out what other posters have said: armor make your ship slower. THAT CAN'T BE. |
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:08:00 -
[529] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:All these one-line posters going 'Woo!! Thanks CCP! This is awesome!' are going to feel pretty let down when they realise these tweaks basically change nothing.
CCP, this is really disappointing. When the Chaos stats were leaked, you told us that they were WIP and may change. Now, it turns out that they were exactly what you were going to implement (apart from correcting your agility nerf to a buff).
Blaster boats will still be outclassed by every other short-range weapon system. They will still be kited by every other type of ship, with their superior versatility of range. If, by some miracle, a blaster platform gets its target into optimal range, its damage output will still not be enough to make up for all the damage being applied by the opponent while it was getting into range.
Right now, blasters are an all-or-nothing weapon, but their 'all' is really quite pitiful compared to the downsides. So the way to fix them is either to a: give them a truly massive increase in damage output at short range, as a trade-off for all the times they'll be outranged, or b: broaden the envelope where they can be partially effective, while still maintaining their slight advantage up-close.
If you're determined that blasters should remain a very short range weapon, then they really have to do a truckload of damage at that range to make up for all the time getting into range, taking damage while doing none. In other words, blasters should do something like twice the damage of ACs if they get in range. Letting a blaster platform get into optimal range before it's at least half-dead already, should mean almost certain death.
If you don't want to give blasters that kind of insane damage, then you have to give them better range. They shouldn't be iwin buttons at longer ranges, but they desperately need more versatility. No other weapon system has such a small envelope in which to operate, and such a steep decline in effectiveness outside of that sweet spot. So fix it with a rebalancing of ammo types to give blasters viable options at ranges beyond Null.
As for rails, you've designed a weapon system that only gains superiority in ranges where the new scanning mechanics make fighting completely impossible. Just give them another 10% damage boost on top of the one you've given them already, and they might become useful.
It would be nice if CCP posted at all in this thread to reassure all those concerned about this supposed 'rebalancing' that the feedback is actually being taken on board, and being acted on.
What this guy said. I've been waiting with baited breath for blaster boats to become useful again (outside of frigates/the pirate boats) but this doesn't cut it at all. They're still relatively slow, (10m/s is nothing), and unless they can do enough "wow damage" to make up for all the time they took damage on the approach, they're still pretty much useless for open combat.
|
xaja
yoni corporation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:09:00 -
[530] - Quote
Hello CCP..
I think you're going in the right direction, and your changes seem largely based on player input already, which is great.
However, I think you're making one mistake MMO companies don't seem to tire of making: changing too many things at once.
All your skills and fittings are a finely tuned game of small percentages.
Taken together, these simultaneous changes to ships and guns add together to something more drastic than I've ever seen in eve.
The whole approach seems even more drastic when compared to the extremely slow and careful tuning to Amarr ships and lasers done in the past.
I'd like to point out the methodology of both car repairs and computer repairs / trouble shooting:
The method is to change ONE thing and then check if its fixed. Because if you change 2 or more things at once:
1) you won't know which measure fixed it 2) if you overshot, you don't know which measure was too much
If the changes stand like they are, I think you've just changed Gallente stuff from underpowered to overpowered in one fell swoop. My guess is that Gallente ships will double in price and there will be pure Gallente roaming gangs all around. This would be fine by me, as I'm all trained up for that, but I don't think a new potentially severe imbalance will make the game better. |
|
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:14:00 -
[531] - Quote
It is common sense (in my opinion) that the short range guy should be the fastest guy, otherwise he will never have a chance to drop any damage. I don't know why this very simple principle is so hard to understand... Take an example from other MMOs, the guy with the sword needs a better tank and a method to get in range, or he will loose every battle vs a long distance fighter.
Now, there are many ways to achieve this with many advantages or disadvanteges: Faster ships, more range for webs, immune to webs, special bonuses for MWD modules etc. But in the end it comes down to the same old problem: if you are slower as a short range fighters there is no way you can win the battle.
And please, don't only look after EFT and numbers. They do not say anything... Fit a Proteus and a Tengu in EFT and compare the numbers, the Proteus doesn't look too bad. Now start a Level 4 mission (I have just done this test with Blockade) and you will see that the Tengu only needs 1/3 of the time that the Proteus needs (my Proteus fit was even with faction and more expensive than the Tengu that was only T2 fitted...). I know this thread is about pvp balancing and my example is a pve example, but it shows the differences very well.
To be honest, in my opinion EVE is very bad balanced in many aspects of the game, not only hybrids. But hopefully CCP will now start to improve this, better too late then never ;) |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
184
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:18:00 -
[532] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Folks needs to stop trying to fly a Gallente blaster boat like a Minmatar kite ship.
Gallente blaster boats do not engage Minmatar ships at distance, and then try to close to blaster range. That is just plain silly.
Gallente blaster boats attempt to jump right on top of Minmatar ships, pin them down, and kill them before they can run away. If you miss blaster range on the jump, then you just get out. If the Minmatar ship looks like it will make it out of blaster range before you can kill it, then you get out. If you get scrammed outside of blaster range, you launch ECM drones and then get out, or launch damage drones and perhaps go down fighting.
At close range, Gallente blaster boats do more damage than Minmatar AC boats - period. Gallente blaster boats typically have more tank, as well. With the hybrid balancing changes, Gallente boats get a choice of even more tank or more gank.
The only thing going for a Minmatar boat is speed. And, a scram, plus dual webs, puts an end to that particular advantage. Once in close range, a scrammed-double-webbed Minmatar boat is going to struggle to survive long enough to get out of blaster range.
Does it work all of the time? Of course not. That would be just plain silly, too.
Exactly this.
You know why Gallente whiners (btw, I have Gallente BS 5, and Large Blaster/Rail spec 5, t2 heavies and sentries and am right now while typing this, sitting in a Vindicator) won't get it? Because they are nullsec blob-fest pilots who want Blasters to be viable at midrange. this is a signature |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:22:00 -
[533] - Quote
chatgris wrote:
What this guy said. I've been waiting with baited breath for blaster boats to become useful again (outside of frigates/the pirate boats) but this doesn't cut it at all. They're still relatively slow, (10m/s is nothing), and unless they can do enough "wow damage" to make up for all the time they took damage on the approach, they're still pretty much useless for open combat.
i seriously doubt this is the final iteration. im hoping they will take the feedback in this thread seriously, cuz if not...well, no 4.95 deal will bring me back.
|
ConXtionS
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Cascade Imminent
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:23:00 -
[534] - Quote
Sorry I dont know how to do the fancy quote thing
"Exactly this.
You know why Gallente whiners (btw, I have Gallente BS 5, and Large Blaster/Rail spec 5, t2 heavies and sentries and am right now while typing this, sitting in a Vindicator) won't get it? Because they are nullsec blob-fest pilots who want Blasters to be viable at midrange. "
To be honest, I am too old and slow for blasters, but I wouldnt mind RAILS being useful at midrange!!!
Not everyone wants a blaster boat.... |
Ronin Nazuri
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:25:00 -
[535] - Quote
Hamox wrote:It is common sense (in my opinion) that the short range guy should be the fastest guy, otherwise he will never have a chance to drop any damage. I don't know why this very simple principle is so hard to understand...
But but but... EVE lore!
If they'd take the active armor bonus from from Blaster boats and replace it with one that lowers the sig-bloom of MWDs or nullifies the speed nerf of armor mods I think it'd help. |
Swearte Widfarend
Mortis Noir. Unforgiving.
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:26:00 -
[536] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:Perdition64 wrote: hurricane vs brutix this is a good summary of why pvp'ers generally stick with AC platforms.
This is not an equal comparison. The Hurricane is the Tier 2 Battlecruiser, the Brutix is the Tier 1. If the Myrm had any turret-based bonuses it would be the ship to compare to. Compare the Brutix to the Cyclone if you are trying to compare ships.
However, I still thing that CCP needs to look at ships across equivalent Tiers or types (the HAC argument).
Quote:The gallente deimos has a falloff bonus while the ishtar must fight within drone control range but can use 5 heavy drones.
The amarr zealot has an optimal range bonus while the sacrilege has very short range but extremely high armor resists.
The minmatar muninn has an optimal range bonus too while the vagabond has a maximum velocity bonus. Making it the fastest cruiser hull in game and sometimes even faster then a destroyer.
The caldari HACs are special since both types have long range bonuses. The eagle has a double optimal range bonus to it's hybrid weapons making it the longest range cruiser hull, even rivalling some battleships, while the cerberus has range and damage bonuses to missiles.
Looking at those ships with their appropriate bonuses and platforms, in their pairings, do they all have a place on the battlefield?
Deimos | Munnin | Zealot | Eagle
Ishtar | Sacrilege | Vagabond | Cerberus
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
184
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:29:00 -
[537] - Quote
ConXtionS wrote:Sorry I dont know how to do the fancy quote thing
"Exactly this.
You know why Gallente whiners (btw, I have Gallente BS 5, and Large Blaster/Rail spec 5, t2 heavies and sentries and am right now while typing this, sitting in a Vindicator) won't get it? Because they are nullsec blob-fest pilots who want Blasters to be viable at midrange. "
To be honest, I am too old and slow for blasters, but I wouldnt mind RAILS being useful at midrange!!!
Not everyone wants a blaster boat....
You click the quote button on the lower right of someones post.
And you're right, I understand if you don't want to dig through the threads, but in all hybrid buff-threads I posted I'm always advocating that the issue with hybrids is with rails, not blasters. Rails could really use some love, while blasters do function in their role today. Maybe a slight damage buff would be at hand, and probably a little tweak to TE's falloff bonus, but the truth is that in shortrange combat - Gallente is king. Still. It's just that in any fleet above a certain size, you need more mobility, and that's what Gallente lack.
I'm also old enough in this game to be bitter over how Gallente completely trashed everything for years, and the sole reason I do have Gallente trained on this character is because Amarr was so underwhelming and Gallente so damn overpowered. It's quite nice to see the whiners today, who don't even know that their race is functional, and yet have short enough memory to not recall when their multi-nos, no bandwith, overpowered damps, nano-bs (and Myrmidon) would just eat everything alive.
But yes, rails could use some love. this is a signature |
Rixt
NorthWest Russian Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:31:00 -
[538] - Quote
Please, don't use this ... font! it's very horrible!
|
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:32:00 -
[539] - Quote
xaja wrote:Hello CCP.. If the changes stand like they are, I think you've just changed Gallente stuff from underpowered to overpowered in one fell swoop. My guess is that Gallente ships will double in price and there will be pure Gallente roaming gangs all around. This would be fine by me, as I'm all trained up for that, but I don't think a new potentially severe imbalance will make the game better.
I think the main problem about giving Blasters too much damage is that every camp will consist of blaster boats then. Funny stuff that the only "Democracy" in the EVE Universum is the largest producer for Pirate boats then |
Jing Xin
Gravity Mining and Manufacturing Inc The Company LLC
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:32:00 -
[540] - Quote
I want to se ROF bonus on Merlin, Moa, Ferox, Rokh, etc. |
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:36:00 -
[541] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote: 1) You are right in that unless you have the bandwidth (which you do on specific bonused ships) you will use combat drones but then you are back at the beginning. The DPS of the drones is offset to the fact that you are out of range to bring your blasters to bear. And if you throw on a second web (which is the freaking point of this whole problem) in order to hold a FLIPPIN' BATTLESHIP/BATTLECRUISER in place then you're tossing out boosting mods that your opponent has no need to do. You're throwing out a SEBO, disruptor, or any other mod because you already are filled with a MWD, cap booster, and scram... this means to be viable even against a shield tanker you need to have a minimum of 5 midslots. The diemost has 3. Brutix has 4. Mega has 4.
MWD, cap booster, scram, web... and for a cruiser you have drop one.
2) Yes but you are also missing the weapon bonus as well, the Tempest's bonus gives it just as much DPS. and you're also throwing in a red herring... Gallente have to train more in drones than a minnie pilot. Even counting in training time missiles takes about 2-3 weeks to be a viable additional weapon system. Not really a huge deal, you'll be running heavies and not cruise on them.
1. When your strategy is to drop right on top of your target (see my other post - and feel free to flame), you don't need a MWD. Also, assuming that you've trained up your energy management skills, you don't need a cap booster - not in a buffer tanked Gallente gunship. The Thorax, Brutix, and Megathron, with a full rack of T2 neutrons, are cap stable, without any mods/rigs. At close range, you don't need a sebo, and when your opponent does less DPS and has less tank than you, you don't need a tracking disruptor. So, yes, there is room for a scram and two webs.
2. The Gallente gunboats get weapon bonuses, as well. And, if you don't train up your Minmatar pilot in drones, you've gimped his DPS further. When the Gallente and the Minmatar pilot have the same SP in guns and the same SP in drones, the Gallente pilot does more damage - because the Gallente ship has more guns and more drones. And 2-3 weeks training in missiles by the Minmatar pilot means 2-3 weeks training that the Gallente pilot can apply to more guns, tank, drones, speed, etc. You don't get those extra 2-3 weeks for free, just because you are Minmatar, you know. :) |
Nyla Skin
Pew Pew Corp Behold.
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:41:00 -
[542] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:
Just a couple counter points:
1) With no web bonus the Gallente pilot will be using web drones to help keep you still so that offsets any extra drone DPS, while the minnie pilot still uses combat drones. If a Gallente pilot uses combat drones there is separate tackle or you're no risk of running.
You remember that the only web drones are heavy drone size?
Pretty much pointless in what they were supposed to do..
|
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
130
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:43:00 -
[543] - Quote
i skimmed through this but couldnt see this so ill ask.
is void t2 ammo also getting fixed so it would be worth using? CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:45:00 -
[544] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote: the issue at hand is this:
when a gallente ship jumps and catches a minnie ship, it still does about the same dps. the only difference - the minnie ship has started applying 100% of its dps and has been hitting you perfectly during your approach.
What approach? You don't jump a Gallente blasterboat outside of blaster range and try to approach a Minmatar ship. It isn't going to happen because the Minmatar ship is usually fast enough to keep its distance.
You jump the blaster boat within blaster range, get it? There is no approach, and thus no issue in your hand. |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:46:00 -
[545] - Quote
Great with a long waited re-balancing of hybrids. The cap reduction and tracking buff combined with hybrid ships getting a small navigation boost is well deserved.
I am however a little concerned with a across-the-board buff to fitting that we might see all hybrid ships neglecting smaller tier hybrids if those have no clear advantage. Are the tracking and other advantages of smaller tiers sufficient, and have you made sure no single ships will suddenly be able to fit guns that will make it OP?
Also in my opinion the long range shield hybrid ships deserve a little extra... Ships such as the Moa and the Ferox could easily do with losing a utility hi-slot and gaining an extra needed medslot. The combat conditions today make it near impossible to maintain an advantage of range without either more staying power (tank) or theability to use supporting modules such as TCs, Webs without reducing the tank they have now... Also as the Moa and Ferox are both pretty low in the food chain I don't foresee any issues even if people attempts ubertanking.
Pinky
|
Nyla Skin
Pew Pew Corp Behold.
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:49:00 -
[546] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:is void t2 ammo also getting fixed so it would be worth using? edit, you seamed to have missed it from this line in the blog Quote:Javelin, Gleam and Quake (all sizes): Removed tracking speed penalty, added 25% tracking speed bonus
Yea I find it psychologically fascinating how CCP still keeps buffing the OTHER ammo in the dev blog thats supposed to be about buffing gallente..
The ammo thats in the most need of fixing is the T2 BLASTER ammo, CCP. Remove the tracking penalty. Pretty please. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:49:00 -
[547] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:The only thing going for a Minmatar boat is speed. And, a scram, plus dual webs, puts an end to that particular advantage. Once in close range, a scrammed-double-webbed Minmatar boat is going to struggle to survive long enough to get out of blaster range.
Does it work all of the time? Of course not. That would be just plain silly, too.
Why do people not realize gallente ships have a max of 5 midslots? Throwing in dual web is not possible unless you're in a hyperion or domi, and even then that's your full rack.
You should not have to dual web a battlecruiser if you REQUIRE it in order to actually hit it. |
Nyla Skin
Pew Pew Corp Behold.
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:50:00 -
[548] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:The only thing going for a Minmatar boat is speed. And, a scram, plus dual webs, puts an end to that particular advantage. Once in close range, a scrammed-double-webbed Minmatar boat is going to struggle to survive long enough to get out of blaster range.
Does it work all of the time? Of course not. That would be just plain silly, too. Why do people not realize gallente ships have a max of 5 midslots? Throwing in dual web is not possible unless you're in a hyperion or domi, and even then that's your full rack. You should not have to dual web a battlecruiser if you REQUIRE it in order to actually hit it.
Youre being trolled, dude. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 15:59:00 -
[549] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Folks needs to stop trying to fly a Gallente blaster boat like a Minmatar kite ship.
Gallente blaster boats do not engage Minmatar ships at distance, and then try to close to blaster range. That is just plain silly.
Gallente blaster boats attempt to jump right on top of Minmatar ships, pin them down, and kill them before they can run away. If you miss blaster range on the jump, then you just get out. If the Minmatar ship looks like it will make it out of blaster range before you can kill it, then you get out. If you get scrammed outside of blaster range, you launch ECM drones and then get out, or launch damage drones and perhaps go down fighting.
At close range, Gallente blaster boats do more damage than Minmatar AC boats - period. Gallente blaster boats typically have more tank, as well. With the hybrid balancing changes, Gallente boats get a choice of even more tank or more gank.
The only thing going for a Minmatar boat is speed. And, a scram, plus dual webs, puts an end to that particular advantage. Once in close range, a scrammed-double-webbed Minmatar boat is going to struggle to survive long enough to get out of blaster range.
Does it work all of the time? Of course not. That would be just plain silly, too.
|
Bilaz
Fremen Sietch DarkSide.
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:06:00 -
[550] - Quote
Well i cooled down a bit and reread blog. Maybe ccp is looking at this whole stuff under wrong angle. See the way i see it - blasters were bad since after nanonerf - maybe even sometime before that. For instance it maybe a good idea to revisit Zulupark answer thread http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=905941&page=1#22 and see that there are almost as many questions about tempest as there are about blasters. and thats 2008 - projectiles (and lasors before them) got buffed after that if memory serves me right.
Why does blaster weapons suck? why did they sucked then and persieved horrible even after proposed changes? well reason for that is change of surroundings. No ships have value just by themselves - its all about how and what other players fly. Now in anything other than 1-on-1 situations ranges less then 15 km are not viable. even 1-on-1 nowdays presume that even if you are one - your hostiles are most likely not. Anyway over the years ships were becoming fatter and fatter in terms of ehp - now with widespread logistics its even worse - you may aply damage indefinitely to no result. Along with that both minmatar and amarr got range boosts - now having dosen of ships with 30-40 km range on close range guns. With caldari - situation is worse - god knows why but their long range weapons hit better than close range ones, they also fit better - so they too have no problems with dealing damage on 50-70 km (damage output suck, but its caldari) So with ships getting 2-3 times wider in terms of ehp and ranges of battle going from 15-20 to 40-50 km (comand ships + recons are seen everywhere ) - there are no place for active tanked, close ranged boats anymore.
I do understand that several years of unadressed balance problems are quite hard to solve in 4 month time - but seeing that you usually do 1 big rebalance once in 3 years - half measures you show - dont impress me one bit. Game have changed a lot over the years - now is as good time as any to start changing outdated and no longer relevant stuff. I think that would not be a pure pr sign like most of this new things you show us, but also very interesting and thus positive to the game. Bring back diversity of eve we have enjoed sometime before that - not 1-2 fotm bc out of 8, 3-4 fotm bs out of 12 and 1 frigate that better than others etc. Make us revisit old fits, tactics and doctrins looking for new ways in new surroundings. |
|
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:06:00 -
[551] - Quote
No issues, just our thanks :) |
Mongo Edwards
Royal Order of Security Specialists
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:14:00 -
[552] - Quote
While these changes seem like a good start I still don't see a reason to fit out my caldari gunboats (aside from the harpy) with anything but projectiles (I haven't finished crosstraining minnie yet). At the operational engagement range limit (arguable 100km) I don't see a need to fit rails over arty's since enemy frigates will get a warp in or burn in range before the dps potential of rails outperforms the alpha ability of arty's. Once the enemy gets in AC/scorch range (30-40km or so) they will just get transversal and the long range guns won't track anyways.
Blasters on the Caldari optimal bonused hulls work out ok but AC's are still the more versatile weapon system and have similar dps characteristics for smaller (moving) engagements. Two huge problems with Caldari gunboats are that they have immense sigs (a byproduct of their tank), and are comparatively slow. So they take more damage compared to an armor tanker (and have less raw ehp) and struggle to keep up with moving enemies.
Even with these changes, aside from frigates and the lol 100km sniper cormorant, I don't really see a reason to fit hybrids over projectiles |
ConXtionS
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Cascade Imminent
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:21:00 -
[553] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote: the issue at hand is this:
when a gallente ship jumps and catches a minnie ship, it still does about the same dps. the only difference - the minnie ship has started applying 100% of its dps and has been hitting you perfectly during your approach.
What approach? You don't jump a Gallente blasterboat outside of blaster range and try to approach a Minmatar ship. It isn't going to happen because the Minmatar ship is usually fast enough to keep its distance. You jump the blaster boat within blaster range, get it? There is no approach, and thus no issue in your hand.
I guess I have never had that opportunity... It seems that the enemy moves and that jumping right on them is difficult because there is no LEAD in the jump system to account for thier movement. So lets suppose you are in warp for 30 seconds, by the time you get there, you are WELL out of range cuz the mim ship was scooting right alone while you tried to JUMP on top of him.
Now, I will agree, if you find a pilot that is NOT MOVING, and doesnt fire his guns at you, and his tank doesnt turn on, Gallente ships will POUND HIM every time.. Other than that, blasters are difficult at best to fly.
Just my 9 dollars and 43 cents
|
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:26:00 -
[554] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote: the issue at hand is this:
when a gallente ship jumps and catches a minnie ship, it still does about the same dps. the only difference - the minnie ship has started applying 100% of its dps and has been hitting you perfectly during your approach.
What approach? You don't jump a Gallente blasterboat outside of blaster range and try to approach a Minmatar ship. It isn't going to happen because the Minmatar ship is usually fast enough to keep its distance. You jump the blaster boat within blaster range, get it? There is no approach, and thus no issue in your hand.
The more I read your posts, the more I get the impression that you don't fly blaster boats outside of EFT. Sure, it would be nice to be able to land right on top of the target... but how often does that happen? Damn rarely, unless you're talking about 1:1... and how often does that happen outside consensual combat?
When looking at small-fleet (and hell, medium/large fleet) pvp, you're almost never conveniently on top of your target, you're typically 10-30km from the next one. If you're saying blaster ships should just warp out at that point, you're saying that blaster ships aren't currently viable for non-1vs1 pvp... which is sort of the point here.
|
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:28:00 -
[555] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote: the issue at hand is this:
when a gallente ship jumps and catches a minnie ship, it still does about the same dps. the only difference - the minnie ship has started applying 100% of its dps and has been hitting you perfectly during your approach.
What approach? You don't jump a Gallente blasterboat outside of blaster range and try to approach a Minmatar ship. It isn't going to happen because the Minmatar ship is usually fast enough to keep its distance. You jump the blaster boat within blaster range, get it? There is no approach, and thus no issue in your hand.
Oh YEAH, We always find a lot of minmatar ship at 0m/s inspace waiting for a blaster boat. Or it's very easy to land in a fight whith a 5km precision, or target uncloak under 5km at gate... Add that the time to lock the target (cause everybody know the scan res of blasterboat is awesome). Stop joking. |
Quantes IQ
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:35:00 -
[556] - Quote
CRUOR VENATIO wrote:Captain Africa wrote:After reading through most posts here and being a cross trained Gallente pilot myself here is my two cents: Firstly I would hate to see all ships become replicas in terms of their capabilities , God forbid how boring Eve would be, its important to keep the racial differences and FFS stop comparing the Brutix to the Hurricane , every race has there own Rock Stars ! I am double Amarr and I love the look of the ships but I donGÇÖt fly them at all because I donGÇÖt like their capabilities , so I trained Minmatar and Gallente cause of their niches that appeals to me. I think the same should be said for Gallente pilots ...fly the role of the race, if you donGÇÖt like it train for something else. Gallentes role or niche is short range fights (between 0and 10 km) and then the drones. When you are caught in that 10 km range against a blaster boat the chance of getting away or winning the fight should be 20% or less. The 0-10 km is the Gallente Blaster zone. I do believe the damage done by blasters should be significantly more to solidify the Gallente Blaster Zone. The second very obvious issue is how to get your enemy in that zone of 0-10 km. In high sec or gate camping this wouldnGÇÖt be that much of a big deal. So in a way Gallente blaster boats already rule High sec and gate camps ! But with conventional null sec fleets and tactics it causes a problem for the Gallente blaster boats. I love that Eve video GÇ£Real spmething GÇ¥ where the Gallente fleet gets melted into scrap metal by a Amarr fleet and then a Gallente frig pilot breakes away and fly directly towards the Amaarr fleet enabeling the gallente fleet to warp in at 0 and burn the Amarr alive ! ThatGÇÖs what appeals to me ...now whether that is practically possible in 50% of the scenarios , I honestly donGÇÖt know. But I think as far as Blaster boats go we need to look more at tactics to get into that Zone than to try and replicate other races roles. I do believe that Gallente is in a disadvantage here when it comes to null sec warfare. (at the same token it should be very difficult for them to be able to get in that zone to balance things out overall). So here is an idea in its infant stage CCP why not create a drone that you as a blaster boat can warp to ? You release the drone or five drones and send them to the enemy ...once in range you warp to the drone and fleet can warp to you. Of course the drone stats need to be balanced out to make the task of the drone to reach its destination hard and relatively easy for enemy ships to shoot it down. The bigger the gallente fleet the more drones to shoot down by the enemy.....think this might be an option to enable blaster boats to get into blaster zone whether you are a fleet or solo pilot ...and its in line with Gallente culture . Hope my idea can solve some problems for us..or maybe look at a new gallente frig with desent speed and a brutal tank to make that video mentioned above more a reality than anything else. I recon this might resolve a lot of problems ...we need something out of the box - THIS IS OUTSIDE THE BOX ! Its unique and with the right balancing it could work well ...increasing the web range or increasing the amount will nullify anyone in that range ....to overpowered ...Gank up the blaster and have a look at alternatives to get into that death zone Gallente was built for ...Oh and stop naging and bitching at CCP - bunch of wet panties !
Why doesnt this look like a viable option .....It adresses almost all the conserns? |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:50:00 -
[557] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:The only thing going for a Minmatar boat is speed. And, a scram, plus dual webs, puts an end to that particular advantage. Once in close range, a scrammed-double-webbed Minmatar boat is going to struggle to survive long enough to get out of blaster range.
Does it work all of the time? Of course not. That would be just plain silly, too. Why do people not realize gallente ships have a max of 5 midslots? Throwing in dual web is not possible unless you're in a hyperion or domi, and even then that's your full rack. You should not have to dual web a battlecruiser if you REQUIRE it in order to actually hit it. Youre being trolled, dude. These days it's hard to tell :( |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:51:00 -
[558] - Quote
Kumq uat wrote: The SLIGHT increase in DPS of blasters does not come close to making up for all of their downsides (Lack of range, cap sucking weps, Ammo consumption, ammo size, lack of lack of lack of)
Increase the DPS by a lot and you are on to something. If I can get into range and pin them down my blasters should MELT THEIR FACE. I have also seen some pretty sturdy Minny tanks so I don't know what you are on about.
The increase in DPS which comes from the ability to fit a higher grade of blaster is not "slight". For example, upgrading from T2 medium electrons to neutrons is a 60% increase in damage. And a 30% reduction in cap means that a Gallente blaster boat doesn't need a cap booster to remain cap stable, even with a full rack of blasters and magstabs.
Ammo consumption and size is something with which I've never had a problem - with hybrids or projectiles - esp. if I do not need to carry cap booster charges. So, I can't speak to this issue.
I've fit some sturdy Minmatar tanks, as well, but Gallente tanks still have the edge, in most cases. This is due in no small part to the larger structure HP on Gallente ships (For the tier 1 Brutix, 1300 HP more than the tier 2 Hurricane), typically augmented by the 60% across-the-board resists provided by the ever-popular DC II - which incidentally provides an additional 15% boost to armor resists, without a stacking penalty.
Armor tanking a Minmatar ship compromises its speed advantage, and its resists favor EM over Kinetic, often leaving a sizeable 25% hole in Kinetic for hybrid ammo to exploit, since the Explosive resist hole is always plugged first. The shield tanked Minmatar ship always plugs its EM resist hole first, often leaving a sizeable 20% hole in Thermal, again which is exploited by hybrid ammo. By contrast, the Gallente amor tank plugs the Explosive resist hole first, leaving much less exploitable 35% holes in Thermal and Kinetic.
|
Laechyd Eldgorn
draketrain
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:53:00 -
[559] - Quote
blasters itself are not really not so much in need of boost, except maybe tracking -a little-. this is also depending on what ship you fly. i.e. taranis rapes stuff easily, i don't see it having difficulties hitting anything. megathrons seem to burn cruisers down pretty easily too. ETC.
also
major problem with caldari and gallente gunboats is OTHER races and game mechanics than just blasters. Even their speed is somewhat adequate. The point is that it doesn't benefit anyone to go close balls deep to get on tackle range. It's just easier to keep stuff webbed and pointed from far with minmatar and gallente recons and in some cases fast tackle while keeping your dps further away. Not to mention artillery which makes you want to keep at range. (drakefleets aren't the best fleet setup out there tbfh get a clue). And then there's capital and cov ops hotdrops. If you go small gang or solo pvp and tackle something at gate there's always possibility something comes out of nothing with cyno trololo. I strongly believe giving cyno a delay or whatsoever would benefit blaster ships a lot.
and then
just generally boosting some random gallente ships (like helios and lachesis wtf they work just fine) you should also remember caldari blaster boats are painfully slow ass bullshit. Not to mention their dps is crap. What needs boost most is caldari ships with blasters. Not megathron. Instead of boosting random **** in haste (normal ccp style) I'd suggest giving it some thought first and let some dude who knows what he'd doing do it. This is just my personal preference but if some hybrid boats would need just anything I'd start from ships like rokh, hyperion, deimos, eagle and tengu, even deimos is a bit so so, it's just bad because ishtar is imba, who'd want to use deimos.
|
Hex'Caliber
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 16:54:00 -
[560] - Quote
Kraven Drakenovic wrote:What i dont understand is why there hasnt been any change to railgun tracking... 6 mil in rails bs 5 and my mega still cant track for peanuts against MISSION L4 Battle ships... its supposed to be the best tracking vessel in the gallente fleet alaas sadly more damage might be a good idea but not really useful if that high damage salvo just gives him a nice breeze ( by high dmg i mean higher than current) and im left killing battle ships with hammer II's in a turret boat... care for a little explanation on that Ccp. Cause if the mega struggles to mission track the main reason im loathe to fitout a hyperion for missioning least the mega gets a tracking bonus
If you cant track L4 bs's its your sp or fitting at fault, perhaps you should stop trying to orbit them at 5km when using rails. If I can track cruisers upto 15kms away, you sure as **** can. |
|
Desiderya
Tirokkunone
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:01:00 -
[561] - Quote
Looks like a good start.
- Things to think about: Railguns still don't seem to fit in a suitable and used ingame strategy. - T1 hybrid charges might need a look at, too.
- while I agree that especially armor blaster boats (i.e: Gallente) need a buff I think it's a bit weird that they get a speed boost while caldari hybrid hulls supposedly have that covered with the optimal range bonus. Last time I've checked I still seem to see more gallente blaster boats around than caldari ones. What about changing the optimal range bonus to optimal range+falloff? Wouldn't change much for railguns since they have a tiny falloff to start with, but might actually be a real benefit with blaster turrets. All V it's usually a 50% bonus (eagle and harpy aside), which roughly increases blaster range by ~25%. Add in the popular low-range high-damage ammo types and you'll end up with an even smaller advantage, way smaller than the 25% damage from gallente hulls. I'd actually prefer such a change over the 5% better agility. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:01:00 -
[562] - Quote
What we need is For blaster : OFC the capacitor, the 30% less capacitor use seem good. A bit more tracking, i don't think 20% is needed, but at least a 10%. OFC a agility/speed boost, i think the hyperion need a bit more than the actual boost, but for other it seem good for me. But blaster need a failoff boost to :.Don't be usless in fleet fight.Don't have to wait to be in the perfect optimal (very short) to start deal damage, deal at least a bit damage to med range boat. have an utility to the failoff bonus on the astarte and the deimos, and if no failoff bonus, i think ppl will be more happy whith a web efficiency bonus on these ship. OR a damage boost. Not a lot, 10/15%, but if blaster boat have to fight only under 5km, they have to be very efficient, more than they are actually. the idea to have 2 ammo per range whith 80%kin 20%therm and 80%therm 20%kin for exemple was a great idea (for me). And OFC, some ships have to be looked and modified (deimos, hyperion, ect) |
Luscius Uta
HAMMER STAR BLADE Universal Paranoia Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:09:00 -
[563] - Quote
What about atrocious cap usage of large hybrids? It's a real pain when you have to warp out during a level 4 mission in a ship like Rokh just because "capacitor is empty", even when passively tanked. I would reduce the cap usage of large blasters for 25% and 50% for large railguns.
Also I would rather see an increase in optimal, falloff or damage (not in rate of fire as that will again drain the cap quicker) or blasters, rather than increase in tracking speed. Web can help you track better, and there are PvP blasters boats of various sizes (Daredevil, Vigilant, Vindicator) with web bonus, but having about half the range of autocannons of the same size for about 20% more damage (these numbers came out of my head and don't have to be perfectly accurate) still makes those three ships in their respective categories inferior to Dramiel, Cynabal and Machariel. It's the blasters that need more damage and rails that need more tracking, not the other way around. |
Volstruis
Mise en Abyme
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:10:00 -
[564] - Quote
My 2 cents:
I think the key to saving Gallente is giving them stasis webbing as their secondary ewar and the sneaky bonus to that new tier 3 battlecruiser is the perfect testing ground.
It suits the style more so than Minmatar and in combination with the given increases in this devblog it solves the Gallente problem very neatly. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:11:00 -
[565] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:[quote=Kumq uat] And a 30% reduction in cap means that a Gallente blaster boat doesn't need a cap booster to remain cap stable, even with a full rack of blasters and magstabs.
Wrong. You still have to fit and use a MWD, you still have 0 DPS if neutra, some blasterboat have to active tank, you always have a full rack of blaster and magstabs on a blasterboat, so you still have to fit a cap booster, maybe not on mega/deimos/thorax, but on other, yes. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:12:00 -
[566] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote: Oh yes. I used to think that way too, three years ago back when my main was still flying exclusively gallente... Oh and please tell me how do you plan on "getting out" when youre scrammed and being kited from 20km-ish.
Well, a scram is only good for 9-14km (assuming that you are not officer fit), which is still within falloff for medium blasters. Not as much pew, but perhaps enough when combined with drones. An opponent might fit a disrupter instead of a scram - but, given that you also might have fit a MWD instead of a second web, it becomes one of those rock-paper-scissors game. And whoever guesses right tends to win.
Alternatively, ECM drones. A flight of light ECM drones has a fair chance of breaking the targeting lock before the ACs can break your tank, at kiting range.
Otherwise, assuming you are carrying T2 medium drones for damage and no ECM drones, bite the bullet and go down fighting! |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:16:00 -
[567] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:[quote=Nyla Skin] Alternatively, ECM drones. A flight of light ECM drones has a fair chance of breaking the targeting lock before the ACs can break your tank, at kiting range. !
A flight to ECM drone has a fair chance of breaking the targeting before the blaster can break your tank, at optimal range, so i call that a draw. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:18:00 -
[568] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote: I am however a little concerned with a across-the-board buff to fitting that we might see all hybrid ships neglecting smaller tier hybrids if those have no clear advantage.
The advantage of staying with a lower grade gun, with the reduced CPU/PG reqs, means that you can fit a larger tank, or free up a low slot or rig slot for other use, while still dealing the same DPS as you are now. It does not make the hybrids the "I Win" gun, but it does allow for more options in fitting. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:22:00 -
[569] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:\Why do people not realize gallente ships have a max of 5 midslots? Throwing in dual web is not possible unless you're in a hyperion or domi, and even then that's your full rack. A scram + 2 webs = 3 mid slots, not 5. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:23:00 -
[570] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote: Youre being trolled, dude.
That's ok, I'm on vacation this week.... :) |
|
kxdan
UK Corp RAZOR Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:23:00 -
[571] - Quote
Blasters range should not be tampered with , but IMO when someone in a blaster ship gets in optimal they should melt face , and absolutely shred you . because that blaster boat has just committed everything for an almost guaranteed one way trip but when you've got other ships then can do that kind of damage at 20+ km and the blaster boat is only giving out marginally more dps then that ship at 8km which is within web and scram range , which means if you don't take the other guy down , your going down . Blasters damage needs to be buffed ALOT . So much to compensate for the risk the pilot has to take with his ship to get in that kind of range , knowing full well he probably wont come out alive |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:24:00 -
[572] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:\Why do people not realize gallente ships have a max of 5 midslots? Throwing in dual web is not possible unless you're in a hyperion or domi, and even then that's your full rack. A scram + 2 webs = 3 mid slots, not 5.
Let's flight blaster boat whitout cap booster, MWD, sensor boost or ECCM... |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:58:00 -
[573] - Quote
Jeffrey Powel wrote:No, you are tackled and ******. Minmatar boat got ECM drone too, so don't come speak about drone here. Why not? ECM drones are commonly used to break a lock when you want to GTFO, and a valid strategy for either Gallente or Minmatar ships.
Jeffrey Powel wrote:The main issue is : actually, NO, or maybe a BIT more DPS for a LOT LESS range, in medium size gun, a blaster do more DPS than an AC UNDER 4000m ONLY!. Since we're talking about fighting within blaster range, then you make my point - blasters do more damage than ACs. I'm not arguing that blasters have better range than ACs, that's not the point.
Jeffrey Powel wrote:You forget : blaster need capacitor, where AC not A 30% reduction in cap makes a blaster boat cap stable, even with a full rack of neutrons. But, I do like that you can choose damage types with projectile ammo.
Jeffrey Powel wrote:a bit more yes, but more signature, bad slot balance, T2 gallente boat got a BIG explosive hole, where minmatar got perfect shield resist, a loljoke tank bonus, ect, ect. True, for the T2 ships. But, not for the T1 ships. See my other post.
Jeffrey Powel wrote:lol, no, speed is not the only advantage minmatar got. And i want a blasterboat whith 7 med slot too pliz.
Add : a blaster boat have to fight ALWAYS at web/scramble range, so can't run after falcon, or logistics, ect, what a minmatar can do. So no, actually, having 10% more "EFT" DPS and 15% more EHP don't compensante. You are really all over the place with this Falcon, logi stuff, and etc., arent' you? I already responded to your previous post on these topics.
And, if you want a blaster boat with 7 mid slots, try your Falcon. In addition to the 7 mid slots, it actually has a damage bonus to medium hybrids (although I don't know why). Only three (3) turrent hardpoints, but I guess you can't have everything. |
Gynoceros
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 17:59:00 -
[574] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:Gynoceros wrote:These changes are a nice start, but, as others have already said, I don't think you can truly fix blasters as long as armor tanking has such a huge impact on speed and agility.
BTW, while you are looking at T2 ammo, Null needs a buff. Null only gives a 25% boost to effective (optimal + falloff) range while the 50% bonuses to optimal and falloff for Scorch and Barrage, respectively, represent ~40% boost to total optimal + falloff. For example:
Heavy Pulse Laser II (Base): 15km + 5km Heavy Pulse Laser II (Scorch): 22.5km + 5km Total boost to optimal + falloff: 37.5%
425mm AutoCannon II (Base): 3km + 12km 425mm AutoCannon II (Barrage): 3km + 18km Total boost to optimal + falloff: 40%
Null either needs a boost to its range bonuses, or some other bonus to bring it in line with Scorch and Barrage. The comparison is interesting, but not good. Scorch Pulses will always outrange others. That's the way it is. Deal with it. What Null possibly does need, however, is a damage buff.
It's not a question of absolute range. Of course Scorch Pulses are always going to outrange others, especially blaster ships. This is not about wanting to push blasters into Pulse/AutoCannon ranges. The simple fact of the matter is that Null's percentage bonus to range is much smaller than both Scorch and Barrage. Null should be boosted so that its bonuses are in line with the other T2 long range ammo. |
Angeliena
Eye of God Controlled Chaos
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:06:00 -
[575] - Quote
Astor Daeoli wrote:CCP Tallest, that a start.
Have you tested a boost to webs? Why not try a 25% base boost to webs? That would bring t2 webs to 75% seepd still a long way off their original 90% base, but this plus the tracking boost might be enough. No boost to webs leaves blasters broken.
edit.. how about reducing scram range to 6k base for t2 scram?
edit.. how about boosting sensor damps by 25%?
The issues with blasters, as they stand, and even post hybrid boost is that Gallente blaster ships still need help getting close enough, fast enough to their target.
Tallest still needs to do some tweaking to web strength and or web range versus scram range. In the past Gallente ships also used sensor demps to help draw in faster, more agile and longer range minmatar (and other enemy) ships. Damps were nerfed to be useless a long time ago.
It would be an interesting thing to make blaster's into a short range version of arty, eg very low range as they already are but alpha like arty. That might make for fun, provided webs are changed.
|
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:12:00 -
[576] - Quote
Jeffrey Powel wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:[quote=Nyla Skin] Alternatively, ECM drones. A flight of light ECM drones has a fair chance of breaking the targeting lock before the ACs can break your tank, at kiting range. ! A flight to ECM drone has a fair chance of breaking the targeting before the blaster can break your tank, at optimal range, so i call that a draw.
No i couldn't call a draw, because faster ships can move out from distance when ECM drones jamming the blaster ships and he cant use scram or his webifier. 20 seconds with 400-500m/s different speed helping to moving out from blaster critical damage range. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:12:00 -
[577] - Quote
ConXtionS wrote: I guess I have never had that opportunity... It seems that the enemy moves and that jumping right on them is difficult because there is no LEAD in the jump system to account for thier movement. So lets suppose you are in warp for 30 seconds, by the time you get there, you are WELL out of range cuz the mim ship was scooting right alone while you tried to JUMP on top of him.
Now, I will agree, if you find a pilot that is NOT MOVING, and doesnt fire his guns at you, and his tank doesnt turn on, Gallente ships will POUND HIM every time.. Other than that, blasters are difficult at best to fly.
Yep, on all points.
Jumping in *at any range* is difficult if the target is moving. But this isn't a problem just for blaster boats. If you can't jump within scram/disrupter range in your Minmatar kiting boat, your target may just jump out before you can get within scram range, esp. if he's cruising around on MWD.
Blaster boats are difficult to fly - no argument. But, they are not impossible to fly.
And exploiting other pilots' mistakes - like not moving, or capping out because he forgot to shutoff his MWD, or not firing back because he forgot to load ammo, or going AFK - is also part of the game. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:19:00 -
[578] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:\Why do people not realize gallente ships have a max of 5 midslots? Throwing in dual web is not possible unless you're in a hyperion or domi, and even then that's your full rack. A scram + 2 webs = 3 mid slots, not 5.
I'll feed you...
MWD and cap booster. If you think you don't need them you don't PvP much outside of Jita 4-4. |
BinaryData
Segmentum Solar White Noise.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:20:00 -
[579] - Quote
Alright, some positives and negatives about your post. As a Gallente pilot, I'm thrilled to see my race getting some attention for a change.
Somethings you failed to realize is;
1. Damage type. Give us a variety of damage to deal
Incendiary Ammo (Explosive), Electromagnetic Charge (EM), Antimatter can stay but be improved, Thermal can stay but be reworked.
The race itself isn't bad, it's just you guys evolved the other races weaponry to be a more advanced.
It's like comparing EVE's current technological state to the Jovian state. Yes, I did read the entire EVE history. Rails need to be on par with Artillery, blasters need to be on par with Auto Cannons. Until they are, no ones going to use them for PvP.
Side Note: Fix the drones too!
Edit: Even Amarr deals only 2 types. C'mon CCP, wtf? |
David Xavier
The Scope Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:23:00 -
[580] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:ConXtionS wrote: I guess I have never had that opportunity... It seems that the enemy moves and that jumping right on them is difficult because there is no LEAD in the jump system to account for thier movement. So lets suppose you are in warp for 30 seconds, by the time you get there, you are WELL out of range cuz the mim ship was scooting right alone while you tried to JUMP on top of him.
Now, I will agree, if you find a pilot that is NOT MOVING, and doesnt fire his guns at you, and his tank doesnt turn on, Gallente ships will POUND HIM every time.. Other than that, blasters are difficult at best to fly.
Yep, on all points. Jumping in *at any range* is difficult if the target is moving. But this isn't a problem just for blaster boats. If you can't jump within scram/disrupter range in your Minmatar kiting boat, your target may just jump out before you can get within scram range, esp. if he's cruising around on MWD. Blaster boats are difficult to fly - no argument. But, they are not impossible to fly. And exploiting other pilots' mistakes - like not moving, or capping out because he forgot to shutoff his MWD, or not firing back because he forgot to load ammo, or going AFK - is also part of the game.
You see the root of the problem is right there, pilots of other ships only worry about that their prey may run away. In a blaster boat you worry about not being able to do anything. Do not pretend it is fine.
Also what if your target does not make the mistakes? Then you are dead. Hell they can even exploit your reliance.
|
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:26:00 -
[581] - Quote
I guess my thinking is that rails are for "open ocean" fights, not blasters.
Also, 1. Caldari rails should perform better than Gallente rails. 2. Caldari rails should have significantly better dps than Projectiles to offset projectiles insane alpha.
Right now it seems to me that rails are better on a Thorax than a Moa, and that the dps of projectiles (Rupture) is on the same order as a Moa - which is ridiculous since artilleries are specialized for alpha. So, (1) make a Moa worth flying as a rail ship, and (2) the dps of artilleries needs to go down quite a bit to offset their insane alpha. We shouldn't be doing comparisons on dps versus range with projectiles - they should be clearly lower since their alpha is insanely high compared to the other turrets.
The key in the entire hybrids debate is projectiles. They are great at a few things and really, really good at others. Where's the tradeoff? There ought to be a tradeoff between alpha and dps for artillery.
Hopefully the hybrids buff makes blasters better at their intended range, but somehow think that autocannon max damage based on ammo type (and not vulnerable to neuts) will make autocannons still the better option for close range fights. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:26:00 -
[582] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:[quote=ConXtionS] Jumping in *at any range* is difficult if the target is moving. But this isn't a problem just for blaster boats. If you can't jump within scram/disrupter range in your Minmatar kiting boat, your target may just jump out before you can get within scram range, esp. if he's cruising around on MWD.
But there is one difference: The Blasterboat needs to jump into the right range, otherwise he will loose his ship. If the Minmatar doesn't jump into the right range he only looses an oportunity to kill someone. The only bad thing that could happen to the Minmatar is if he accidently jumpes into the Blasterrange. Then he might get problems. But chances aren't that huge.
So whats the difference? Blastership needs to jump successfully or he will loose his ship, AC ship needs to jump successfully or he will loose the opportunity.
In general, with a Blastership you always have to dive deep into the fire and take all risks to be successfull. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:31:00 -
[583] - Quote
Bottom line why I think blasters really still need either added DPS OR added overload DPS: The game desperately needs a new FOTM, contrary to what many people ITT say. That's the only way to get bittervets to resubscribe in larger amounts, people need to get back to good old fashioned theory crafting and EFT warrioring tbh. Thus the blaster boost will need to at least *appear* very major (and tbh the commonly suggested 10-20% dps boost wouldn't actually be major in current TQ gameplay anyway. DPS/EHP/Speedwise the blasterboats will *still* die to a lot of their peers and be hard to use in gangs)
And I'm not asking for my own sake, I am already FOTM proof (most weapon systems and ships maxed, everything below cruiser size)
But I would like to see this game thrive once again, and shaking the balance and game mechanics is the ticket. But definitely, re-iteration on a more frequent basis than what the last few years has happened needs to happen in the future as well, and the FOTMs need to be changing... |
Trainwreck McGee
Ghost Ship Inc.
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:32:00 -
[584] - Quote
still using auto cannons on my Myr
buff the range ffs! CCP Trainwreck - Weekend Custodial Engineer / CCP Necrogoats foot stool |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:37:00 -
[585] - Quote
... Overload damage boost
Come on Tallest, you know you want to... War-Machine |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:41:00 -
[586] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:... Overload damage boostCome on Tallest, you know you want to...
Not emptyquoting! Would bring a nice unique gameplay twist and complement the blaster role very nicely. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:45:00 -
[587] - Quote
Raimo wrote:and the FOTMs need to be changing... Yepp, in reallity every faction would spend huge amounts on developing technologies to get the advantage. Why not make the same real for EVE. Make it an never ending balancing process where the FOTM will change constantly and everybody gets exited what the Amarr answer will be on improved Hybrids and so on.
Fix it up, fix it down, just keep on moving. Everything is better than have for example the Tengu to be the standard ship for PVE and WH activity for ages now ;) |
Alain Kinsella
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:48:00 -
[588] - Quote
How about an update post from any Dev, that this thread *is* being picked through? No need for an actual statement of intend (not from me anyway), just a little something that says you're reading this.
Though I do not use this gun type, one reason many Gallente ship users feel shafted is that *both* of their weapon systems have problems. At least with Caldari, they can fallback to Missiles (not perfect either, but functioning). What does a Gal ship user have to fallback on? Drones.
*snerk*
CCP, if you're going to use lore or PF as part of your argument for Hybrid weapon balancing, then its important to take another look at Drones. Otherwise that argument will not hold water. Even refining their logic would be great right about now.
I may have come here from Myst Online, but that does not make me any less bloodthirsty than the average Eve player.
Just more subtle.
|
Noriko Satomi
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:52:00 -
[589] - Quote
My God, it's full of... win! |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 18:58:00 -
[590] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Jeffrey Powel wrote:The main issue is : actually, NO, or maybe a BIT more DPS for a LOT LESS range, in medium size gun, a blaster do more DPS than an AC UNDER 4000m ONLY!. Since we're talking about fighting within blaster range, then you make my point - blasters do more damage than ACs. I'm not arguing that blasters have better range than ACs, that's not the point.. As i said, a BIT MORE DPS, and can't chose damage, so yes, blaster are better from 0 to 4000m, and AC better from 5km to 60km, and AC ship are faster than blasterboat, so are able to dictate the range, so don't come tell me it's fair and balanced. And yes, the range is the point, cause doing more DPS on EFT don't mean more DPS in the battlefield.
Sizeof Void wrote:Jeffrey Powel wrote: Add : a blaster boat have to fight ALWAYS at web/scramble range, so can't run after falcon, or logistics, ect, what a minmatar can do. So no, actually, having 10% more "EFT" DPS and 15% more EHP don't compensante.
You are really all over the place with this Falcon, logi stuff, and etc., arent' you? I already responded to your previous post on these topics. It's maybe cause falcon, logi, med range ship are all over the place no? You diden't responded anything, you just say "blaster got enought DPS" and i say "10% more DPS in a 5km range when a standard battlefield is on at least 30km range don't balance the fact minmatar boat are more versatile and have more survivability and adaptability in PVP" |
|
Howen
Frontier RunnerS
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:00:00 -
[591] - Quote
Stop dammit matar boost HAIL should not be boosted! |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:04:00 -
[592] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote: Jumping in *at any range* is difficult if the target is moving. But this isn't a problem just for blaster boats. If you can't jump within scram/disrupter range in your Minmatar kiting boat, your target may just jump out before you can get within scram range, esp. if he's cruising around on MWD.
Blaster boats are difficult to fly - no argument. But, they are not impossible to fly.
And exploiting other pilots' mistakes - like not moving, or capping out because he forgot to shutoff his MWD, or not firing back because he forgot to load ammo, or going AFK - is also part of the game.
Standard math. You say a blasterboat have to land under 10km (i say under 5km cause crappy web, the time to lock, ect) and a minmatar boat have to land under 25km, upper to 5km, and got a better scan res. Here is the math : 5km < 20Km
+if the target is at 0m/s, if it's a trap, you are ****** in blasterboat, and not ****** in AC boat. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:04:00 -
[593] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Raimo wrote:and the FOTMs need to be changing... Yepp, in reallity every faction would spend huge amounts on developing technologies to get the advantage. Why not make the same real for EVE. Make it an never ending balancing process where the FOTM will change constantly and everybody gets exited what the Amarr answer will be on improved Hybrids and so on. Fix it up, fix it down, just keep on moving. Everything is better than have for example the Tengu to be the standard ship for PVE and WH activity for ages now ;)
Of course, CCP used to do this, I actually thought it was a very clever way to keep ppl subbed for longer as eventually everyone wanted to train all races due to the changing game balance. It's just that 1-2 years ago they basically stopped doing it... |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:05:00 -
[594] - Quote
Alex Harumichi wrote: The more I read your posts, the more I get the impression that you don't fly blaster boats outside of EFT. Sure, it would be nice to be able to land right on top of the target... but how often does that happen? Damn rarely, unless you're talking about 1:1... and how often does that happen outside consensual combat?
When looking at small-fleet (and hell, medium/large fleet) pvp, you're almost never conveniently on top of your target, you're typically 10-30km from the next one. If you're saying blaster ships should just warp out at that point, you're saying that blaster ships aren't currently viable for non-1vs1 pvp... which is sort of the point here.
Added: you also advocate not fitting MWD (because, apparently, you magically land on top of targets). Not sure what to say here, other than look bewildered. That sort of setup can work in precisely one situation: station camping. Outside that, flying a (non-frigate) blaster boat without MWD is suicide. Which you'd know, if you actually flew the things in real pvp.
Well, first off, consensual 1v1 combat is actually quite common in high sec and folks often seem to prefer to jump right on top of each other. But, if you are one of those who says high sec PvP isn't real PvP, then we'll move along.
As for how often you find a non-moving, non-consensual target... as with many things in Eve, it happens surprisingly more often than you might think. Don't believe me? Well, I cannot do much about that and not much point in arguing about it.
Small fleet - yep, usually moving and hard to jump directly to blaster range, unless the FC is dicking around (which never happens). But, if you are in a small fleet, then you probably have dedicated tacklers, too. And jumping to them, at blaster range, after a target has been tackled, is pretty straightforward. If you are solo, going after a small fleet, well.... what can I say, but good luck?
Medium/large fleet - don't often see much call for blaster boats, true enough, except for the occasional large scale gank. But, except for the random roam, most fleet compositions are standardized, without much variety in ship or weapon types - so, not only blaster boats are ignored here.
I've liked how everyone says that you always have to fit a MWD, a scram, and a web, in order to do PvP. If this were true, CCP should just perma-fit these modules to every ship in the game.
Sarcasm aside, you admit that if you land on target - magickally or whatever - you don't need the MWD. A scram and dual webs are going to pin down most ships, Minmatar or otherwise, unless they use ECM to break the locks. This is a tactic I'd consider against a Minmatar ship, simply because trying to chase one down in a blaster boat is usually futile (or fatal).
If I'm hunting non-Minmatar ships which are slower than my blaster boat, they I'd probably switch back to using a MWD, and a scram, and possibly a web (but maybe not).
I guess that my main point is that there isn't (and should not be) one ship, one weapon, one race, one loadout, to fit all situations. Certainly, some combinations (Minmatar + ACs) have greater flexibility and can be used in a variety of combat situations. Whereas others are more specialized, and are suited for specific types of combat. Blasters and blaster boats fit into the latter category - and trying to adapt them into a general-purpose role doesn't make much sense, when there are already plenty of other options for those roles.
As a few posters have stated earlier, I don't want to turn blasters into ACs and I don't want blasters to become the insta-win of close combat. There has to be variety, and there has to always be risk, or PvP just isn't fun. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:18:00 -
[595] - Quote
I don't want a blaster AC like, or a WTF DPS machine at close range, but whith all the new things in EVE like web nerf, T2 ammo, new scramble, logistic, new ship, AC buff, nos nerf, ect,ect... i really think blaster HAVE TO be buff. A bit more failoff OR a bit more damage, nothing incredible. |
Nyla Skin
Pew Pew Corp Behold.
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:18:00 -
[596] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote: Well, a scram is only good for 9-14km (assuming that you are not officer fit), which is still within falloff for medium blasters. Not as much pew, but perhaps enough when combined with drones. An opponent might fit a disrupter instead of a scram - but, given that you also might have fit a MWD instead of a second web, it becomes one of those rock-paper-scissors game. And whoever guesses right tends to win.
Didnt we start the thread saying that gallente are slow? So by that premise, the opponent will be able to kite you if Gallente are slower than them. And all other races have better mid range weapons.. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:23:00 -
[597] - Quote
Before this patch and after this patch Blasters are still only 27% more useful in 3 situations and Rails are still useless: 1. Station undock games 2. Gate Camps 3. Small fleet vs 1 where the blaster boat warps to 0 when the target is tackled. ( which also mean your missing out on the first 10 seconds of the fight or so, at 800 dps, thats 8000 dps you did not do so the damage when you arrive better make up for that very quickly, becuase AC's and Pulses have been chugging along doing thier damage the whole engagment)
Meanwhile AC's get very a substantial boost to Hail in effect doubling its range increasing their versatility and effectivness.
If this is the final rebalance, what is the best way to move forward? Simple let us take back our skill points in gallente hulls and hybrids and put them where they are useful AC's or Pulses. |
Junky Juke
Delta Division.
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:29:00 -
[598] - Quote
I noticed that you excluded the Myrmidon from the speed buff list and I wonder why! Do you consider the myrmidon a sniping ship? All of us know exactly how to fit a myrm for PVP and all of us know that you MUST use blasters or projectile autocannons! So please consider giving the +5 speed bonus to the myrmidon too. (+10 may be too much because the myrm is not a gunboat)
For the rest I feel very satisfied with your choices, good job guys |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:31:00 -
[599] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote: I'll feed you...
Yum... thank you!
Vincent Gaines wrote: MWD and cap booster. If you think you don't need them you don't PvP much outside of Jita 4-4.
Actually, I've never PvP'ed in Jita 4-4. Is it fun?
Cap booster - you really don't need it, esp. with a 30% reduction in cap use. Even today, with maxed fitting skills (which I do have and recommend to everyone), the Gallente T1 gunboats are actually cap stable, with a full rack of guns. Adding a MWD takes it down a notch, but since you do not run the MWD continuously, and rarely while you are actually firing blasters, it isn't an issue.
MWD.... since the scram buff, it has become a tougher call to auto fit the MWD. In many cases, an AB is a better choice, even for a blaster boat that needs to close range. A scrammed MWD does notthing, after all - whereas an AB can still get you into range, if your opponent is fitting a MWD, and you'v'e got him scrammed, too.
As for the case where you don't need either a MWD or an AB.... speed is relative. If you can land within scram/web range, your MWD and your opponent's MWD would be useless (worse than useless, since they take up a mid-slot and a good chunk of PG), so why fit it at all? Say, now that you've got two webs fitted, so your opponent's speed is going to drop rather dramatically - enough that you'll probably be able to close range at your normal speed (or even halved speed, if he hits you with single web) - except for the Dram, which needs a speed nerf. Certainly, your opponent will not be going anywhere fast, and it will be difficult for him to reach kiting range.
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:39:00 -
[600] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote: As for how often you find a non-moving, non-consensual target... as with many things in Eve, it happens surprisingly more often than you might think. Don't believe me? Well, I cannot do much about that and not much point in arguing about it.
Ahahaha. Get real. Yeah, i've dropped in at zero on a newb a few dozen times in the last six years too. That doesn't mean it's a common occurence at all. Another bum premise.
Sizeof Void wrote: I've liked how everyone says that you always have to fit a MWD, a scram, and a web, in order to do PvP. If this were true, CCP should just perma-fit these modules to every ship in the game.
Obviously you don't need full tackle if your gang or fleet is flush with dedicated tackle, but I think you'll find fleets of that size tend to disqualify blasters (for reasons you've already hinted at). Thusly, in blaster-friendly pvp (very small gang, solo) you do need the trinity.
Sizeof Void wrote: Sarcasm aside, you admit that if you land on target - magickally or whatever - you don't need the MWD. A scram and dual webs are going to pin down most ships, Minmatar or otherwise, unless they use ECM to break the locks. This is a tactic I'd consider against a Minmatar ship, simply because trying to chase one down in a blaster boat is usually futile (or fatal).
Are you actually suggesting no prop mod at all? heh
Sizeof Void wrote: If I'm hunting non-Minmatar ships which are slower than my blaster boat, they I'd probably switch back to using a MWD, and a scram, and possibly a web (but maybe not).
If you're hunting minmatar ships SLOWER than your blaster boat, you're hunting battleships in a cruiser or frigate.
Sizeof Void wrote: I guess that my main point is that there isn't (and should not be) one ship, one weapon, one race, one loadout, to fit all situations. Certainly, some combinations (Minmatar + ACs) have greater flexibility and can be used in a variety of combat situations. Whereas others are more specialized, and are suited for specific types of combat. Blasters and blaster boats fit into the latter category - and trying to adapt them into a general-purpose role doesn't make much sense, when there are already plenty of other options for those roles.
Sure, there shouldn't be one ship for all situations. That's exactly the problem I have with projectiles and minmatar in general. Blasters should have more of a general effective window of opportunitiy. They shouldn't be able to disengage at will, but they should have a reasonable chance to punish ships they tackle, that is supposed to be their forte. |
|
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:44:00 -
[601] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote: Cap booster - you really don't need it, esp. with a 30% reduction in cap use. Even today, with maxed fitting skills (which I do have and recommend to everyone), the Gallente T1 gunboats are actually cap stable, with a full rack of guns. Adding a MWD takes it down a notch, but since you do not run the MWD continuously, and rarely while you are actually firing blasters, it isn't an issue.
Yeah, passive tanked brutix, astarte, hyperion FTW ! You NEED a cap booster on these ship, that all. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
98
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:47:00 -
[602] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:As for how often you find a non-moving, non-consensual target... as with many things in Eve, it happens surprisingly more often than you might think. Don't believe me? Well, I cannot do much about that and not much point in arguing about it.
This is pretty much the problem with your argumentation.
You post perfect examples of perfect fights for every single possibility, yet you talk about high sec and also choose to not take in consideration our opinions just by throwing the rabble "you don't fly them".
Well first most have done and still do but if they choose another path it's just because we figured since a long time all the contrary of what you just argue.
HIGH SEC pvp has nothing in common with low sec or null sec pvp where in some cases like wd's and in hands of experienced pilots with the perfect fleet not being bothered by 20 to 50 red roamers have their niche. But in another race like minmatar/amarr/caldari you can do just has good or even better. I really hope someday you try to fly minmatar ships of all kinds to figure out by yourself how screwed blaster and rail ships are stuck in a very small niche, so tiny it doesn't ever happen in other places than dreams or in forum posts.
Now you're happy with? -fairwell but those who don't expose their opinions based on real facts and problems they encounter each time they fly their ships in other places and situations than perfect ones because those happen 99% the time they play.
This is why some of us, read your posts but don't believe a word of them and might think either you're just trolling or that you live in a perfect world where everything suits you perfectly.
This being said, the majority still thinks AC's/ARTY stuff will still be overpowered, now they get a huge buff to their dmg and tracking. So gallente moves one step forward and minmatar/amarr get 2, very nice sense of balancing stuff.
Without the lasers and projectiles buff I'd say "hummm maybe, first step but maybe", after looking closer to those ammo buffs I just think it's a waste of time and humain ressources to balance stuff this way.
Of course if those are the ones comming on TQ. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:47:00 -
[603] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote: MWD.... since the scram buff, it has become a tougher call to auto fit the MWD. In many cases, an AB is a better choice, even for a blaster boat that needs to close range. A scrammed MWD does notthing, after all - whereas an AB can still get you into range, if your opponent is fitting a MWD, and you'v'e got him scrammed, too.
If, if, if.... if my ibis could fit a DD, ect.... |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
98
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:47:00 -
[604] - Quote
wtf .....ganked FTL again....fracking forum !! |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:52:00 -
[605] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote: I'll feed you...
Yum... thank you! Vincent Gaines wrote: MWD and cap booster. If you think you don't need them you don't PvP much outside of Jita 4-4.
Actually, I've never PvP'ed in Jita 4-4. Is it fun? Cap booster - you really don't need it, esp. with a 30% reduction in cap use. Even today, with maxed fitting skills (which I do have and recommend to everyone), the Gallente T1 gunboats are actually cap stable, with a full rack of guns. Adding a MWD takes it down a notch, but since you do not run the MWD continuously, and rarely while you are actually firing blasters, it isn't an issue. ]MWD.... since the scram buff, it has become a tougher call to auto fit the MWD. In many cases, an AB is a better choice, even for a blaster boat that needs to close range. A scrammed MWD does notthing, after all - whereas an AB can still get you into range, if your opponent is fitting a MWD, and you'v'e got him scrammed, too.
What in the hell are you talking about?
Scrams have a 10km limit. Engagements happen between 15-30km. Outside of FRIGATES you pulse the MWD to get into range. You pulse maybe 2-3 cycles if needed which takes away cap. you fire which takes away cap. you're running a scram/2x webs which takes up cap.
If you're neuted you're dead. Neut a projectile ship and they still have full DPS on you.
[/quote]As for the case where you don't need either a MWD or an AB.... speed is relative. If you can land within scram/web range, your MWD and your opponent's MWD would be useless (worse than useless, since they take up a mid-slot and a good chunk of PG), so why fit it at all? Say, now that you've got two webs fitted, so your opponent's speed is going to drop rather dramatically - enough that you'll probably be able to close range at your normal speed (or even halved speed, if he hits you with single web) - except for the Dram, which needs a speed nerf. Certainly, your opponent will not be going anywhere fast, and it will be difficult for him to reach kiting range. [/quote]
ok, IF.. and IFFFFFF you land in scram/web distance.. IF by that slim...slim chance... I'm talking slimmer than going on candy ******* mountian... then you manage to dual web and scram them, it becomes a DPS battle and you hold the edge. Congrats, you killed an AFK ratter. Oh, wait he's not AFK and he switches to Hail and rapes your face while neuting you. |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:52:00 -
[606] - Quote
Enyo with neutrons + NULL: 212 gun dps @ 4.2+3.9 Wolf with 200's + HAIL: 286 gun dps @ 0.8+9
It's the same story across all gun sizes. With these changes, Minmatar's close-range high-dps ammo outranges Gallente's long-range low-dps ammo. Matari ships are still significantly faster than their Gallente counterparts (Wolf 987 m/s, Enyo around 900 m/s post-patch). Having flown exclusively Gallente since I started this game 18 months ago, I'm comfortable saying that this is a HUGE problem. The tracking and fitting buffs are great, but they don't address the key issue of range.
My suggestion: you're buffing T2 ammo anyway. BUFF NULL AND VOID. Null should outrange Hail by a decent margin if you want any sort of balance. Give it +50% optimal and falloff. That won't be op simply because Null's damage is pretty mediocre. Void is point-blank-range ammo, so it should have a bit more dps (10%) and better tracking (10-15% penalty rather than 25%). The effect: blaster boats dominate at close range and aren't completely impotent at mid ranges. This still wouldn't be an insta-win button because the hulls are still pretty slow, allowing other ships to pull out of Void range.
I honestly think hybrids, Gallente hulls, and armor tanking in general could all use a serious overhaul. Barring that, ammo changes seem like the simplest and most effective solution. And gimme my T2 drone mods! |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 19:54:00 -
[607] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Actually, I've never PvP'ed in Jita 4-4. Is it fun? hell if I know Quote:Cap booster - you really don't need it, esp. with a 30% reduction in cap use. Even today, with maxed fitting skills (which I do have and recommend to everyone), the Gallente T1 gunboats are actually cap stable, with a full rack of guns. Adding a MWD takes it down a notch, but since you do not run the MWD continuously, and rarely while you are actually firing blasters, it isn't an issue.
MWD.... since the scram buff, it has become a tougher call to auto fit the MWD. In many cases, an AB is a better choice, even for a blaster boat that needs to close range. A scrammed MWD does notthing, after all - whereas an AB can still get you into range, if your opponent is fitting a MWD, and you'v'e got him scrammed, too. What in the hell are you talking about? Scrams have a 10km limit. Engagements happen between 15-30km. Outside of FRIGATES you pulse the MWD to get into range. You pulse maybe 2-3 cycles if needed which takes away cap. you fire which takes away cap. you're running a scram/2x webs which takes up even more cap. The cap reduction lets you shoot for 60 seconds opposed to 45. If you're neuted you're dead. Neut a projectile ship and they still have full DPS on you. Quote:As for the case where you don't need either a MWD or an AB.... speed is relative. If you can land within scram/web range, your MWD and your opponent's MWD would be useless (worse than useless, since they take up a mid-slot and a good chunk of PG), so why fit it at all? Say, now that you've got two webs fitted, so your opponent's speed is going to drop rather dramatically - enough that you'll probably be able to close range at your normal speed (or even halved speed, if he hits you with single web) - except for the Dram, which needs a speed nerf. Certainly, your opponent will not be going anywhere fast, and it will be difficult for him to reach kiting range.
ok, IF.. and IFFFFFF you land in scram/web distance.. IF by that slim...slim chance... I'm talking slimmer than going on candy fscking mountian... then you manage to dual web and scram them, it becomes a DPS battle and you hold the edge. Congrats, you killed an AFK ratter. Oh, wait he's not AFK and he switches to Hail and rapes your face while neuting you.
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 20:25:00 -
[608] - Quote
For all those proposing that we drastically increase Gallente hulls to perform around the performance range of Minmatar hulls, just remember what you will be doing to the other two races hulls in the process. There are more ships in the game than just the Brutix and Hurricane (or Enyo and Wolf for that matter), and the big picture must be thought of.
Are Minmatar guns overpowered? Maybe. They are very useful to say the least, and very deadly across a wide engagement spectrum. Are Amarr guns overpowered? Most pilots would say no, and especially those who don't have access to Scorch and/or Aurora ammunition. They work though and get the job done. Railguns (especially with the changes) will do the job they are supposed to quite nicely, and Missiles already do their job. That leaves blasters.
If you give blasters a range envelope that rivals non-T2 Amarr weaponry and/or Autocannons, you will be destroying Amarr weapons in the process. Projectiles will still be useful, but only because they have damage type diversity and take no power to operate. If you buff blaster ships speed and blaster effectiveness, you will create a situation where the only time you would EVER want to fly Amarr would be in heavily armor tanked situations supported by Logistics (trading one broken feature for another). From where I sit, assuming you want this change to use existing game mechanics and be implemented in the next month, there really are only two options available:
1) Go with this incremental upgrade that nudges Blasters towards a more usable platform, still keeping them inferior in the vast majority of situations but pushing them less out of the "Why in the hell would I ever fly blasters" to "Blasters are decent, and good enough especially against weakly tanked ships" category. Basically, what you proposed in this dev blog.
*or*
2) Go with a niche approach where you make Blasters truly excel at something. Give them the nuclear option, the "You get within my targeting envelope and YOU... WILL.... DIE!" Keep Gallente ships where they are at performance wise, or give them small nuanced speed boost (and maybe EHP boost as well!), but also give them the tracking to operate at 500m from target while traversing and give them a power boost that when they can get position, they can do their job. See comments around pages 18-22 for more information!!!
(2) seems the best approach to me, and (1) seems like it would be better than just simply making Gallente a new FOTM. More diversity in ship types and weapon systems will continue to make EVE a combat rich environment, and anything that pushes Blasters to be "just another short range weapon system" with little difference to the alternatives would be borderline criminal. |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 20:35:00 -
[609] - Quote
I don't think anyone is asking for a speed boost, I'm in the group looking for just a teeny web boost and a nice nudge on optimal. Outside of 12-15km you have trouble but once in that web and under those blasters better hit that DCU. |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 20:37:00 -
[610] - Quote
Get rid of the agility buff, It should have been nerfed and the speed increase should be a damn site more than 10m/s. Galle ships should not be able to run rings round their prey, that's the minmitar thing, they should however be able to go really fast in a straight line. If blasters are to remain with such short weapons range then in that range there should be a massive amount of DPS, not 10% more, it should be %30-%50 more. |
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 20:38:00 -
[611] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:I don't think anyone is asking for a speed boost, I'm in the group looking for just a teeny web boost and a nice nudge on optimal. Outside of 12-15km you have trouble but once in that web and under those blasters better hit that DCU. Lets assume blasters can put over 90% of their DPS on target at 15km with a cruiser hull. Give me one reason to fly Amarr that isn't "they have lots of low slots" or "I like lazorz". |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
99
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 20:44:00 -
[612] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:I don't think anyone is asking for a speed boost, I'm in the group looking for just a teeny web boost and a nice nudge on optimal. Outside of 12-15km you have trouble but once in that web and under those blasters better hit that DCU. Lets assume blasters can put over 90% of their DPS on target at 15km with a cruiser hull. Give me one reason to fly Amarr that isn't "they have lots of low slots" or "I like lazorz".
Because I can stil burn your face to the ground with my scorh pulse at 45km (med size) with not much fitting effort, not counting on implants and boosters/fleet boost.
This is why. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 20:45:00 -
[613] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Digital Gaidin wrote:Vincent Gaines wrote:I don't think anyone is asking for a speed boost, I'm in the group looking for just a teeny web boost and a nice nudge on optimal. Outside of 12-15km you have trouble but once in that web and under those blasters better hit that DCU. Lets assume blasters can put over 90% of their DPS on target at 15km with a cruiser hull. Give me one reason to fly Amarr that isn't "they have lots of low slots" or "I like lazorz". Because I can stil burn your face to the ground with my scorh pulse at 45km with not much fitting effort, not counting on implants and boosters/fleet boost. This is why. So Amarr are only workable when you get T2 ammunition? Yep, matches my argument above...
And even then, there would be little point to carry some Imperial Navy Multifrequency with you anymore because you're going to be raped by Hybrid AND Projectiles unless you can somehow maintain range against two races of ships that are faster than you and almost always far more cap-stable...
And with only T1 ammo, there would be little point to even sit in an Amarr ship.
The nuclear option IS the best option, because the balance of power that exists today between other weapon systems does not need to change to accomodate a new and improved blaster weapon system. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 20:55:00 -
[614] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:[quote=Digital Gaidin]
So Amarr are only workable when you get T2 ammunition? Yep, matches my argument above And even then, there would be little point to carry some Imperial Navy Multifrequency with you anymore because you're going to be raped by Hybrid AND Projectiles unless you can somehow maintain range against two races of ships that are faster than you and almost always far more cap-stable... And with only T1 ammo, there would be little point to even sit in an Amarr ship. The nuclear option IS the best option, because the balance of power that exists today between other weapon systems does not need to change to accomodate a new and improved blaster weapon system.
Well, Amarr ships could still be buffed to have very good damage over all ranges and a great tank. The point is, we all know that if they adapt hybrids and Gallente ships, they will have to adapt the other races and ships as a second step. I just hope that CCP will not need 3 years for this second step and in the meantime 3/4 of the players are unsatisfied.
I'm afraid that CCP could go the other way, they will adapt hybrids a little bit, give it more tracking and a bit more damage and leave it so for a few years making 1/4 of the players unsatisfied. |
Alex Harumichi
Gradient Electus Matari
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:00:00 -
[615] - Quote
Amarr are a bit weird atm. They are generally pretty nicely balanced, even maybe on the lower end of the scale -- except Scorch, which is stupidly powerful. And of course everyone uses that, so it's what we need to compare against. Nerf Scorch, then you can start comparing to lasers in other configurations. Not before.
|
Thelron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:00:00 -
[616] - Quote
Thread's moving pretty fast (and forum software is crappy)... don't *think* this is in here yet thogh.
What about making rails the "sniping" weapon less in the OMG range sense, and more in the precision sense? Arty/rails/lasers all have basically the same max range these days with mechanics getting in the way of things, so rails stay in the middle DPS-wise, but get an improved sig resolution compared to arties (lol @ space cannon) and lasers (some crappy explanation about focusing the beams or whatever). Then rail platforms become pretty reliable damage even against ships a class down (especially using the smaller rails... dual guns in that case should possibly have the same stats as what they claim to be, they just somehow split the larger charge). That ends up being their "niche," which yes, makes life even harder on the smaller ships, but both hybrid races already have ways to be really unpleasant for smaller craft to be around (gallente can carry drones for all occasions, and assuming they actually get *fielded* caldari missile hulls can be a complete nightmare (if only in theory) for the next size down, especially cruiser-level with ASMs and such) so the main difference would just be that its guns and not missiles. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:08:00 -
[617] - Quote
Thelron wrote:Thread's moving pretty fast (and forum software is crappy)... don't *think* this is in here yet thogh.
What about making rails the "sniping" weapon less in the OMG range sense, and more in the precision sense? Arty/rails/lasers all have basically the same max range these days with mechanics getting in the way of things, so rails stay in the middle DPS-wise, but get an improved sig resolution compared to arties (lol @ space cannon) and lasers (some crappy explanation about focusing the beams or whatever). Then rail platforms become pretty reliable damage even against ships a class down (especially using the smaller rails... dual guns in that case should possibly have the same stats as what they claim to be, they just somehow split the larger charge). That ends up being their "niche," which yes, makes life even harder on the smaller ships, but both hybrid races already have ways to be really unpleasant for smaller craft to be around (gallente can carry drones for all occasions, and assuming they actually get *fielded* caldari missile hulls can be a complete nightmare (if only in theory) for the next size down, especially cruiser-level with ASMs and such) so the main difference would just be that its guns and not missiles. I hit Dramiels just fine at 80km with my Artillery on a Hurricane.
I'm not sure how you would need more precision than that.
Alex Harumichi wrote:Amarr are a bit weird atm. They are generally pretty nicely balanced, even maybe on the lower end of the scale -- except Scorch, which is stupidly powerful. And of course everyone uses that, so it's what we need to compare against. Nerf Scorch, then you can start comparing to lasers in other configurations. Not before. Scorch are the one saving grace of Pulses right now... the one thing that IS working for Amarr short range weaponry that gives it a real reason to be used on the battlefield over projectiles. Even then, only a few Amarr ships can truly take advantage of the range bonuses of Pulses due to their optimal bonuses, but even the ships that can't remain useful.
I think we can ALL agree that we want a real reason to use Blasters in combat. What some of us want to push for though, is that we don't want the reasons to use other weapon systems to be null and void by the changes put in place. ;) |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:09:00 -
[618] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Actually, I've never PvP'ed in Jita 4-4. Is it fun? hell if I know Well, damn. You get me all excited about someplace new to PvP and now you say you don't know and you can't even tell me more about it?
What about the rest of your posts? Are you just shooting off your mouth about other things you know nothing about here? How can I ever take your comments about blaster boats seriously now? Rage... rage... rage....
Nah, just kidding.... lol. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
99
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:14:00 -
[619] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:So Amarr would only be workable when you get T2 ammunition? Yep, matches my argument above...
Ho because you think T1 blasters are better than T2's? Because you think T2 blasters are uber with T2 ammo?
Flash news, T2 blasters get +10% dmg thw to spec, applys on mod so every one uses it with faction ammo because high range is crap and short range makes you miss/half hit 90% if not more.
So, Amarrian fellah's should be operational with T1 lasers. mkay...
Quote:And even then, there would be little point to carry some Imperial Navy Multifrequency with you anymore because you're going to be raped by Hybrid AND Projectiles unless you can somehow maintain range against two races of ships that are faster than you and almost always far more cap-stable...
The thing is that you have nothing to do under 15km face to blaster ships like it or not is a fact.
Now every one forgot this because blasters actually are crap, you can orbit under 1.5km and web with your Zealot throwing pipe bombs on blaster hulls they will miss you so much is ridiculous, if you always orbit them over this and under 10km then you're doing it wrong. Either go away or go on top of them, that's why blasters suck even at their niche This is actually how you own blasters ships, on top of their head or over 15km, while over 15km I agree your shortest weapon system with multi will do enough dmg, be on top of your oponent and blow it's brains with a giant sledge hammer is the job of blasters NOT LASERS.
Quote:And with only T1 ammo, there would be little point to even sit in an Amarr ship.
It's the point for every single race. You add nothing relevant to the discussion stating this.
Quote:The nuclear option IS the best option, because the balance of power that exists today between other weapon systems does not need to change to accomodate a new and improved blaster weapon system.
So you want them to keep that tiny short range engagement, be slower than you, but still have to run after you forever dreaming they can apply their ubber dmg (lol for uber dmg on ships with natural oversised tank)
Why is it so difficult to understand: shortest range weapon need the speed t get in range and use it's guns.
Can you snipe at 10Miles with a shot gun? |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
275
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:18:00 -
[620] - Quote
People complaining about Amarr being underpowered have clearly never flown in a decent armor fleet before. |
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:25:00 -
[621] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:wtf .....ganked FTL again....fracking forum !! Yeah, it happens. The message editor times out.
Try this:
Type in your post. When you are done, hit Ctrl-A to select all your text, then hit Ctrl-C to copy it to the clipboard. Next, press the PREVIEW button, and all of your changes may be gone. If not, press POST and be happy. If your changes are indeed gone, don't despair yet. If you were editing a new post and the message window is empty, click in the message window and then hit Ctrl-V to paste your new text from the clipboard. If you were editing a quoted post and the message window is not empty, click in the message window, then press Ctrl-A to select everything again, and then Ctrl-V to overwrite with your new text from the clipboard. Press PREVIEW again and confirm that everything was copied correctly. Finally, press POST.
If you get tossed to the GANKED page, after pressing PREVIEW or POST, just click the link to return back and continue with the above steps to recover and post your message. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:28:00 -
[622] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Quote:And with only T1 ammo, there would be little point to even sit in an Amarr ship. It's the point for every single race. You add nothing relevant to the discussion stating this. I have no desire to go around and around with you on these forums. Most of my points were stated about 10 pages back, and I think I said what I wanted to. I will respond to this though.
Artillery - Republic Fleet ammo is used almost exclusively except in Tremor ranges. Tier4 weapon systems maintain effectiveness until you get to 70km+ engagement ranges on Battlecruisers and even further on Battleships for standard fitting configurations. Autocannon - I've always used Republic Fleet in T2 weapons, not sure if T2 was better previously? Beam - Imperial Navy Multi-frequency, Standard, and Aurora Pulse - Imperial Navy Multi-frequency, Standard, and Scorch Standard/Heavy/Cruise Missiles - Caldari Navy Torpedo's - Javalin/Rage
In all but Torpedo's, the T1 faction ammunition IS the way to go for PvP in most situations with the current implementations and balance of power between weapon systems. Some of the changes in this dev blog may change that. When you add a weapon system that pushes high DPS and crowds out the engagement windows of other systems, you quickly invalidate both ammunition types and effectively ship setups/tactics.
Were you to make blasters operate in the 15km+ range (25km with Null? 35km with Null and Tracking Enhancers?) there would be little to no engagement window for Pulses even with Scorch (hard to maintain range for any amount of time), and the switching of range advantages that is an Amarr capability right now would be relatively void as their DPS would be outperformed by blasters for just about every other engagement range. Again, Autocannons are designed to operate in Falloff and are a different beast altogether, held up most notably by their damage types even if their DPS curves fall off reasonably well.
If you make Gallente ships super speedy and have ultra-high DPS, you end up with gank mobiles, and make lots of Minmatar pilots cry. If you make Gallente ships have mid-range engagement protential and ultra-high DPS, you replace Amarr in this category, leaving them without a purpose. Blasters should have their niche. Without it, its just putting all the weapons systems back into the balance blender and ending up with something that comes out broken in the end. |
Kalot Sakaar
CragCO
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:34:00 -
[623] - Quote
CCP you should rename this post to:
"Minmatar FTW."
With the buff you've given the Tech II ammo, projectile weapons become even more overpowered. Why fly much else? Obviously you couldn't get away with a post called that so you nested the really big change with some minor improvements to hybrids to keep the masses focused on the shiny object. Classic bait and switch.
I find it interesting that after the many responses and lots of ideas that this thread has produced no real input from any of the CSM's. This hybrid change must not be important to them? I noticed they were very vocal in CAP ship re-balancing. Why is this?
EVEN more absent is any response from CCP. I've noticed that the Faction Warfare thread has numerous responses back from CCP and has helped guide the dialogue in a productive and exciting way. With some input from CCP this could do the same. If CCP came back and said, hey no way we can make Gallente faster or whatever, then people can stop talking about that and focus on other ideas. The impression I get is that this hybrid/Gallente issue is just too big, too hard and will only be marginal. As it stands right now, with the boost to the ammo, its Minmatar all the way.
And the Talos will be as fail as the Diemost btw.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
99
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:35:00 -
[624] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Quote:And with only T1 ammo, there would be little point to even sit in an Amarr ship. It's the point for every single race. You add nothing relevant to the discussion stating this. I have no desire to go around and around with you on these forums. Most of my points were stated about 10 pages back, and I think I said what I wanted to. I will respond to this though. Artillery - Republic Fleet ammo is used almost exclusively except in Tremor ranges. Tier4 weapon systems maintain effectiveness until you get to 70km+ engagement ranges on Battlecruisers and even further on Battleships for standard fitting configurations. Autocannon - I've always used Republic Fleet in T2 weapons, not sure if T2 was better previously? Beam - Imperial Navy Multi-frequency, Standard, and Aurora Pulse - Imperial Navy Multi-frequency, Standard, and Scorch Standard/Heavy/Cruise Missiles - Caldari Navy Torpedo's - Javalin/Rage In all but Torpedo's, the T1 faction ammunition IS the way to go for PvP in most situations with the current implementations and balance of power between weapon systems. Some of the changes in this dev blog may change that. When you add a weapon system that pushes high DPS and crowds out the engagement windows of other systems, you quickly invalidate both ammunition types and effectively ship setups/tactics. Were you to make blasters operate in the 15km+ range (25km with Null? 35km with Null and Tracking Enhancers?) there would be little to no engagement window for Pulses even with Scorch (hard to maintain range for any amount of time), and the switching of range advantages that is an Amarr capability right now would be relatively void as their DPS would be outperformed by blasters for just about every other engagement range. Again, Autocannons are designed to operate in Falloff and are a different beast altogether, held up most notably by their damage types even if their DPS curves fall off reasonably well. If you make Gallente ships super speedy and have ultra-high DPS, you end up with gank mobiles, and make lots of Minmatar pilots cry. If you make Gallente ships have mid-range engagement protential and ultra-high DPS, you replace Amarr in this category, leaving them without a purpose. Blasters should have their niche. Without it, its just putting all the weapons systems back into the balance blender and ending up with something that comes out broken in the end.
But that's exactly where we are now.
Autocanons and pulse took the blasters place, have better engagement distance thx to so many buffs like tracking falloff or amo like scorch.
So, what must be donne, buff blasters or nerf projectiles and lasers to bring them at their place? |
Berendas
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:36:00 -
[625] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:All these one-line posters going 'Woo!! Thanks CCP! This is awesome!' are going to feel pretty let down when they realise these tweaks basically change nothing.
CCP, this is really disappointing. When the Chaos stats were leaked, you told us that they were WIP and may change. Now, it turns out that they were exactly what you were going to implement (apart from correcting your agility nerf to a buff).
Blaster boats will still be outclassed by every other short-range weapon system. They will still be kited by every other type of ship, with their superior versatility of range. If, by some miracle, a blaster platform gets its target into optimal range, its damage output will still not be enough to make up for all the damage being applied by the opponent while it was getting into range.
Right now, blasters are an all-or-nothing weapon, but their 'all' is really quite pitiful compared to the downsides. So the way to fix them is either to a: give them a truly massive increase in damage output at short range, as a trade-off for all the times they'll be outranged, or b: broaden the envelope where they can be partially effective, while still maintaining their slight advantage up-close.
If you're determined that blasters should remain a very short range weapon, then they really have to do a truckload of damage at that range to make up for all the time getting into range, taking damage while doing none. In other words, blasters should do something like twice the damage of ACs if they get in range. Letting a blaster platform get into optimal range before it's at least half-dead already, should mean almost certain death.
If you don't want to give blasters that kind of insane damage, then you have to give them better range. They shouldn't be iwin buttons at longer ranges, but they desperately need more versatility. No other weapon system has such a small envelope in which to operate, and such a steep decline in effectiveness outside of that sweet spot. So fix it with a rebalancing of ammo types to give blasters viable options at ranges beyond Null.
As for rails, you've designed a weapon system that only gains superiority in ranges where the new scanning mechanics make fighting completely impossible. Just give them another 10% damage boost on top of the one you've given them already, and they might become useful.
It would be nice if CCP posted at all in this thread to reassure all those concerned about this supposed 'rebalancing' that the feedback is actually being taken on board, and being acted on.
This guy nailed it. |
haldon taradi
hauler killers
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:37:00 -
[626] - Quote
Forgive me, I haven't read the entire thread, but a good portion of it. I'm sure this has been mentioned but just want to put it out there again.
Seems to me, the problem with gallente is they don't have the 'legs' to get to targets (especially minnies) out of range of their blasters. We don't want to give them the ability to go kite, that's minmatar. If we change blasters into projectiles that use cap (more falloff), nothing is achieved except having two races that are the same. So, what we need is something like this:
ship bonus: +10% bonus to overheated speed for afterburners and microwarpdrives per skill level.
Don't worry about the exact percentage, that's something that needs to be tuned. Effectively, what you do is give gallente a sort of overdrive so they can burn into range. However, they can't sustain this speed so they either need to grab their target or they're dead in the water. It makes being a minmatar pilot less automatic as well. Do you fit full shield extenders and hope to outrun? Or do you use webs to keep the blasters out of their true optimal? Do you stay at long range and your target warps out, or at warp disrupt range but risk getting run down? Did his MWD really just burn out, or does he have some charges left and is playing dead? These sort of questions would add some more interesting scenarios to solo pvp. In small group pvp, makes for interesting target calling on the side of the opfor.
Of course, the bonus would have to be tuned, as I said above, so that you have a good chance of catching someone trying to warp disrupt you, but not so good that you can run down really long range guys or kiters at medium range.
Blasters could probably also use a SMALL dps bonus, on the order of 10%.
What rails need is more of an open question. These changes are a really good start, but as someone said, there really is no 'long range' pvp, what with probers. Maybe change 'warp to' range to be 250km? |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 21:41:00 -
[627] - Quote
Lekgoa wrote:Enyo with neutrons + NULL: 212 gun dps @ 4.2+3.9 Wolf with 200's + HAIL: 286 gun dps @ 0.8+9
I fully support blaster DPS facemelting buff, straightline speed buff, and Web buff for Gallente hulls. The Gallente ships are so limited atm. NO range buff needed as blasters == spaceshotguns. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 22:00:00 -
[628] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:So, what must be donne, buff blasters or nerf projectiles and lasers to bring them at their place?
Berendas wrote:Daedalus Arcova wrote:Right now, blasters are an all-or-nothing weapon, but their 'all' is really quite pitiful compared to the downsides. So the way to fix them is either to a: give them a truly massive increase in damage output at short range, as a trade-off for all the times they'll be outranged, or b: broaden the envelope where they can be partially effective, while still maintaining their slight advantage up-close.
This guy nailed it. I think I answered your question Tanya with the second quote... which is essentially the exact thing I was trying to propose!
And if you do the extended range, you either increase it's optimal and stomp all over Pulses (where one will remain the best), or increase its falloff and stomp all over projectiles (except Projectiles will still be able to switch damage types!). Insane DPS at point blank is the way to make it a truly unique weapon system and give someone a reason to specifically use it. If going this route, remember they need to have some pretty amazing tracking else some odd behavior will be witnessed (e.g. getting bumped and DPS going to zero). |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
100
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 22:28:00 -
[629] - Quote
I don't care if i can't shoot further than 15km to full dmg with my blasters, I want to blow up their teeth if they let me get in to that range and I want "working" tools to achieve this.
Witch means not missing or half hitting shots, not having total crap tracking at 1km or total crap dps at 15km and have enough tank to support the dps i'll be taking while I try hardly to get in range.
Not asking the moon, not asking to shoot 100% dmg at 25km, there are already laser and projectiles for that (oups my cynabal shoots shortest range atomic ammo at 33, Hail to hail now over this super buff)
The only thing that will ever make me use more often blaster ships is to have tools to catch my preys and melt them seriously, if they're dumb too late, if they're smart they deserve my wreck, not the pain has it is right now where there's almost nothing you can do to catch whatever with a smart fit, all you can do is watch yourself miserably die.
Or be surrounded by big numbers of minmatar friends to help pin down stuff just for you, because they love blasters so much, what would they do without them... |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
47
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 22:28:00 -
[630] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Right now, blasters are an all-or-nothing weapon, but their 'all' is really quite pitiful compared to the downsides. So the way to fix them is either to a: give them a truly massive increase in damage output at short range, as a trade-off for all the times they'll be outranged, or b: broaden the envelope where they can be partially effective, while still maintaining their slight advantage up-close.
I'm not a fan of giving blasters significantly more range, as it just homogenises the weapon systems. That just leaves us with giving blasters the massive damage advantage close up, as a balance to the massive damage advantage that Pulse and ACs have at medium ranges. There are two ways of doing this - a) much more DPS for blasters, or b) much less DPS for ACs and Pulse at blaster range.
Option A sounds easier, but, frankly, the damage boost that would be needed to make blasters worth using, given the very short range and necessity and difficulty of going into web range and bearing in mind that Pulse and ACs would still be able to apply very good DPS at blasters' optimal, would be about 30-50%. That's game-breaking, it's just stupid.
So, IMO, the only way to make blasters worth using is to greatly reduce the applied DPS of Pulse and ACs at blaster-range. This could be achieved by a large cut to the tracking of Pulse and reverting all of the completely unnecessary projectile boosts. |
|
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 22:36:00 -
[631] - Quote
In the thread "are hybrids inherently broken and impossible to fix?" I wrote this:
[quote]That it might be not possible to fix hybrids is an idea i had some time ago as well. Most of the proposed changes would turn hybrids either into lasers, but ones that need ammo and has kinetic damage instead of em, or it would turn them into projectiles, but ones that need cap and have fixed damage types. Thats completely pointless.
Also the "don-¦t change hybrids, change the ships" approach. Yeah, just make them able to close in fast, where they still can-¦t hit cr4p without the agility to lessen the tracking problems. Oh, agility too? Great, but if you want to turn the Gallente into Minmatar that badly, why not simply giving them the projectile weapons? Also blasters aren-¦t the only hybrids. And, well, is it just me or is it really a bad idea to close in as fast as possible with rails? If you just want to change the ships you-¦re better finding some buff that makes both blasters and rails useful. Good luck with that.
Also there is no area left that isn-¦t already covered by either lasers or projectiles. One has good alpha, the other good dps; one good optimal, the other good falloff; one uses cap, the other uses ammo; one has instant reload, the other variable damage types; what should a third turret weapon specialize in without either becoming a copy of an existing weapon, become underpowered (for example using both ammo and cap, have both reload time and fixed damage types...) or overpowered (by giving all the advantages and none of the flaws).
Thats the problem with a weapon system that incorporates every existing flaw possible while rejecting every possible advantage. You simply have nothing to work with when it comes to balancing.
If you want to keep hybrids, you practically have to rework all turret weapon systems completely if you want to end up with something where all of them are balanced.
My solution was simpler: give caldari lasers and gallente projectiles (or gallente lasers and caldari projectiles), adjust the ships stats for the use of those weapon systems and get rid of hybrids. Problem solved.[/qoute]
The proposed changes are proving me right. As it is, hybrids are really impossible to fix.
"You either need less science fiction or more medication."
"Or less medication and more ammo!" |
OOooole
nina k Corp
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 22:43:00 -
[632] - Quote
special function on guns minmatar --without cap-- amar --insta reaload-- caldari-- without cap--
galente have what ?
lol thx Hamox |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 22:46:00 -
[633] - Quote
OOooole wrote:special function on guns minmatar --without cap-- amar --insta reaload--
galente have what ?
They look nice when they shoot :)
Edit: Don't forgett Caldari Missles also without cap... |
draconothese
Independant Celestial Enterprises Pink Fluffy Pussycats
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 22:52:00 -
[634] - Quote
as it is now i fly a proteus with tech 2 neutron blasters fitted with antimatter i can only hit at 5km away and thats with all 4 in gun skills by the time i can get in range im smoking and on fire.
let alone after i can get in range if they get moving just enough i cant hit for nothing
so from what i have been expereincing a damage buff anlong with a big tracking increase would even out blasters a lot.
armor tanks are also part of the issue and some of that comes from the problem of blasters as well from the fact we cant finish off anyone.
after we finaly get in range we have taken to much damage and cant dish enough out to make up for the loss in our tank
now the other thing is getting into range i thought the 90% increase in webs was vary interesting as it is now must ships fit webs so would be a interesting idea to have gallente ships have a web bonus along with all there others
sorry for my bad grammer i have issues with english XD |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:02:00 -
[635] - Quote
draconothese wrote:as it is now i fly a proteus with tech 2 neutron blasters fitted with antimatter i can only hit at 5km away and thats with all 4 in gun skills by the time i can get in range im smoking and on fire.
let alone after i can get in range if they get moving just enough i cant hit for nothing
so from what i have been expereincing a damage buff anlong with a big tracking increase would even out blasters a lot.
armor tanks are also part of the issue and some of that comes from the problem of blasters as well from the fact we cant finish off anyone.
after we finaly get in range we have taken to much damage and cant dish enough out to make up for the loss in our tank
sorry for my bad grammer i have issues with english XD
Haha you should compare the Proteus with a Tengu on level 4 or 5 missions, you will start to cry :) The Tengu hits everything up to 90 km and you can easily fit 3 balistic controls on it to improve the damage. I have just done such a test, I fly Proteus and Tengu, and the Tengu needed 1/3 of the time that I needed to finish a mission with a Proteus. Even if you improve the damage on PVE by 500% the Tengu will be faster becouse you loose so much time to fly to your target, especially if you are in dead space and you can not use MWD. The whole idea about hybrids is just unplayable on PVE, you have the choise between no range or no tracking ;)
But lets get back to topic, it is all about pvp balancing, right? |
Alski
Fringe Nova INC. Ravensgaard
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:03:00 -
[636] - Quote
The proposed changes are nothing to get excited about tbh, and even *IF* Gallente ships were going to get looked at one by one to bring them back into favour vs. other races, the entire weapon system itself adds nothing at all that another race can't do better.
ie: Amarr. Able to change weapon range instantly, damage type more useful than kinetic+thermal. excellent optimal range of pulse. Minmatar. Ability to change damage type, exceptional range from AC's, exceptional alpha from Artys, capless guns Caldari. damage type, capless missile platforms, great ECM boats, railboats are as fail as gallente though. Gallente. ... drones?
Try this, I got bored and knocked it up in 10 minutes off the top of my head, i had a vague stab at ballanceing it but i really don't care, mostly posting it for the luls....
...and to make the point that Gallente weapons need a unique role.
Blasters = Multirole Weapons System.
Neutron Blasters Same as TQ +65% Damage multiplyer, -30% ROF reduction, +30% activation cap useage, point blank alpha king, 35% more damage tha TQ, horrendious unsustainable cap usage.
Ion Blasters Same as TQ +300% Optimal, -25% falloff, +50% Damage multiplier, -30% ROF, +25% activation cap useage. alpha roughy equvilent to neutrons but less dps. Autocannon challanger with less DPS, but with max damage ammo your still hitting for nothing beyond 15km
Electron Blasters Same as TQ +20% Tracking, +30% optimal, +15% ROF, +400% ammo capacity, same optimal as TQ ions but less falloff, actully has a role now.
Damage ammo:
Antimatter. Optimal -50%, combined damage: 48 (as TQ)
Plutonium. Optimal -50%, combined damage: 40, cap usege -20% (the sensible Neutron blaster ship pilot's choice of ammo, makes above OP neuts not much better than TQ)
Urinium. Optimal -50%, combined damage 100, cap useage +270%, ROF -50% (max alpha strike ammo, distroys your cap in just a few vollys)
Compromise ammo:
Thorium. Optimal 0% (as TQ), combined damage: 36 (TQ is 33) -50% cap useage (as TQ)
Lead. Optimal -15%, combined damage: 40. cap useage same as antimatter. -15% tracking speed
Range Ammo
Iridium. Optimal +30% (TQ is 20%), combined damage 32 (TQ is 28) -24% cap (as TQ)
Tungsten. Optimal +30% (TQ is 40%), combined damage 56 (TQ is 24) cap useage same as antimatter, -50% ROF.
Iron. Same as TQ, because :lol.iron:
Reload Times
Small Hybrids Reload time = 2 seconds Medium Hybrids Reload time = 4 seconds Large Hybrids Reload time = 6 seconds
(may not be actually serious ) |
Nyla Skin
Pew Pew Corp Behold.
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:06:00 -
[637] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:
I'm not a fan of giving blasters significantly more range, as it just homogenises the weapon systems.
The other option would be what I have proposed couple times elsewhere, make gallente ships more agile, give them acceleration buff, less mass, something.
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:21:00 -
[638] - Quote
OOooole wrote:special function on guns minmatar --without cap-- amar --insta reaload-- caldari-- without cap-- galente have what ? lol thx Hamox What? You're putting zero cap usage and instant reload in the same paragraph, thus implying these 2 things are of close usefullness? You've got to be kidding. Instant ammo switch (in case of lasers, which can't select damage types) is like 0.05 of what 0 cap usage gives. And I'm not even sure this is not an overestimation. 2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is" 2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?" Nice progress, guys. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:24:00 -
[639] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote: I really hope someday you try to fly minmatar ships of all kinds to figure out by yourself how screwed blaster and rail ships are stuck in a very small niche, so tiny it doesn't ever happen in other places than dreams or in forum posts.
Boo, hoo. I guess you found me out. My tears are flowing.
Anyhoo.... back on topic....
Yeah, blaster and rail ships are in a niche. Autocannon ships are the FOTM. No argurment from me.
Is it absolutely impossible to win with a Gallente blaster boat or rail ship, in any PvP or PvE situation, irregardless of the circumstances? I don't think so, and I tried to explain wny, but If your answer is always "absolutely, effing yes", then the fix is simple - remove blasters and rails from the game, as well as the offending Gallente ships. Ok, done. Next problem.
If you are now saying, "Now wait a minute,dammit, that's not what I said - I just want to buff blasters and rail guns so they do more damage, with faster tracking and more range, and with T2 ammo which is as good as T2 projectiles in all aspects, and I want to make the Gallente ships fast enough to always catch the Minmatar ships in a straight run", then what you really want are autocannons, artillery, lasers, and Minmatar ships - and we've already got them in the game. So, let's just fly Minmatar and Amarr ships - and not fly Gallente ships (except maybe the drone boats). Ok, done. Next problem.
If you are now yelling, "You arsewipe, what we're saying is that we don't want blasters to be like ACs, we want them to be facemelting awesomeness at short ranges with enough speed on the blaster boats so they can actually get close enough to use it", well, then, what you want just so happens to be what CCP apparently wants. Run the new numbers, fit some new loadouts. You'll find that the proposed balance changes do buff blaster damage (by fitting better guns), and do buff Gallente ship velocity to within 5-10m/s of the Minmatar ships (although the Thorax is still a bit short), and do buff agility and blaster tracking, so those silly blaster ships can orbit close at speed and still hit something.
If you are now screaming, "Oh, yeah, right... but, you arrogant plick (Mel Gibson chinese accent here), it is not enough! CCP needs to do even more! Your dreamy EFT fits only work in forums and your own fairytale mind. Real PvP doesn't work that way. You've obviously never flown these ships or used these weapons before, so you don't know what you are talking about."
Well, guess what? Neither have you. With the new stats in place, these are effectively new guns and new ships. The old loadouts, the old strategies and the old experiences are simply obsolete. You get to start over again and see what actually happens when you put these guns and ships in game.
And, if you claim that you already know exactly how these new stats will affect the actual gameplay, in terms of who will come out on top of every PvP encounter - one on one, small gang, medium and large fleets - then, you are either a genius or just a plain ol' hypocrite - living in your own dreams and own forum posts.
Now, I'm not personally claiming to be a genius or a trying to be a hypocrite, so I'm simply advocating folks to take a look at the numbers, use EFT, theorize how certain changes to the ship fitting will affect overall performance, discuss the possibilities with others, and get ready to play around with the actual new guns & ships when they go live... before screaming (yet again) that CCP isn't doing enough.
Too much to ask? Maybe so. I'm so sad. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
48
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:27:00 -
[640] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:Gypsio III wrote:
I'm not a fan of giving blasters significantly more range, as it just homogenises the weapon systems.
The other option would be what I have proposed couple times elsewhere, make gallente ships more agile, give them acceleration buff, less mass, something.
None of these changes would address the fact that ACs would still do similar applied DPS at blaster optimal, while having the advantages of no cap use, much greater falloff and being mounted on faster hulls, giving them the ability to apply DPS without having to expose themselves to the dangers of web range.
I think the only way to make the mobility solution work is to make blasterboats faster than AC-boats. Now, people quite rightly object to that because Minmatar are supposed to be the fastest. That leaves a workaround of switching blaster and AC falloff. People will object to that, too.
Bleh. I can't see any of these changes happening, because they involve nerfs, and CCP is terrified of alienating the playerbase and unleashing threadnoughts. We'll just get some half-arsed "fix" similar to the stuff in the blevdog that completely fails to give blasterboats a reason to exist. |
|
Lord Timelord
GETCO Waterboard
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:31:00 -
[641] - Quote
The TIME has come once and for all for Blaster Boats to get the Bonus that they NEED to counter the webbing, warp scrambler, and other races ammo range issues...
- Gallente Blaster Boat Racial Bonus... MWD SHUTDOWN IMMUNITY to Warp Scramblers!
They would still be 'pointed' by the Warp Scrambler (unable to warp out), BUT their MWD would continue to function! This is a fair trade due to the increased sig radius of getting up close and personal and taking damage to close to weapons range, and KEEP in weapons range!
RP of this is that the Gallente managed to reverse engineer how MWD's didn't work in the Deadspace Pockets, and applied this strategic advantage to their 'front line' war vessels.
THAT my friends... would GREATLY change the battlefield IMHO! |
draconothese
Independant Celestial Enterprises Pink Fluffy Pussycats
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:42:00 -
[642] - Quote
i like that idea of microwarp drives are immune to slowing but lets take that one step more and say they will have a weakness and that would be Heavy Interdictors that would allow it to be balanced means you dont screw with gallente unless you fit a heavy interdictor |
Lord Timelord
GETCO Waterboard
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:50:00 -
[643] - Quote
draconothese wrote:i like that idea of microwarp drives are immune to slowing but lets take that one step more and say they will have a weakness and that would be Heavy Interdictors that would allow it to be balanced means you dont screw with gallente unless you fit a heavy interdictor
Good Idea! Add a 3rd Script for the Heavy Dictor's Infinite Point Disruptor that can disable a MWD! |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:05:00 -
[644] - Quote
I can't tell if you guys are serious or if the trolls have arrived? |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:11:00 -
[645] - Quote
Lord Timelord wrote:- Gallente Blaster Boat Racial Bonus... MWD SHUTDOWN IMMUNITY to Warp Scramblers!
This is too much, if you loose the battle you just activate MWD, fly out of scrambler range and warp of... But what about to make the MWD only 70%-80% immune so you still can fly a bit faster but not too fast? Or what about a new module that allowes you to "jump" for 10 Km every 120 seconds? Something like this could work and you could balance the effect through range, cooldown timer and cap usage so people don't jump all the time. |
Lord Timelord
GETCO Waterboard
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:11:00 -
[646] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:I can't tell if you guys are serious or if the trolls have arrived?
Dead Serious. I've played Gallente for 7 1/2 years. The whole 'double barrel shotgun' blaster playstyle needs some serious loving. The Proposed Changes are not enough... there needs to be an additional "X Factor" to make the playstyle shine differently from the others. |
Kosta Shadow
N7 Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:12:00 -
[647] - Quote
First is a pity that no Russian forum. Now for hybrid instruments, I suggest to do with ammunition as EM. Kinetic. Termal. Explosive Another thing I would add that all the ships Galente bonuses to drones |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
100
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:14:00 -
[648] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:I can't tell if you guys are serious or if the trolls have arrived?
Short ammo range buff, hail.
How much do you think the Cynabal will like it? -and if it's a troll buff comming soon then I just got owned.
Sry forgot about hybrids. |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:14:00 -
[649] - Quote
lol, ganked, double post, and so on... |
Lord Timelord
GETCO Waterboard
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:14:00 -
[650] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Lord Timelord wrote:- Gallente Blaster Boat Racial Bonus... MWD SHUTDOWN IMMUNITY to Warp Scramblers! This is too much, if you loose the battle you just activate MWD, fly out of scrambler range and warp of... But what about to make the MWD only 70%-80% immune so you still can fly a bit faster but not too fast? Or what about a new module that allows you to "jump" for 10 Km every 120 seconds? Something like this could work and you could balance the effect through range, cooldown timer and cap usage so people don't jump all the time.
Webbers would still have an effect on the ship, slowing down it's top speed. Remember that if the blaster boat is in webber range, so is the target ship. If the Blaster Boat wants to disengage from the fight, it's going to be more difficult while still webbed. |
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:18:00 -
[651] - Quote
Lord Timelord wrote:Digital Gaidin wrote:I can't tell if you guys are serious or if the trolls have arrived? Dead Serious. I've played Gallente for 7 1/2 years. The whole 'double barrel shotgun' blaster playstyle needs some serious loving. The Proposed Changes are not enough... there needs to be an additional "X Factor" to make the playstyle shine differently from the others. So you think the way to fix Gallente is to completely give up on Hybrids, give a racial ability to all Gallente ships, and THEN they'll be fixed? What is to stop me from saying screw it to blasters, putting Projectiles on my scram immune ships, and doing whatever the hell I like as nothing can slow me down (you web me, I web you, and burn out of your web range)?
There's 2 good ways to fix blasters, one not-so-good-but-CCP-style way to fix blasters, and a whole bunch of ideas that will never, ever get implemented. Good: Give them a niche that doesn't ruin other ships/weapons Mediocre: Buff them to be better but still inferior Worse: Make them superior to an existing weapon system that works in the same ranges, but is just better, introducing FOTM ... and then everything else that would require far more work than the timeframe to next expansion has to offer, and would introduce game breaking mechanisms that would be exploited... |
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:28:00 -
[652] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Tanya Powers wrote: I really hope someday you try to fly minmatar ships of all kinds to figure out by yourself how screwed blaster and rail ships are stuck in a very small niche, so tiny it doesn't ever happen in other places than dreams or in forum posts.
Boo, hoo. I guess you found me out. My tears are flowing. Anyhoo.... back on topic.... Yeah, blaster and rail ships are in a niche. Autocannon ships are the FOTM. No argurment from me. Is it absolutely impossible to win with a Gallente blaster boat or rail ship, in any PvP or PvE situation, irregardless of the circumstances? I don't think so, and I tried to explain wny, but If your answer is always "absolutely, effing yes", then the fix is simple - remove blasters and rails from the game, as well as the offending Gallente ships. Ok, done. Next problem. If you are now saying, "Now wait a minute,dammit, that's not what I said - I just want to buff blasters and rail guns so they do more damage, with faster tracking and more range, and with T2 ammo which is as good as T2 projectiles in all aspects, and I want to make the Gallente ships fast enough to always catch the Minmatar ships in a straight run", then what you really want are autocannons, artillery, lasers, and Minmatar ships - and we've already got them in the game. So, let's just fly Minmatar and Amarr ships - and not fly Gallente ships (except maybe the drone boats). Ok, done. Next problem.
Nope, i-¦m not saying "Now wait a minute..." because taking blasters and rails out of the game is exactly my proposal, Gallente and Caldari ships are getting lasers or projectiles instead (their stats of course adapted to the new weapons). As you said, problem solved.
The only other alternative would be reworking all turret systems completely, mixing the characteristics new... but that is apparently too much work (and too much whining) for ccp. "You either need less science fiction or more medication."
"Or less medication and more ammo!" |
StuRyan
Assisted Homicide Legion of The Damned.
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:29:00 -
[653] - Quote
onom where is my freakin megathron.....
Thanks for listening.....
looking forward to testing this changes out. |
Lord Timelord
GETCO Waterboard
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:36:00 -
[654] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Lord Timelord wrote:Digital Gaidin wrote:I can't tell if you guys are serious or if the trolls have arrived? Dead Serious. I've played Gallente for 7 1/2 years. The whole 'double barrel shotgun' blaster playstyle needs some serious loving. The Proposed Changes are not enough... there needs to be an additional "X Factor" to make the playstyle shine differently from the others. So you think the way to fix Gallente is to completely give up on Hybrids, give a racial ability to all Gallente ships, and THEN they'll be fixed? What is to stop me from saying screw it to blasters, putting Projectiles on my scram immune ships, and doing whatever the hell I like as nothing can slow me down (you web me, I web you, and burn out of your web range)? There's 2 good ways to fix blasters, one not-so-good-but-CCP-style way to fix blasters, and a whole bunch of ideas that will never, ever get implemented. Good: Give them a niche that doesn't ruin other ships/weapons Mediocre: Buff them to be better but still inferior Worse: Make them superior to an existing weapon system that works in the same ranges, but is just better, introducing FOTM ... and then everything else that would require far more work than the timeframe to next expansion has to offer, and would introduce game breaking mechanisms that would be exploited...
You have a good point that players could fit autocannons or other turret based weapons on such a ship, using it's bonus for different weapons systems. I'm not sure if it's within CCP's programming abilities or not, but could the bounsed ships be programmed to ONLY fit Railguns and Blasters? Kind of like how turrets won't fit on an all missile boat, etc?
I'm brainstorming atm trying to find a way to give the Gallente Blaster Boats what they first had back when this game was started. Good Damage, Good Ramming Capability to keep ships from warping out, and a 'highly active, hands on playstyle' that they used to be.
For Example, it was common long ago to run mostly 'active' modules on blaster boats, with active tanking mods. Almost all of your High/Mid/Low Slots were utilizing active modules. This required a high degree of skill in, cap management, module activation on/off to manage cap (like cap injectors), and now also includes using Heat and Combat Boosters into the mix.
Now most ships gimp their speed/agility with EHP Plated Fits. Maybe the ship could provide a bonus reducing mass to armor plates to keep it's speed up instead? Between all of us we can hammer out a good solution... we just need to keep throwing ideas around! |
Shadow Lord77
Shadow Corporation Confederacy
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 01:23:00 -
[655] - Quote
CCP Guard why do you have a hand-grenade in the dev-log videos?
Also nice work on the hybrid and tech II ammo balancing. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
117
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 01:38:00 -
[656] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Option A sounds easier, but, frankly, the damage boost that would be needed to make blasters worth using, given the very short range and necessity and difficulty of going into web range and bearing in mind that Pulse and ACs would still be able to apply very good DPS at blasters' optimal, would be about 30-50%. That's game-breaking, it's just stupid.
why not cutting range down even further? in my view (L) blasters, even with null loaded shouldn't be able to do jack all damage at 15km, but facemelt everything below that border. If that means that the weapons lose their falloff of a chunk of their optimal, then so be it. atm their damage is simply pitiful, and I think I can talk for quite some people if you do exactly this, coupled of course, with a nudge on the mobility, you can (hopefully) fix blasters. As I've said time and time again in all this mess, blasters, and only blasters, should be the gun that solely relies on the ship for damage projection, having few, if at all, self ability to project their (atm not) ungodly facemelting damage.
boost damage massively, boost tracking moderately, and cut down range accordingly to keep things balanced, while increasing gallente blaster boats mobility.
Gypsio III wrote:We'll just get some half-arsed "fix" similar to the stuff in the blevdog that completely fails to give blasterboats a reason to exist.
and here's something I agree with you. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Ruri Atreides
The Fifth Ace
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 01:57:00 -
[657] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:Much as I love these new changes (I have 2 Gallante toons) CCP need to do something about their insider trading. I love the fact that somehow from a new Dev blog today all the ammo types that have just had boosts anounced were bought up off the market 7 days ago. Players that are involved in the balancing/development ideas should not be able to make huge sums of isk out of inside trading.
People have been speculating on these changes for a lonnnnnng time. Get with the program and maybe you will make some isk too. |
cBOLTSON
Star Frontiers BricK sQuAD.
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 02:01:00 -
[658] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Tristan North wrote:Please specify in that blog if it is an Agility Nerf or Agility Buff. Most players are confused about it. The agility change is an agility buff. The ships will be more agile.
This has me pleased :) Im not an expert but overall these changes seem fair, at least. Can't wait to test it all. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 02:44:00 -
[659] - Quote
Lekgoa wrote:Enyo with neutrons + NULL: 212 gun dps @ 4.2+3.9 Wolf with 200's + HAIL: 286 gun dps @ 0.8+9
It's the same story across all gun sizes. With these changes, Minmatar's close-range high-dps ammo outranges Gallente's long-range low-dps ammo. Matari ships are still significantly faster than their Gallente counterparts (Wolf 987 m/s, Enyo around 900 m/s post-patch). Having flown exclusively Gallente since I started this game 18 months ago, I'm comfortable saying that this is a HUGE problem. The tracking and fitting buffs are great, but they don't address the key issue of range.
My suggestion: you're buffing T2 ammo anyway. BUFF NULL AND VOID. Null should outrange Hail by a decent margin if you want any sort of balance. Give it +50% optimal and falloff. That won't be op simply because Null's damage is pretty mediocre. Void is point-blank-range ammo, so it should have a bit more dps (10%) and better tracking (10-15% penalty rather than 25%). The effect: blaster boats dominate at close range and aren't completely impotent at mid ranges. This still wouldn't be an insta-win button because the hulls are still pretty slow, allowing other ships to pull out of Void range.
I honestly think hybrids, Gallente hulls, and armor tanking in general could all use a serious overhaul. Barring that, ammo changes seem like the simplest and most effective solution. And gimme my T2 drone mods!
Man, null vs hail ??? Maybe you need to compare void vs hail. Null vs barrage. Do not create false comparison with other type ammos.
Enyo with neutrons + void + overheat 312dps+20dps from drone=332 dps Wolf with 200's + HAIL: 286 gun dps (with your numbers) but just that 240 without overheat with one gyro and full lvl5 skill With overheat the real damage is just 276 and not 286.
Wolf with 200's + Barrage 171dps vs Enyo S blaster with long range ammo (null) 212 dps+20 drone dps |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
276
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:04:00 -
[660] - Quote
The guns do need bigger changes as do the ships. |
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:22:00 -
[661] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:[quote=Lekgoa]Enyo with neutrons + NULL: 212 gun dps @ 4.2+3.9 But dont forget the most important things. If CCP dont fix blasters just using this weak fix, they wont change them again for other 3 years long. We waiting so much time for fix, and we need a real solution for blaster fix or we would be waiting for another 3 years. Keep them under pressure. Give to CCP good and useable ideas or they wont fix fine the hybrid guns with this halfway measures.
I got 3,454,119 Skillpoint in hybrid. If CCP just reimburses it, for me that is the fix. Good riddance.
PS: It is sad to see the hybrid community whining all the time when CCP + other communities refuse to support their plight just because they do not want to see hybrid actively participating in pvp.
|
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:27:00 -
[662] - Quote
How can you people not think they need a boost in damage when AC's almost equal them and have much greater range, flexibility, and the option to choose what kind of damage you do? You afraid of having your face melted because you fly like idiots and may not be able to escape if you get in a Gallente death zone?
Sure blasters used to be awesome, back when webs actually held you down and ships didn't get boosts to EHP and didn't have rigs to boost EHP even more and other weapon systems did not do as much damage and ships like the Thorax could launch 7!!!!!! heavy drones!. It is time to make Gallente FEARED again. No range bonuses or this speedy Gallente crap. Just give them pure DPS power and ungodly tracking in their zone and blasters will become what they were again. TOTALHELLDEATH to anyone who gets in range. If Gallente have to get in range of all the neuts, nos, webs, and all dps then give them something that is WORTH IT!
And yes, I have been around and know how to fly pretty much everything in the game. My thoughts are more valuable than yours. Lemme know when you have been playing for six years.
Skills |
Hrett
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:29:00 -
[663] - Quote
Celebris Nexterra wrote:Hmmm, I am now motivated to make a stupidly simple analogy for what you're saying about blasters vs all other weapon types.
You give a person a shotgun (Gallente ship with blasters), you give the opponent an assault rifle (Minmatar ship with AC's). You place these two people in an open field at 50m (any place in space where the ships do not land on top of each other). The person with the shotgun is actually Aretha Franklin, while the person with the AR is Usain Bolt. Usain is able to run at full speed while shooting his gun and never missing, while Aretha "runs" while shooting and never hitting. Sure, it'll take a few hits before she goes down, but she has absolutely no chance to ever hit her target. NOW BOOST HER SPEED BY 10%!!!!
And you tell me this is fair?
This post is win!
Kudos. From hence and anon I shall picture my Brutix nailing its MWD and charging offf into space with mammaries bouncing and shotgun in hand.
R E S P E C T. CCP please help Aretha. That Usain Bolt guy is due for an ass whippin.
|
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:42:00 -
[664] - Quote
BTW, one possible and more finely balanced version of the additional blaster boost would be along the lines of
5-10% +DPS for small blasters (they're best off atm, afterall)
20-30% +DPS for medium blasters (worst off atm)
10-20% +DPS fo large blasters (though lol battleships)
...And/or a massive overload damage boost. ;) |
Hrett
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:46:00 -
[665] - Quote
These are really good starts. Now, two more would fix the problem:
1. Give all Gallente ships their 'class equivilant' plate as internal armor, but reduce some of the mass penalty. E.g. Frigs get an 'internal' 100 or 200mm RTP. Destroyers would get a 400mm, cruisers/BC an 800mm and BS get 1600mm RTP. It would obviate the need to use a lowslot plate to have a decent tank. More damage and speed mods would be used...
2. Give the Gallente ships the ability to use a special-gallente-only web drone. A flight of 5 lights would do a 50% speed reduction. That is the gallente 'anti-kite defense'.
Your hybrid changes fix one part of the problem. These changes fix the other two. 1.No more having to load a speed killing Plate for a tank, and 2. Lets Gallente have a real chance to catch kiting ships that are within their drone control range.
Nom nom nom. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 07:54:00 -
[666] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:Or they could do what I've been saying for 2 pages now that you conveniently left off your list. We don't need *another* versatile weapons system. Artillery can't track worth hell. Autocannons are very versatile. Pulses are only good if you can use Scorch, else hope you are in blaster range. Beams and Railguns suck because they can't get the job done in real 'verse situations. Blasters currently suck but might not soon. Heavy Missiles are great if you have an army of them impacting at the same time, and are under 84km. Short range missiles are decent when used properly.
#1 you do realize EVERYONE worth mentioning can use scorch . . . the game must be balanced for the high SP players not the noobs who cant fit their ships properly. #2 you do realize that mega pulse lasers with a 15 km optimal using conflag have more than twice the range of large neutron blasters using void right? Even if the blasters switch to null ammo they still only reach 11 km right? you realize there is a HUGE difference between 6.8 km and 15 km right?
Digital Gaidin wrote:No one excels in the 10km and under range right now. Blaster ships don't need to be a jack of all trades (like Autocannons, T2 Pulses, or Heavy missiles), but they do need to have a purpose on the battlefield. They might not be good for all situations (few ships are, and usually only completented by support ships), but they should be damn good at something. If you are flying Gallente and need something to mission run in, either MWD after your targets and blast them or use Railguns and deal with fast movers using drones. This is the perfect opportunity for a weapon system to be designed to fill a void, and it would be a shame if it came off mediocre to appeal to the "I want this one system to do everything" crowd.
The problem isnt wanting blasters to be jack of all trades, its wanting blasters to be good at something which right now they are not. Even after the buff they're going to lack the speed to get into range . . .
the hurricane is 700 DPS pretty much always, and the brutix is 1,000 DPS pretty much never . . . which would you choose given the option? |
Sam Bowein
Sense Amid Madness
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 07:57:00 -
[667] - Quote
Some people in this thread said that hybrids currently have nothing to differentiate them from other weapon systems.
THIS is I think the knot of the problem. If hybrids are not made unique somehow, any amount of tweaking range or damage won't solve the problem.
So guys, how could we make hybrids unique ? Here are a few ideas I read:
- they make a special type of damage, always on the lower resist of the target - shotgun effect (target area damage) - delayed weapon damage, they shoot at he end of weapon cycle - much higher overload effect - damage penetration (bleed through to all HP layers)
What else ?
|
Imawuss
United Atheist League
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 08:33:00 -
[668] - Quote
We are not caring about pve right? Just want to check.
I mean Caldari (missiles) is just ok with pvp but its God like for pvp Amarr Lasers and Min projectiles can do well in pve but shine more in pvp. Hybrids are the red headed step child for both pve and pvp.
The proposed changes dont change the pve aspect and only slightly help the pvp aspect while still being inferior. I mean a torp raven can still out DPS a mega with Blasters...
If the proposed changes are the best CCP can come up with fine im over it. Just give us an option to get our SP's we spent in hybrids back and problem solved.
|
Cpt Fina
The Tuskers
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 09:01:00 -
[669] - Quote
Destination SkillQueue wrote:I honestly don't think it matters if the immediate changes are enough or not, since I think that is a secondary concern with balancing in general. Naturally you want to hit that perfect balance on the first try, but missing the mark isn't a huge problem. It only becomes a problem, if you aren't willing to monitor the situation and be prepared to revisit the issue after a short time. What I want is for CCP to keep an eye out for how things change with the buff and be willing to do a second round of changes in a month or two after the initial buff has been released, if their design goals haven't been reached. Whatever you do don't sit around with your collective thumbs up your asses for a year or two before revisiting the issue.
PS. +1 to the idea of creating a clear and distinctive role for blasters and rails and making them excell in those roles, instead of trying to make all weapon systems similar. Every weapon system should have some clear advantage over the others.
Most sensible post in the thread.
1. Balancing should be a process, not a single event. 2. Iron out roles / traits for each race |
Firartix
Sense of Serendipity Echoes of Nowhere
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 09:01:00 -
[670] - Quote
Hey. Stupid question : the devblog talks about a "reduction of the inertia modifier", which is indeed a boost.
Now, if you look @ the leaked change list everyone got around (http://pastebin.com/TkY3rY6q random linkage) what i see instead is an increase of the inertia modifier (so it's a nerf)
.. ... what the hell o_o? |
|
Nyla Skin
Pew Pew Corp Behold.
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 09:29:00 -
[671] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:I can't tell if you guys are serious or if the trolls have arrived?
Well considering the completely contradictory nature of Gallente that CCP has tried to push for years, its no wonder that the discussion gets weird.
I will recap what I see as the crux problems: - rails need damage. - blasters need range - gallente ships need mobility - hybrid t2 ammo needs tracking penalty removed
No matter what you do to 'fix' the problems, were not getting around the fact that the changes make gallente move towards minmatar. Thats no big news, since Gallente are fail at a conceptual level. CCP must debunk the whole concept behind gallente to make it work. Complete revamp would be needed.
You can buff gallente speed and agility all you want, but unless you actually make them faster than minmatar, minmatar ships will still remain superior simply because they have superior range in their guns along with basically equal damage. Fixing Gallente, IT IS UNPOSIBUL |
XIRUSPHERE
In Bacon We Trust
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 09:56:00 -
[672] - Quote
Would love to be positive but seriously guys you're dropping the ball with gallente again. Blasters need a role and need to shine at it, you boosted EHP, you gave us rigs, you fixed lasers and boosted the damage of projectiles. Blasters need more damage, not a smudge, they need to be feared if you get into a gallente kill zone. Please do something to make them shine and have a role again. It's a nice first shot but that was way over the bow. |
JitaPriceChecker2
State War Academy Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:30:00 -
[673] - Quote
Dear DEV.
Which ship would you choose.
Cane with 700dps that can applied constantly or brutix with 1000 dps can pretty much can never be applied ? |
Jazzmyn
Bite me inc. Narwhals Ate My Duck
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:32:00 -
[674] - Quote
How about getting rid of T2 missile signature / explosion radius penalties as well?
I think there was a rumor about T2 missiles getting changed aswell, but thats doesnt seem to be the case. Me sad. |
Hex'Caliber
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:49:00 -
[675] - Quote
Right now I would rather see Gallente drop Hybrids altogether if this is CCP's idea of fixing them.
Remove the ability of other race ships to use anything BUT med/light combat drones and give Gallente the whole bloody lot, with ship bonuses to drone damage, larger drone bays, drone ewar, repair drones etc and, have drone dmg on Gallente ships compare to other race turrets and slow them down some. Finally let everyone reassign all sp spent in turrets and drones, to prevent all the ensuing QQ.
Seriously, anything else at this point is simply shuffling numbers about to create voids for hybrids to fill; let Gallente become THE drone race. Hell I am not a great drone user even though I rolled Gallente, but if it's the only way to define the race instead of being the race that covers minis & amarr blind spots, so be it.
Its time step up and stop the mess that is Gallente, it is long over due; It would re define the race, giving Gallente a place in the scheme of things, while not stepping on toes or becoming over powered requiring a nerf 6 months later. Sure carriers would need a rethink and a shuffle about, but frankly thatGÇÖs no bad thing; hell while I think about it why not drop other race carriers and stop Gallente using Dreads.
Failing that, let everyone reassign all their sp so we can drop Gallente once and for all, and get on with Mini, Cald, and Amar.
|
Nimusa
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:57:00 -
[676] - Quote
i dont get it , after that blog post by hillmar about you guys not listening enough to the community you give us this.
Do you even play your own game? or read your own forums? |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 10:58:00 -
[677] - Quote
Thanks for looking at this balancing CCP Tallest.
TL;DR Rokh and Eagle don't do enough DPS with Blasters
People have already commented on the Rokh and Eagle. I would like to second that request for both to get looked at as individual ship balances.
Given that both of these ships can fit reasonable shield buffer setups for fleets (still not as good as armor buffer however), they could - and frankly should, have a role that allows them to be used with closer range setups and blasters, but they just don't output enough DPS to warrant using them in a shield fleet setup at present, and both remain the ship everyone laughs at if you ever turn up in one, which is a real shame.
I would still like to see both these ships get a DPS increase for Blasters. The only time I have seen an Eagle in real use was casual gate camping in HED and popping pods from range.
Also, the Rokh is quite small in the game for a battleship - indeed, I suspect the new Caldari Battlecruiser (Ascog) will be larger than the Rokh now, so a slightly larger Rokh model would be appreciated too.
Many thanks CCP |
Katabrok First
Apukaray Security
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:01:00 -
[678] - Quote
What about giving originally intended blaster boats a bonus to mwd, and maybe ab, of lets say 25% speed under overload? The ship wouldn't usually be faster than a Minnie ship, but it could be at some moments... What do you say? |
Katabrok First
Apukaray Security
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:05:00 -
[679] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Thanks for looking at this balancing CCP Tallest.
TL;DR Rokh and Eagle don't do enough DPS with Blasters
People have already commented on the Rokh and Eagle. I would like to second that request for both to get looked at as individual ship balances.
Given that both of these ships can fit reasonable shield buffer setups for fleets (still not as good as armor buffer however), they could - and frankly should, have a role that allows them to be used with closer range setups and blasters, but they just don't output enough DPS to warrant using them in a shield fleet setup at present, and both remain the ship everyone laughs at if you ever turn up in one, which is a real shame.
I would still like to see both these ships get a DPS increase for Blasters. The only time I have seen an Eagle in real use was casual gate camping in HED and popping pods from range.
Also, the Rokh is quite small in the game for a battleship - indeed, I suspect the new Caldari Battlecruiser (Ascog) will be larger than the Rokh now, so a slightly larger Rokh model would be appreciated too.
Many thanks CCP
I love the Rokh, but I always felt that it needed a boost to its damage. With the limit to locking range and on grid scanning as it is now, its main advantage (range) is not a big thing anymore. |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:10:00 -
[680] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote: But dont forget the most important things. If CCP dont fix blasters just using this weak fix, they wont change them again for other 3 years long. We waiting so much time for fix, and we need a real solution for blaster fix or we would be waiting for another 3 years. Keep them under pressure. Give to CCP good and useable ideas or they wont fix fine the hybrid guns with this halfway measures.
This is an unsubstantiated statement. Have you been told by CCP that no further adjustments will be made to hybrids for another 3 years?
No, I didn't think so.
Please get your head out of the past and stop judging CCP on what they did or did not do before.
CCP has demonstrated its renewed commitment to to FiS and esp. to addressing long outstanding issues, while downsizing efforts/resources for WiS. This is not just idle rumor or speculation - the publicly released Winter Expansion plans, followup devblogs, and company restructuring completely support this change in CCP's attitude/direction.
Back on topic, we don't need yet another one-time fix, such as the mothership->supercarrier "fix". We need an ongoing cycle of tweaks to stats, in-game evaluation and feedback - in order to achieve an actual balance of various complex game elements and mechanics. |
|
Hex'Caliber
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:11:00 -
[681] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Thanks for looking at this balancing CCP Tallest.
TL;DR Rokh and Eagle don't do enough DPS with Blasters
This change isn't about a couple of marginal caldari boats, it's about fixing an entire race so they have a part to play.
Not one Gallente combat boat stands out in its group as being better than other races in its class. Currently, in every respect Gallente are also ran's, with ships from other races better able to fulfil X role. Hell even the rokh is a far better rail boat than anything Gallente currently have, and its our primary weapons platform.
|
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
130
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:21:00 -
[682] - Quote
so i have a toon with 15mil sp's only in hybrids. i was looking forward to them getting attention. but these changes do not go far enough and certainly do not fix them dps of blasters is still low and dosnt make up for the time taken to get into range. range is still bad.
make them good at 1 thing pls. not **** at 2 things.
so either push there damage up to make up for the getting into range problem or give them more range. also please look at null and void, faction ammo shouldnt be the only option that makes sence, there should be a reason to use t2 ammo above faction
fake edit. fix the ******* forums also, what a pile of **** these are CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Merende Macaco
GONE RETARD BACK LATER Rise - Against
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:47:00 -
[683] - Quote
Dog ate my reply so trying again (fix yer forums dammit).
As a Gallente who flies almost exclusively Minmatar these days i agree with the proposed changes.
I am a proponent of the shotgun blasters role - Keep range very short (better optimal, less falloff) Tracking improvements work Higher damage at close range with a sig radius penalty to avoid being OP against tackle
Blasters should be a pvp thing - mission runners can fit the new improved rails and deploy drones.
Possible gallente ship fixes aside from speed to address the range issue: Increased web or scram range Shorter minimum warp range (but have it increase cap use dramatically) |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:56:00 -
[684] - Quote
Hex'Caliber wrote: This change isn't about a couple of marginal caldari boats, it's about fixing an entire race so they have a part to play.
Not one Gallente combat boat stands out in its group as being better than other races in its class. Currently, in every respect Gallente are also ran's, with ships from other races better able to fulfil X role. Hell even the rokh is a far better rail boat than anything Gallente currently have, and its our primary weapons platform.
Drone boats? The Domi is one of the oldest ships in the game, and still one of the most flexible and difficult-to-anticipate ships in PVP. Even after the speed nerf, the Ishtar is still among the best HACs. And, the Ishkur is one of the best solo PVP boats in the frigate-sized class. I'm pretty certain that many people consider the Vexor and Myrmidon to be very effective in PVP, within their class of ships.
Taranis is also considered, by many, to be the best solo PVP interceptor, even with the currently-gimped blasters.
|
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 11:59:00 -
[685] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote: But dont forget the most important things. If CCP dont fix blasters just using this weak fix, they wont change them again for other 3 years long. We waiting so much time for fix, and we need a real solution for blaster fix or we would be waiting for another 3 years. Keep them under pressure. Give to CCP good and useable ideas or they wont fix fine the hybrid guns with this halfway measures.
This is an unsubstantiated statement. Have you been told by CCP that no further adjustments will be made to hybrids for another 3 years? No, I didn't think so. Please get your head out of the past and stop judging CCP on what they did or did not do before. CCP has demonstrated its renewed commitment to to FiS and esp. to addressing long outstanding issues, while downsizing efforts/resources for WiS. This is not just idle rumor or speculation - the publicly released Winter Expansion plans, followup devblogs, and company restructuring completely support this change in CCP's attitude/direction. Back on topic, we don't need yet another one-time fix, such as the mothership->supercarrier "fix". We need an ongoing cycle of tweaks to stats, in-game evaluation and feedback - in order to achieve an actual balance of various complex game elements and mechanics.
I don't agree
They need to prove they have changed over time, otherwise it is fair judge based on past actions. Doing a 180 on WIS to FIS is NOT proof that they will be doing more frequent balance changes. These changes are so useless they might as well not be there for all the good they will do. We have waited 3 years for balance and THIS is all we get, 20 percent tracking for blasters and 10 percent dps for rails is akin to throwing a piece of bread to a starving man he may shut up for the moment but he will still be hungery after hes done.
If you want a ongoing cycle how bout thus they should do a one time fix now and tone it down little by little if its op. I say thats a hell of alot better than being useless for the next 2-3 years (5-6 years total) while they oh so very slowly buff hybrids
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 12:23:00 -
[686] - Quote
Dunmur wrote: They need to prove they have changed over time, otherwise it is fair judge based on past actions. Doing a 180 on WIS to FIS is NOT proof that they will be doing more frequent balance changes.
This sort of thinking is so lol. The single biggest complaint by players was WIS vs FIS. No one really expected CCP to actually capitulate on this issue, even during the meltdown weekend this summer. But, they did - and now you say that it isn't good enough. lol.
To use your analogy, this is like giving a steak to a starving man, then having him demand steak sauce.
Dunmur wrote:If you want a ongoing cycle how bout thus they should do a one time fix now and tone it down little by little if its op. You must mean like the mothership buff, right? I seem to recall that this issue was the second biggest complaint by players.
Dunmur wrote: I say thats a hell of alot better than being useless for the next 2-3 years (5-6 years total) while they oh so very slowly buff hybrids Tell you what, you pull up a copy of CCP's 2-3 year plan for rebalancing hybrids, and then we can talk. If CCP says that they do not plan to take another look at hybrids for at least another year, then, your argument has merit. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 13:02:00 -
[687] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote: But dont forget the most important things. If CCP dont fix blasters just using this weak fix, they wont change them again for other 3 years long. We waiting so much time for fix, and we need a real solution for blaster fix or we would be waiting for another 3 years. Keep them under pressure. Give to CCP good and useable ideas or they wont fix fine the hybrid guns with this halfway measures.
This is an unsubstantiated statement. Have you been told by CCP that no further adjustments will be made to hybrids for another 3 years? No, I didn't think so. Please get your head out of the past and stop judging CCP on what they did or did not do before. CCP has demonstrated its renewed commitment to to FiS and esp. to addressing long outstanding issues, while downsizing efforts/resources for WiS. This is not just idle rumor or speculation - the publicly released Winter Expansion plans, followup devblogs, and company restructuring completely support this change in CCP's attitude/direction. Back on topic, we don't need yet another one-time fix, such as the mothership->supercarrier "fix". We need an ongoing cycle of tweaks to stats, in-game evaluation and feedback - in order to achieve an actual balance of various complex game elements and mechanics. I don't agree They need to prove they have changed over time, otherwise it is fair judge based on past actions. Doing a 180 on WIS to FIS is NOT proof that they will be doing more frequent balance changes. These changes are so useless they might as well not be there for all the good they will do. We have waited 3 years for balance and THIS is all we get, 20 percent tracking for blasters and 10 percent dps for rails is akin to throwing a piece of bread to a starving man he may shut up for the moment but he will still be hungery after hes done. If you want a ongoing cycle how bout thus they should do a one time fix now and tone it down little by little if its op. I say thats a hell of alot better than being useless for the next 2-3 years (5-6 years total) while they oh so very slowly buff hybrids
Just dont feed Sizeof Void troll.
Anything else. I agree with your answer. We wrote many ideas for hybrid fixes to CCP and to the CSM forum section. Just check Assembly Hall: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1203311 But nothing happend at least 3 years long. Now when finaly CCP trying to fix the hybrid guns , we got a far from a fine solution changes. We know that they want to forget drones, becaused they dont like them and drones create lag in the game, but gallente advantages was the plus drone damage and huge damage from guns from short distances. (so, CCP dont wanna give drone buffs anymore when fix gallente ships, just check supcap drone nerfs or moros changes) Gallente ships lost after speed/web/agility nerf their advantages, need solution to a good balance for them. Year to year guns got + damages from implants, from rigs, but drones got just nerfbat. (hammerhead tracking nerf,bandwith nerf,drone number nerf,myrmi,eos,moros drone nerfs) It's time to compensate the gallente drone nerfs with fine hybrid boost.
When CCP make this fix, we dont want to wait after patch more three years again, when blaster wont working fine. SoonTM wont change their fixes again when their ideas will implement to the game. They will just change then only when those changes too overpowered and need nerf as Supercarriers. They needed more than 1 year for just a supcap balance. So many times we waited, when they create an unbalanced module or ships.
I think, that's better when they create an overpowered hybrid platform and balancing them after 8 months later, than we waiting three years again when they creating a bad or weak changes for hybrid guns now. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
100
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 13:29:00 -
[688] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Dunmur wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote: But dont forget the most important things. If CCP dont fix blasters just using this weak fix, they wont change them again for other 3 years long. We waiting so much time for fix, and we need a real solution for blaster fix or we would be waiting for another 3 years. Keep them under pressure. Give to CCP good and useable ideas or they wont fix fine the hybrid guns with this halfway measures.
This is an unsubstantiated statement. Have you been told by CCP that no further adjustments will be made to hybrids for another 3 years? No, I didn't think so. Please get your head out of the past and stop judging CCP on what they did or did not do before. CCP has demonstrated its renewed commitment to to FiS and esp. to addressing long outstanding issues, while downsizing efforts/resources for WiS. This is not just idle rumor or speculation - the publicly released Winter Expansion plans, followup devblogs, and company restructuring completely support this change in CCP's attitude/direction. Back on topic, we don't need yet another one-time fix, such as the mothership->supercarrier "fix". We need an ongoing cycle of tweaks to stats, in-game evaluation and feedback - in order to achieve an actual balance of various complex game elements and mechanics. I don't agree They need to prove they have changed over time, otherwise it is fair judge based on past actions. Doing a 180 on WIS to FIS is NOT proof that they will be doing more frequent balance changes. These changes are so useless they might as well not be there for all the good they will do. We have waited 3 years for balance and THIS is all we get, 20 percent tracking for blasters and 10 percent dps for rails is akin to throwing a piece of bread to a starving man he may shut up for the moment but he will still be hungery after hes done. If you want a ongoing cycle how bout thus they should do a one time fix now and tone it down little by little if its op. I say thats a hell of alot better than being useless for the next 2-3 years (5-6 years total) while they oh so very slowly buff hybrids Just dont feed Sizeof Void troll with his CCP roadmap or plan idea. We know CCP promised so many things, as walking in station in 2009 year, or new gui in 2010 or other things what is did not come true yet, but passed 3 or 4 years and still happened nothing. So plan-roadmap is nothing. Anything else. I agree with your answer. We wrote many ideas for hybrid fixes to CCP and to the CSM forum section. Just check Assembly Hall: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1203311But nothing happened at least 3 years long. Now when finaly CCP trying to fix the hybrid guns , we got a far from a fine solution changes. We know that they want to forget drones, becaused they dont like them and drones create lag in the game, but gallente advantages was the plus drone damage and huge damage from guns from short distances. (so, CCP dont wanna give drone buffs anymore when fix gallente ships, just check supcap drone nerfs or moros changes) Gallente ships lost after speed/web/agility nerf their advantages, need solution to a good balance for them. Year to year guns got + damages from implants, from rigs, but drones got just nerfbat. (no damage implants, no damage rigs just for sentries,hammerhead tracking nerf,bandwith nerf,drone number nerf,myrmi,eos,moros drone nerfs) It's time to compensate the gallente drone nerfs with fine hybrid boost if they dont want to buff drones and want to forget them. When CCP make this fix, we dont want to wait after patch more three years again, when blaster wont working fine. SoonTM wont change their fixes again when their ideas will implement to the game. They will just change then only when those changes too overpowered and need nerf as Supercarriers which is ruined all 0.0 fights. They needed more than 1 year for just a supcap balance, which made crap their main 0.0battle zones. So many times we waited years, when they created an unbalanced module or ships. We dont want this anymore. I think, that's better when they create an overpowered hybrid platform and balancing them after 8 months later, than we waiting three years again when they creating a bad or weak changes for hybrid guns now.
|
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 13:48:00 -
[689] - Quote
Hex'Caliber wrote:Moonaura wrote:Thanks for looking at this balancing CCP Tallest.
TL;DR Rokh and Eagle don't do enough DPS with Blasters
This change isn't about a couple of marginal caldari boats, it's about fixing an entire race so they have a part to play. Not one Gallente combat boat stands out in its group as being better than other races in its class. Currently, in every respect Gallente are also ran's, with ships from other races better able to fulfil X role. Hell even the rokh is a far better rail boat than anything Gallente currently have, and its our primary weapons platform.
I whole heartily agree it is not about two boats, but overall about bringing Hybrids in line with other weapon types - the changes look solid in that respect. But it is also about balance in EvE overall and my feeling, and the feeling of many others, is even when that is all said and done, both the Rokh and Eagle will still be unused and unloved, even with the Hybrid balances.
Here is the Rokh description:
Quote:Having long suffered the lack of an adequate hybrid platform, the Caldari State's capsule pilots found themselves rejoicing as the Rokh's design specs were released. A fleet vessel if ever there was one, this far-reaching and durable beast is expected to see a great deal of service on battlefields near and far. Special Ability: 10% large hybrid optimal range per level and 5% shield resistance per level
When was the last time the Rokh was considered a fleet vessel? And when did any Caldari pilots rejoice over the Rokh? And it certainly hasn't see a great deal of service on any battlefields near... only occasionally far ;-)
Essentially, The Rokh and the Eagle are one trick ponies, which undermines the whole point of being able to swap fits for different fleet types, and that feels a shame given it's potential tank when setup for close range.
While it is a great snipe boat, granted, in shield gangs, it is now Minmitar shield battleships or bust, given their potential alpha and fitting flexibility, why would a decent FC want Rokh's in his fleet setup? And given that fleets are sniping at the maximum range of Minmitar ships (about a third less than the Rokh's range potential) it's lack of DPS even makes it a poor option for snipe fleets.
As it stands and will continue to be without specific ship blaster DPS bonuses, both the Rokh and Eagle can only really be considered useful for extreme long range and will not see real use outside of snipe fleets. My suggestion is that they get a bonus to Blaster DPS, not Rails, to give them that fitting flexibility, and while they should never be as good at DPS as a Megathron or Minmitar battleships, they should at least be a bit closer, while still comparably weaker due to the range bonus they receive.
And while I agree that Gallente aren't setup for Rail guns particularly well, they also have a unique advantage in very high DPS, excellent tracking bonuses, unique race drone bonuses, faster speed, and larger buffer tank potential, which is why you still see so many Megathrons in use, even with the current state of Hybrids. I get what you are saying about Megathron's not being ideal for Rail sniping, but they are at least pretty close to Minmitar artillery in terms of DPS and range. |
Ponder Yonder
Fleet of the Damned Legion of The Damned.
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 14:01:00 -
[690] - Quote
The buffs are good, but the main remaining issue with blasterboats is the fact that they cannot get into range to apply the superiour damage.
My solution: Gallente blasterboats get a racial bonus of 10% per level to the overheating bonus of MWD and AB.
Thus, a max skilled pilot will get a 75% speed boost from overheating a MWD or AB, rather than the normal 50%. This gives the ship the chance to get into range, but not much more.
Affected ships are dedicated blasterboats only: Incursus Enyo Catalyst Thorax Deimos Brutix Megathron
This is a good solution, because: 1. It only applies to blaster boats 2. It fixes a specific problem, without breaking racial roles, i.e. Minmater will still be faster in a straight line over time. 3. It provides a bonus, speed, for the risk of burning the mod. 4. It rewards skilled players 5. It makes blasterboats very dangerous but requires trained and skilled pilots. |
|
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 14:22:00 -
[691] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Got through about 1/2 of the posts here, and I think many of you need to get on EFT and try some new loadouts, using the new stats, before you rant and rave about the proposed rebalancing.
The real problem with Gallente ships has been the combined high PG reqs of both hybrid guns and armor plates, which made balancing gank vs tank difficult. In addition, after the previous across-the-board speed rebalancing, Gallente ships were running a bit too slow, due to the speed/agility penalty from armor plates and armor rigs.
The proposed reduction in PG reqs for hybrid guns means that many of the Gallente blaster ships will be able to fit a full rack of higher grade guns, while maintaining the same amount of tank - ie. instead of electron blasters, you can now fit ion blasters. This is equivalent to giving a massive damage buff to both blasters and railguns. For example, upgrading from T2 medium electron blasters to T2 medium ion blasters, is a 60% boost in damage. Railguns get an additional 10% damage buff, on top of the ability fo upgrade to higher grade guns - from the old T2 350mm rails to the new T2 425mm rails, we're talking about a 50% boost in damage. So, what are you complaining about?
However, the PG reduction is even better than a simple damage buff. Why? Because you can also opt to keep the same gank, and use the extra PG to upgrade your tank instead.
For example, the PG req for an 400mm plate is 30, whereas the PG req for an 800mm plate is 200. In many cases, due to the high PG of the hybrid guns, Gallente ships have been a bit short on PG for the 800mm plate and thus forced to use the 400mm plate. Now, with the lower PG of the guns, you will be able to upgrade many ships to the 800mm plate, which has 100% more armor HP than the 400mm plate. So, armor tanking gets a bit of love out of this hybrid rebalance, too.
But, we don't stop here. Currently, if you want a beefer armor tank, you might opt to use two (2) 400mm plates, or one (1) 800mm plate + RC/PDS module or ACR rig (to boost the PG). The reduction of the gun PG reqs means that you will be able to fit the single 800mm plate, without a PG upgrade, to get the identical tank. This effectively frees up either a low slot or a rig slot - which can be used for an additional damage mod/rig, a tanking mod/rig, or even a speed mod/rig. Yeah, baby!
Next, the buff to Gallente ship max velocity/agility helps to take the edge off of the armor plate penalty. For example, the Incursus (new speed 344 m/s) is now only a hair slower than the Rifter (353 m/s), and likely more agile. With faster tracking blasters, the upgraded Incursus just might be the new FOTM for solo PvP frigs... hmm.
And, finally, the substantial reduction in cap use of the hybrid guns reduces the need for cap rechargers, cap boosters, nosferatus, and CCC rigs. Again, we''re talking about freeing up mod/rig slots which can be used to improve gank, tank, or speed.
I've had this reply open for 2 days but only now have the time to reply to it. I just want to avoid anyone blindly buying these statements (even though it was back on page 15)...
First of all, Neutrons may be harder to fit at the moment, but they aren't unused (far from it actually). So anything you suggest about getting a damage advantage from the PG (or even CPU) requirement reduction only applies to fits that don't already use them. Those may be able to fit a bit more tank though, which blaster boats obviously need very much to survive long enough to even start causing any damage in the first place.
For top-grade rails the fitting requirements are (were?) much more of an issue in my opinion, but those do NOT provide a significant damage advantage over their smaller versions. Their distinguishing attribute is range! Higher grade rails have significantly higher optimals, but the damage barely increases. This is especially true if you include the reload time, since the internal ammo storage halves for every step up in size/grade. This leaves (T2) small and medium rails with about 1 dps advantage (around 3-5%) for each bigger size on a hybrid bonused platform, and about 2 dps for larges (about 5%). Even with the 10% damage increase this is really FAR away from the 50% increase you suggested. More like 15% at best...
Which brings me to my next point: the reduced fitting requirements will not allow you to go up a grade for your guns. It puts the new requirements close to the midpoint between the current requirements. Let's look at T2 425s and large T2 neutrons requirements after the change in relation to the current requirements of 425s and 350s, neutrons and ions respectively. Currently: 425s: 2625 350s: 1969 L-T2 Neutrons: 2363 L-T2 Ions: 1838 New values according to the blog: 425s @ 2310; T2 Neutron @ 2079 This puts the new 425s PG requirement on the 52% spot between current 425s and 250, neutrons land on 46% between current neutrons and ion. Similar results for the next step down, calculate it yourself :P So any fit that doesn't use the highest grade guns already can now do so only by reducing the tank (if it had that much free PG it was a really REALLY bad fit).
All the statements about how the fitting changes can be used to improve the tank are of course valid, even though I haven't checked any numbers myself... |
OOooole
nina k Corp
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 14:48:00 -
[692] - Quote
aahaha I understand ccp now this is just scared helloween joke real balance coming in 2015
|
Vrykolakasis
Trinity Operations Aurora Irae
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 15:04:00 -
[693] - Quote
Looking at a lot of the responses since I last checked in, I'm still not sure I agree that these changes are insufficient. I think it would be interesting for blasters to gain even more dps at extremely close range, but I'm not positive that it's necessary. We have to remember that this buff isn't about making hybrids AWESOMEtm, but about making them approximately as useful (different roles, etc assumed) as the other weapon types.
I still do agree, however, that the Rokh and Hyperion, especially the Rokh, should become useful ships. The other r3 battleships are really great, and they're made by the duct tape kings and a bunch of bible thumpers. You'd think the State and the Federation could do better, if not at least equally as good. |
thoth rothschild
Aliastra Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 15:08:00 -
[694] - Quote
After 35 pages i really think the only possible solution will be
=> minmatar with hybrids and gallente with projectiles.
The minmatar playstile (Shield&Speed) would perfetly fit with blasters. fast in hit hard and hide again. While gallente (Armor Tank) definitly likes the control of aerea from projectiles. Easy fix.
Whoever had the idea giving short range weapons to armor tanks should be hung, drawned and quartered. To be fair, in the beginning Ships like the Thorax had a function like the cynaball nowadays but that is long long in the past.... |
OOooole
nina k Corp
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 15:17:00 -
[695] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:After 35 pages i really think the only possible solution will be .
ccp must start using memory augementation - improved cybernetic subprocessor - improved social adaptation chip - improved |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 15:49:00 -
[696] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:After 35 pages i really think the only possible solution will be
=> minmatar with hybrids and gallente with projectiles.
The minmatar playstile (Shield&Speed) would perfetly fit with blasters. fast in hit hard and hide again. While gallente (Armor Tank) definitly likes the control of aerea from projectiles. Easy fix.
Whoever had the idea giving short range weapons to armor tanks should be hung, drawned and quartered. To be fair, in the beginning Ships like the Thorax had a function like the cynaball nowadays but that is long long in the past....
Really, that's so off the wall outlandish it actually makes sense. Shame it's one of those things that should have been done from inception and would be hard to change so much lore and content.
I present your post with a like, sir. |
Grady Eltoren
Aviation Professionals for EVE
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 15:53:00 -
[697] - Quote
Jane Idoka wrote:Celebris Nexterra wrote:Hmmm, I am now motivated to make a stupidly simple analogy for what you're saying about blasters vs all other weapon types.
You give a person a shotgun (Gallente ship with blasters), you give the opponent an assault rifle (Minmatar ship with AC's). You place these two people in an open field at 50m (any place in space where the ships do not land on top of each other). The person with the shotgun is actually Aretha Franklin, while the person with the AR is Usain Bolt. Usain is able to run at full speed while shooting his gun and never missing, while Aretha "runs" while shooting and never hitting. Sure, it'll take a few hits before she goes down, but she has absolutely no chance to ever hit her target. NOW BOOST HER SPEED BY 10%!!!!
And you tell me this is fair? +1 for giving Aretha Franklin a shotgun...
Quoted because it is one of the funniest things I have read in days. Epic win :) |
Dravidshky
Falling Outside The Normal Moral Constraints
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 15:58:00 -
[698] - Quote
Max Von Sydow wrote:Reilly Duvolle wrote: Now, a speedboost certainly is a good start, but you cant make Gallente ships faster than minmatar without breaking the lore.
Then let them make new lore, cant they say that some gallente engineer have designed a new superior propulsion system for gallente ships that make them faster but less agile than minmatar ships?
Exactly my opinion. |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:16:00 -
[699] - Quote
Tracking and fitting were issues but so is damage. Currently blasters have barely any DPS edge over AC without the range, versatility, capless firing, ammo size, customizable damage, escapability, etc that AC's and Minmatar have.
As a blaster pilot you plow into the center of the battle and commit yourself 100% and subject yourself to all the scrams, drones, neuts, webs, etc. The blasters have pitiful range. They barely out damage AC's even in the optimal of that range and because of the range they need to be in they require tons more tracking. Add to the fact that blasters in their hay day were also combined with things like a Thorax launching 7 heavy drones. Then CCP buffed HP on all ship hulls. Then came rigs which buffed EHP even more. Then the other weapon systems got boosted. Blasters no longer were TOTALHELLDEATH if you came in range of them.
The changes are a first step but they are hardly enough. There needs to be not a range bonus or speed but a massive DPS and tracking boost to make them acceptable for the risk of flying straight into a fleet and committing 100% to the battle with no hope of escape. That is the Gallente way and IT WILL BE GLORIOUS! |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:26:00 -
[700] - Quote
I'm still reading the thread, and am currently back on page 25, but I'd rather post now than wait till I've read it all and nobody cares anymore.
Many propose or support giving Gallente blaster boats a web bonus (I suppose implemented as a role bonus). I'm against this, as it would be sort of special treatment to compensate for earlier changes (web nerf) instead of adapting the ships/guns to the way things are now. It might be hard to explain to newer players (who haven't been around for the web nerf) why only Gallente boats get a role bonus and nobody else. Also don't forget that the web nerf came together with the "scram turn off mwd"-change. This would mean nobody who came close to any such ship would have a chance in hell to get away. Close range should be their domain, but there still needs to be a counter (like using speed mods to be able to escape). Currently anyone basically can escape without needing to have such a counter, which also isn't a solution of course. But otherwise webs and afterburners pretty much balance each other out (1 web negates 1 ab), they wouldn't then. Also keep in mind that the web bonus only helps if they can get into web range in the first place.
As I've already hinted in an earlier post there is another way to approach this while keeping the racial features and distinctions. That would be to make Gallente noticeably faster than even Minmatar, but reduce (nerf) agility also significantly. This would mean they are faster in a straight line but much slower once they start orbiting (or turning in general). Minmatar are still the agile and nimble flyers, can orbit Gallente but have a much harder time keeping out of blaster range (or getting away). It's still possible but requires pilot skill and maneuvers, not just pressing "orbit" and not just flying away in a straight line (Gallente will just catch up). This could be balanced so that current ships still orbit and approx. the same speed they do now (with no speed/agility mods) at or near the optimal range of their blasters. This is to ensure smaller ships become neither cannon fodder nor unhittable for bigger ships. Obviously this would
A reversal in railgun damage progression has also been proposed. Make the closer ranged variants capable of higher DPS than the long ranged ones. This is in fact a great idea and would give the smaller rails an additional advantage other than just a bit of tracking.
A lot of the discussion is focused on PVP, but please don't completely forget PVE in the process. Yea the racial differences are more apparent during PVP, but that doesn't mean all is well in the PVE world. The proposed changes do pretty much nothing to address the insufficiencies there. There has already been a great post about the usability (or lack there of) for Gallente ships in incursions here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=286154#post286154 Let me paraphrase: Proteus is the only T3 that is basically useless in incursions and wormholes. Medium Pulses and ACs can hit Sanshas in Vanguards, medium Blasters can't really. Not even close. Not even with Null. Even battleships (or marauders) have trouble compared to pulses and ACs and effectively need to use Null. I don't even know how to fix this without breaking the Gallente fighting style, which sadly isn't an option for these encounters. The only thing I can think of is to reduce the orbiting distance of the sanshas/sleepers. Maybe give a significant boost to Null? As has been pointed out many times it provides far smaller bonuses (in %) than the equivalent laser/projectile ammo, leading to an even smaller increase (since the range is much shorter to begin with). |
|
|
CCP Tallest
C C P C C P Alliance
151
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:43:00 -
[701] - Quote
Hello all. Sorry for not replying more. I've been a tad busy. We're trying to get these changes to SISI so we can start playing around with them. Once this is on SISI, please post more feedback in the test server feedback forums.
Here are some responses to your concerns.
"Hail boost is too much" Possibly... I might change it to a 25% falloff penalty instead of removing it completely.
"Tech II ammo needs to be rethought" I agree that we need to take a better look at this. What I did was just reacting to some issues that I found to be very obvious when comparing them to tech 1 ammo.
"Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible... etc." Keep posting specific examples. We can't fix everything at once, but hearing the problems from you helps us prioritize what needs to be looked at.
"Reduce hybrid ammo size" That's a pretty good idea. I'll look into it.
"Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
"This isn't enough, we need bigger boosts to damage" That is entirely possible but I believe this is a good starting point. |
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:45:00 -
[702] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Hello all. Sorry for not replying more. I've been a tad busy. We're trying to get these changes to SISI so we can start playing around with them. Once this is on SISI, please post more feedback in the test server feedback forums.
Here are some responses to your concerns.
"Hail boost is too much" Possibly... I might change it to a 25% falloff penalty instead of removing it completely.
"Tech II ammo needs to be rethought" I agree that we need to take a better look at this. What I did was just reacting to some issues that I found to be very obvious when comparing them to tech 1 ammo.
"Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible... etc." Keep posting specific examples. We can't fix everything at once, but hearing the problems from you helps us prioritize what needs to be looked at.
"Reduce hybrid ammo size" That's a pretty good idea. I'll look into it.
"Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
"This isn't enough, we need bigger boosts to damage" That is entirely possible but I believe this is a good starting point. First, thanks for a response and reading our thoughts!!!
To respond directly to your response though...
Tech 2 changes are nice (across the board), even if they will shake up the LP Store markets some as some of the faction ammo will become second rate. Those aren't really a hybrid fix though, as has already been pointed out, as much as a general "T2 Ammo kinda sucks" fix for many of the non-used ammo types.
Regarding specific ship setups and how they can be fixed, these are directly related the core philosophy behind the use of blasters, and this is exactly what people are complaining about. Blasters need a reason to be used, as their lack of weapon damage types combined with range, capacitor usage, and targeted hulls just do not make a compelling reason to use them over something else. You can fix armor rigs, nudge gallente ships faster, etc... but there needs to be a compelling reason to use a weapon system for it to actually be used.,,, else you end up nudging and nudging until the system just becomes overpowered and invalidates other weapon systems.
The nuclear option COMBINED with enough tracking to fight at 500m with traversal seems like the one niche where Blasters can excel. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:50:00 -
[703] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Hungry Eyes wrote: the issue at hand is this:
when a gallente ship jumps and catches a minnie ship, it still does about the same dps. the only difference - the minnie ship has started applying 100% of its dps and has been hitting you perfectly during your approach.
What approach? You don't jump a Gallente blasterboat outside of blaster range and try to approach a Minmatar ship. It isn't going to happen because the Minmatar ship is usually fast enough to keep its distance. You jump the blaster boat within blaster range, get it? There is no approach, and thus no issue in your hand.
You keep repeating this argument. Are you aware that it also means that every Gallente blaster ship will always (!!!) lose if it is surprised or simply not the aggressor? This does happen, you know? What kind of a 'balance' is it, if you are pretty much guaranteed to lose unless you are the aggressor? Sure, aggressing should give you an advantage, but it can't be the main deciding factor in pretty much all battles including a certain race...
Nyla Skin wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:is void t2 ammo also getting fixed so it would be worth using? edit, you seamed to have missed it from this line in the blog Quote:Javelin, Gleam and Quake (all sizes): Removed tracking speed penalty, added 25% tracking speed bonus Yea I find it psychologically fascinating how CCP still keeps buffing the OTHER ammo in the dev blog thats supposed to be about buffing gallente.. The ammo thats in the most need of fixing is the T2 BLASTER ammo, CCP. Remove the tracking penalty. Pretty please.
For gods sake, the Long-Range T2 ammo has needed this change for a long time now. It's only fair to apply it to all weapon systems equally. This does of course require that blaster and rail balancing works and the weapon systems do end up balanced! If that is the case it would be unfair to have only applied this change to one of them...
I do agree on the tracking penalty for close range T2 ammo as well though. Doesn't have to be turned into a bonus, but should at least not make tracking more difficult than it already is at those ranges... |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 16:59:00 -
[704] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: "Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible... etc." Keep posting specific examples. We can't fix everything at once, but hearing the problems from you helps us prioritize what needs to be looked at.
I approve of getting it to SISSI to start testing it. With regards to specifics for the Deimos:
It's too large. 160m signature radius as it slowly charges it's enemies means not much will fail to hit it. It's too slow. It goes half the speed of a Vagabond and has 25% of the range. Comparing ships and even the Eagle goes faster then it - before you add plates or anything else. It's bonuses should be looked at. With less cap going to the guns is the MWD bonus all that neccesary? I would suggest either the much maligned web bonus OR an overheat bonus OR a warp core stab point ala blockade runners for leaving when the stars don't line up. |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:03:00 -
[705] - Quote
Hi Tallest, thanks for your reply!
CCP Tallest wrote:
"Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
"This isn't enough, we need bigger boosts to damage" That is entirely possible but I believe this is a good starting point.
The 2 most important points from your post, IMHO. Please do consider these carefully before going live (and ok, Hail too)
(And do consider overload damage buff combined with a very small straight damage boost as a possibility for blasters, too. But they really do need more damage) |
thoth rothschild
Aliastra Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:04:00 -
[706] - Quote
The best deimos fix is already on tranquility. it is called adrestia. perfect blaster boat, perfect hybrid fix |
Raimo
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:04:00 -
[707] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote: I approve of getting it to SISSI to start testing it. With regards to specifics for the Deimos:
It's too large. 160m signature radius as it slowly charges it's enemies means not much will fail to hit it. It's too slow. It goes half the speed of a Vagabond and has 25% of the range. Comparing ships and even the Eagle goes faster then it - before you add plates or anything else. It's bonuses should be looked at. With less cap going to the guns is the MWD bonus all that neccesary? I would suggest either the much maligned web bonus OR an overheat bonus OR a warp core stab point ala blockade runners for leaving when the stars don't line up.
While the MWD bonus is actually somewhat good, I'd *love* to see the bolded bit implemented instead! :D |
Capqu
Nyan Cat Academy Extract.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:07:00 -
[708] - Quote
as a taranis pilot
+20% tracking
-30% cap use
-12% power grid on light neutron blasters (what most people use)
+3 CPU
-5% inertia
sounds a bit good
also could you please add some speed to some/one of the proteus subsystems most commonly used with blasters? and please remove the tracking penalty on void, it's still not better than faction antimatter in most cases for that reason |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:07:00 -
[709] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:CCP Tallest wrote:Hello all. Sorry for not replying more. I've been a tad busy. We're trying to get these changes to SISI so we can start playing around with them. Once this is on SISI, please post more feedback in the test server feedback forums.
Here are some responses to your concerns.
"Hail boost is too much" Possibly... I might change it to a 25% falloff penalty instead of removing it completely.
"Tech II ammo needs to be rethought" I agree that we need to take a better look at this. What I did was just reacting to some issues that I found to be very obvious when comparing them to tech 1 ammo.
"Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible... etc." Keep posting specific examples. We can't fix everything at once, but hearing the problems from you helps us prioritize what needs to be looked at.
"Reduce hybrid ammo size" That's a pretty good idea. I'll look into it.
"Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
"This isn't enough, we need bigger boosts to damage" That is entirely possible but I believe this is a good starting point. First, thanks for a response and reading our thoughts!!! To respond directly to your response though... Tech 2 changes are nice (across the board), even if they will shake up the LP Store markets some as a few faction ammo types will become second rate. Those aren't really a hybrid fix though, as has already been pointed out, as much as a general "T2 Ammo kinda sucks" fix for many of the non-used ammo types. Regarding specific ship setups and how they can be fixed, these are directly related to the core philosophy behind the use of blasters, and this is exactly what people are complaining about. Blasters need a reason to be used, as their lack of weapon damage types combined with range, capacitor usage, and targeted hulls (slow, fat, armor tanked, and lacking the slots to make for a manageable tank/buffer while increasing damage via magstabs to the levels necessary) just do not make a compelling reason to use them over something else. You can fix armor rigs, nudge gallente ships faster, etc... but there needs to be a compelling reason to use a weapon system for it to actually be used.,,, else you end up nudging and nudging until the system just becomes overpowered and invalidates other weapon systems. The nuclear option COMBINED with enough tracking to fight at 500m with traversal seems like the one niche where Blasters can excel. Crank up the damage to where Gallente ships can really excel in ONE area better than all others, and a real use will exist (even if it isn't what many are looking for). Today I have real reasons to fly Amarr, Minmatar, and Caldari hulls in a variety of combat situations. For those of us who love Gallente, all we ask is that Gallente get given a real reason to fly their hulls (beyond running missions in drone boats). Preferably, whatever it is that is provided, some of us would ask that it doesn't invalidate the existing paradigms that are in place for other races' ships and their corresponding weapon systems.
This times a million
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:09:00 -
[710] - Quote
As a follow-up to some ship buffing for Gallente...
Proteus - Give them a setup that allows 125m3 drone bandwidth Hyperion - Increase drone bandwidth to 125m3 Myrmidon - Increase drone bandwidth to 100m3 (or 125m3) Eos - Increase drone bandwidth to 100m3 (or 125m3)
All blaster boats - Either increase speed and keep them as is, or keep their speed as is and increase base armor hitpoints. Their mixed slot layout provides some real versatility in PvP, but they don't have the survivability to be anything but glass cannons unless they gimp their DPS for a half-assed tank.
Drones - A few nudges in the direction of making drones faster and more survivable on the battlefield will increase Gallente desirability in a range of engagements. Give Heavy Drones the speed of Medium drones, and medium drones half way between where they are now and light drones. Bump up the usefullness of combat utility drones, and possibly consider introducing smaller web drones into the game. This change, while affecting everyone, will have the most benefit towards Gallente hulls.
For Hybrids - Ask yourself on any blaster boat why I should fit blasters instead of Projectiles. If you find yourself still wanting to fit Autocannons (so your tank is cap stable, so your range is extended, so you can switch damage types, etc.) than something is still wrong with blasters. The ship I think about the most for this is the Myrmidon. I can put a nice tank on this and use my drone DPS as the primary weapon system, but Projectiles are just gravy on top while Hybrids complicate the setup.
For the good things... * Hybrid ammo size reduction is good! * Hybrid capacitor reduction needed is good! * Hybrid tracking increases are good, however I question whether they will make fighting between 500-2500m any better than it is today * Gallente ship speed increases - maybe, though seems superficial unless they can really break speed against their desired targets (assuming those targets aren't nanoed as the Gallente doesn't have the slots to increase his speed). I still think keeping them where they are and increasing base armor would be better with a nuclear option for blasters, but I'm a little biased towards that solution as I think its a really good idea
If you want to bring Projectiles down to earth, you could take the nerfing idea of making all their ammo types Explosive/Kinetic only. If you don't go the nuclear option for blasters, it might help level the playing field - especially in the very close range bracket where blasters operate! |
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
101
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:12:00 -
[711] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:The best deimos fix is already on tranquility. it is called adrestia. perfect blaster boat, perfect hybrid fix
now compare adrestia with deimos and it will be clear why it is perfect.
I WANT THAT !!
I'd need a full hangar of those s'il vous plait CCP
Would like to use magic stuff, blow it and get blown all teeth out yelling "BAAANZAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII"
|
MiliasColds
Infinite Improbability Inc RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:23:00 -
[712] - Quote
huh, the adrestia is the perfect fix, it has the nuclear, the snatch and grab, the speed, and the tracking to use the guns.... + some range bonus to actually have reach. i mean THAT is a blaster platform :) |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
245
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:30:00 -
[713] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:The best deimos fix is already on tranquility. it is called adrestia. perfect blaster boat, perfect hybrid fix
now compare adrestia with deimos and it will be clear why it is perfect. Either that or the proteus. 900dps with 180k EHP, or 400dps with 400k ehp. Basically those two ships are the only blaster ships ive flown that work. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
101
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:44:00 -
[714] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:The best deimos fix is already on tranquility. it is called adrestia. perfect blaster boat, perfect hybrid fix
now compare adrestia with deimos and it will be clear why it is perfect. Either that or the proteus. 900dps with 180k EHP, or 400dps with 400k ehp. Basically those two ships are the only blaster ships ive flown that work.
I'd like an extra mid slot instead of utility high "power core multiplier" sub: +1 low +1 mid (instead of high and not being hard point)
So I could fit mwd+scram+web+cap inj instead of having to choose between either web either scram, the point on pvp with this little babe is to have the long range scram so no way I change the sub ! -but you can add an extra mid.
|
thoth rothschild
Aliastra Gallente Federation
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 17:45:00 -
[715] - Quote
I've got another example for poor gallente ships astarte & eos.
astarte is underwhelimg compared to it's sister the sleipnir. less range, less speed, less tank, eos is the poorest gallente shiip of all. information link is least used, 75m-¦ dronewidth is without any words, speed and tank is both poor.
|
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:00:00 -
[716] - Quote
I'm sure that someone already noted it here (did not read whole thread). My vision of blaster boats: they are agile (definitely need boost), high dps (maybe current dps is ok) and tracking ships (definitely need boost).
Agility, not speed, is important for blaster ships. if you can gain speed faster than other that mean you can faster get it scramble/web range or leave disruptor range. Leave speed for minmatar. Agility is for gallente. 5% better agility is not enough.
Your speed gain should be like dash, and you should have change moving vector fast. Much quicker that other ships, because it's "all or nothing" type.
Important tactical range is from 0 up to 24km. Taking in mind scramble and web range it becomes 10-24km that blaster boats has troubles in. Using agility and acceleration blaster boat should cover ~8-10km of that range faster than minmatar or amar ships.
That way minmatar pilot knows that he has ~4 km safe range if he gets to close, agile ship could burs towards him and scram/web him. In other side galente pilots know that if minmatar are to far for burst (minmatar would get his speed before galente could reach him) he always could use his agility, turn fast and burst in opposite direction and get out of disruptor range.
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:05:00 -
[717] - Quote
Shmekla wrote:I'm sure that someone already noted it here (did not read whole thread). My vision of blaster boats: they are agile (definitely need boost), high dps (maybe current dps is ok) and tracking ships (definitely need boost).
Agility, not speed, is important for blaster ships. if you can gain speed faster than other that mean you can faster get it scramble/web range or leave disruptor range. Leave speed for minmatar. Agility is for gallente. 5% better agility is not enough.
Your speed gain should be like dash, and you should have change moving vector fast. Much quicker that other ships, because it's "all or nothing" type.
Important tactical range is from 0 up to 24km. Taking in mind scramble and web range it becomes 10-24km that blaster boats has troubles in. Using agility and acceleration blaster boat should cover ~8-10km of that range faster than minmatar or amar ships.
That way minmatar pilot knows that he has ~4 km safe range if he gets to close, agile ship could burs towards him and scram/web him. In other side galente pilots know that if minmatar are to far for burst (minmatar would get his speed before galente could reach him) he always could use his agility, turn fast and burst in opposite direction and get out of disruptor range.
It doesn't fix the Hybrid issue, but I think this is an elegant solution to the Gallente ship issue.
+1 from me, though that dash potential would need to be significant and would also need to be counterbalanced with chasing potential, as Gallente ships would align crazy fast when pursuing or running between systems. |
Lee Vanden
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:17:00 -
[718] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:The best deimos fix is already on tranquility. it is called adrestia. perfect blaster boat, perfect hybrid fix
now compare adrestia with deimos and it will be clear why it is perfect. Either that or the proteus. 900dps with 180k EHP, or 400dps with 400k ehp. Basically those two ships are the only blaster ships ive flown that work. I'd like an extra mid slot instead of utility high "power core multiplier" sub: +1 low +1 mid (instead of high and not being hard point) So I could fit mwd+scram+web+cap inj instead of having to choose between either web either scram, the point on pvp with this little babe is to have the long range scram so no way I change the sub ! -but you can add an extra mid.
The diemos needs an extra midslot too, for the same reason. |
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:18:00 -
[719] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote: It doesn't fix the Hybrid issue, but I think this is an elegant solution to the Gallente ship issue.
+1 from me, though that dash potential would need to be significant and would also need to be counterbalanced with chasing potential, as Gallente ships would align crazy fast when pursuing or running between systems... especially if used in a pack where Lachesis could be your tacklers and ships fit a nano setup with a shield buffer so they can free up their lows for gank and speed (with even more insane align potential).
I agree that hybrids needs boost, especially in tracking (you coming close full speed at your prey and start orbiting and what... you can not track, it's double edge sword- you must use speed to get close and because of these same speed you can not track... ) i just want to point maybe new concept to blaster boats. There should be ~20 km dead zone around blaster boat because of their agility.
|
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:22:00 -
[720] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:I've got another example for poor gallente ships astarte & eos.
astarte is underwhelimg compared to it's sister the sleipnir. less range, less speed, less tank, eos is the poorest gallente shiip of all. information link is least used, 75m-¦ dronewidth is without any words, speed and tank is both poor.
Sorry Guys i will use bold font now.
The problem is not the weapon system but the combination of ship hulls and weapon system.
Seconded. The Eos is very hard to justify in a fleet because of the hull issue, compared to it's command ship counterparts which add real value:
- Given that the Information Warfare bonuses are mainly beneficial to enhance ECM boats and help counter ECCM - it is best used in Shield Gangs
- Sadly - It isn't a shield based ship, although it can fit one, it won't win any 'Prettiest Pig at the Faire' awards.
- It's excellent drone capability was nerfed badly so that the ship no longer had any real advantages to offer. Should allowed to run 5 large drones like before.
My suggestion is give the Eos +1 medium slot to allow for hull type changes, and a more shield HP, and an increase in drone bandwidth to make it attractive to fly once more.
In the same way, the Claymore also needs armor tank balancing in the same way Eos needs shield balancing as both of these command ships sort of awkwardly sit in the twilight zone.
Indeed, you could argue that bumping the Claymore low slots by +1 and increasing it's armor HP would go some way to offering some of the speed boost that Blaster pilots are asking for in this thread, while making the Claymore tactically relevant in an armor gang. The only way to fly a Claymore at present in Armor gangs is to stay well away from the fight, typically with the logistics and the tank requirements removes any real DPS from the fit. It isn't exactly... 'fun'.
I don't want to digress from the hybrid thread here, but see the Eos and Claymore suffering from the same sort of issue, with the Claymore offering some of the features blaster pilots are asking for - AKA speed. |
|
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:33:00 -
[721] - Quote
thoth rothschild wrote:After 35 pages i really think the only possible solution will be
=> minmatar with hybrids and gallente with projectiles. (Giving Aretha the rifle and Bolt the shotgun)
The minmatar playstile (Shield&Speed) would perfectly fit with blasters. hit hard and run ... While gallente (Armor Tank) likes the range control which projectiles do provide. Easy fix.
Whoever had the idea to give armor tanks short range weapons should receive a falcepalm. To be fair, in the beginning Ships like the Thorax had a function like the modern cynaball but that is long long in the past....
After reading all the posts (included the reply of CCP) i only get three ideas: - Making that armor rigs (and i suppose that armor modules, right?) don't receive speed penalties doesn't solve the problem. Armor are also used by Amarr. Try to catch an Amarr without additional weight and uber-range, then you will know the new FOTM. Ah, and insta-reload for fitting range. And I recognize I thought it was a great idea, but can't alow that. - The quoted idea of switching weapon systems between Minmatar and Gallente. And to hit with the bone of the justice to the stupid that thought in these planning of the races... - The idea of dropping hybrids, reimburse hybrid SP and make Gallente Laser ships and Caldari Projectile ships. I thought in this classification as Gallente are always more trained for cap usage than Caldari. And lasers are a hole of cap.
That or... enabling a feature to ignore that trolls of Digital Gaidin and Sizeof Void about giving stupid ideas like that "NUCLEAR feature" or the stating of hybrids as a "tiny niche" for 4 stupids that doesn't use Projectile or Lasers. PD: I've got almost 5M SP in Hybrid. PD2: I've discovered how to hide posts from a user. Owwwwwwww Yeah!!!! |
fukier
Handsome Millionaire Playboys Flatline.
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:39:00 -
[722] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:here are the fixes for hybrids:
blasters:
concept shotguns (short range arties...)
1. Increase base damage by 50% 2. Decrease rate of fire by 30% 3. Increase falloff by 15% 4. increase tracking by 37.5%
railguns: Concept long range auto cannons
1. Increase base damage by 15% 2. Increase rate of fire by 15% 3. decrease activation cost by 40% 4. increase tracking by 37.5%
ammo:
Simular boost that projectile ammo got
concept choice between what damage type you want to do between thermal and Kinetic (i.e. antimater does 80% thermal damage 20% kin damage, uranium does 80% kin damage and 20% thermal damage)
also include a tracking bonus built into the ammo
Caldari boost: remove the optimal range bonus for hybrid turrets and replace with a rate of fire bonus
gallente boost: remove the falloff bonus and tracking bonus and replace with a speed pulpusion moduel mass reduction per level
change the internal rep bonus to include a bonus incomming remote rep
General fix: change the speed reduction affect on armor rigs and replace with an agility reduction change reload time from 10 seconds to 5 seconds
CCP TBH this is the fix... just do this and tweek a bit on sisi and presto two races are fixed... we dont need to spend months on working on minor fixes we should pump out a real fix and then balance it... |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:40:00 -
[723] - Quote
While most people see these changes as a Gallente boost, let's not forget that Caldari use hybrids and could use a little love too.
The role that CCP seems to have envisioned for Carlari ships does not exist.
The Caldari, based on most ship bonuses, are put into the "medium damage from extreme range" role. A role that no longer truely exists on any level of play. This does not just affect railguns, but missiles also. However, I'll focus on hybrids as they are the focus of of this thread and devblog.
Extreme ranges are usually considered 150 - 250 km out, and the Caldari have several ships that can, in theory, reach out and touch someone from those ranges. The real question is why would you want to do this. Considering the simple facts that not everyone flys or enjoys flying Caldari means that several people in any suffeciently large fleet will not be able to shoot from more than about 100 - 120 km. The fleet's optimal range is only as long as the member with the shortest optimal range. This means that any Caldari pilots will be forced to fit for shooting at literally half of their optimals. This means that Caldari could potentially choose a new ammo so that he'd do more damage, but in many cases this can actually lead to a damage reduction or an insignifigant increase in DPS (if not using faction ammo) as spike does do signifigant damage for it's range bonus. Furthermore, at any ranges exceeding the warp range, it is no trouble at all for a covert ops to place himself where the enemy fleet can simply warp to their optimals. With the changes to scanning, this can take any organised fleet as few as about 12 to 13 seconds.
In smaller scale and solo stuff long range just doesn't work because of the range of warp disruptors and scramblers.
The extreme range role simply doesn't (and perhaps cannot) exist |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:41:00 -
[724] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Hello all. Sorry for not replying more. I've been a tad busy. We're trying to get these changes to SISI so we can start playing around with them. Once this is on SISI, please post more feedback in the test server feedback forums.
Here are some responses to your concerns.
"Hail boost is too much" Possibly... I might change it to a 25% falloff penalty instead of removing it completely.
"Tech II ammo needs to be rethought" I agree that we need to take a better look at this. What I did was just reacting to some issues that I found to be very obvious when comparing them to tech 1 ammo.
"Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible... etc." Keep posting specific examples. We can't fix everything at once, but hearing the problems from you helps us prioritize what needs to be looked at.
"Reduce hybrid ammo size" That's a pretty good idea. I'll look into it.
"Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
"This isn't enough, we need bigger boosts to damage" That is entirely possible but I believe this is a good starting point.
Well, where to start?
T2 ammo does need to reworked. Barrage and Scorch offer too much of a performance gain over T1 ammo. It's a tenet of Eve that new players should be useful; you should not be required to train a T2 weapon before being able to contribute. But the step up from T1 to Scorch and Barrage is simply too large. Simialrly, don't introduce a T2 ammo for one weapon system that intrudes directly into the role of another weapon. Example - Hail turns ACs into blasters, Scorch turns Pulse into Beam, well, Beam with MF anyway.
Don't balance T2 ammos just by looking at their stats - you don't fly ammo, you fly ships with guns that fire ammo. If AC boats are underpowered at blaster range and you think a good solution is to increase their damage at blaster range, then consider a T2 ammo that turns ACs into blasters. Of course, it's fundamental balance that ACs need to be bad at blasters' range, because otherwise there's no damn point in blasters... oh.
Eagle is terrible. Much slower than the other two sniper HACs, much less damage than the Zealot and much less alpha than the Muninn, with no EHP advantage. There is no reason to fly it even after your proposed changes. To compensate for its very low speed and lack of alpha it needs much more rail DPS and ease of fitting - or give it mobility equal to that supposed Amarr brick, the Zealot.
Deimos is terrible. Insufficient speed to get into blaster optimal (unlike the Vaga), insufficient combination of range and tracking to hit frigates (unlike the Vaga), very poor survivability thanks to having to go into web range (unlike the Vaga). There is no reason to fly it even after your proposed changes (unlike the Vaga). There is no way of balancing the Deimos with the Vagabond without addressing the fundamental absurdity of having the shortest-range guns on slow ships.
Astarte is terrible. See Deimos comparison with Sleipnir, and the general obsolescence of field CS in favour of T3s as link platforms and tier 2 BCs as general combatants.
Rokh is terrible. It is designed for a niche of very long range sniping that does not exist, thanks to on-grid warping and instant probing. Even if this niche did exist, the Tachyon Apocalypse can do the Rokh's long-range job just as well while also having the option of more DPS at close range. At closer ranges, it is thoroughly outclassed by Scorch Apocs and artillery. There is no reason to fly it even after your proposed changes. If you want the Rokh to be useful, you need to eliminate instant on-grid probing and warping and then evict the Apocalypse from the Rokh's niche.
Ferox is terrible. It's supposed to be a cheap rail sniper, but the artillery Hurricane is far superior at this. I know there's a tier issue here too, but the fact remains that the supposed sniper BC is completely outclassed by another with no range bonuses. Crazy.
Megathron isn't terrible as such, it's just that there's no reason to fly it when you need more range in gang/fleet but don't want to give up the ability to apply great DPS at blaster range (lasers) and more mobility and survivability solo (Tempest, or something that isn't a slowarse BS).
The hybrid frigates are basically fine. Don't change them! Your proposed changes run the risk of making game balance and diversity worse, by tilting frigates towards hybrids while not giving anyone a reason to fly a heavier hybrid subcapital.
T1 cruisers that aren't the Blackbird are terrible, because they've been completely obsoleted by tier 2 battlecruisers possessing much more, better-tracking DPS, more EHP and having the slots to be fit to be faster and more agile. "Better than cruisers at being cruisers" is the phrase, and it's killed them. |
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:42:00 -
[725] - Quote
Kiev Duran wrote:While most people see these changes as a Gallente boost, let's not forget that Caldari use hybrids and could use a little love too.
The role that CCP seems to have envisioned for Carlari ships does not exist.
The Caldari, based on most ship bonuses, are put into the "medium damage from extreme range" role. A role that no longer truely exists on any level of play. This does not just affect railguns, but missiles also. However, I'll focus on hybrids as they are the focus of of this thread and devblog.
Extreme ranges are usually considered 150 - 250 km out, and the Caldari have several ships that can, in theory, reach out and touch someone from those ranges. The real question is why would you want to do this. Considering the simple facts that not everyone flys or enjoys flying Caldari means that several people in any suffeciently large fleet will not be able to shoot from more than about 100 - 120 km. The fleet's optimal range is only as long as the member with the shortest optimal range. This means that any Caldari pilots will be forced to fit for shooting at literally half of their optimals. This means that Caldari could potentially choose a new ammo so that he'd do more damage, but in many cases this can actually lead to a damage reduction or an insignifigant increase in DPS (if not using faction ammo) as spike does do signifigant damage for it's range bonus. Furthermore, at any ranges exceeding the warp range, it is no trouble at all for a covert ops to place himself where the enemy fleet can simply warp to their optimals. With the changes to scanning, this can take any organised fleet as few as about 12 to 13 seconds.
In smaller scale and solo stuff long range just doesn't work because of the range of warp disruptors and scramblers.
The extreme range role simply doesn't (and perhaps cannot) exist
I have never understood how Caldari are rail boats. They have Optimal Range bonus, they should be Blasters platforms (BlasterRokh ;)
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
51
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:53:00 -
[726] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:
I have never understood how Caldari are rail boats. They have Optimal Range bonus, they should be Blasters platforms (BlasterRokh ;)
Ironically, you can argue that blasters work better on Caldari hulls and rails work better on Gallente hulls. Range bonuses and shield tanks help offset blasters' drawbacks of poor range and slowing rigs and armour; the non-existence of long-range sniping forces railboats to operate at closer range where the Gallente damage bonus is more useful than the Caldari optimal bonus.
Not that it really matters, you'd be insane to use either when you could be using projectiles, with a side helping of lasers. |
Durie
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:55:00 -
[727] - Quote
I really like the idea of blasters as the shotguns of EVE. However in most games shotguns are pretty terrible competitively (compared to assault rifles/rocket launchers/etc). So, I thought about what situations (in other games) would a player choose to wield a shotgun and came up with dealing tons of damage at point blank range to large targets or dealing with swarms of smaller enemies. What would people think about making blasters effective weapons against smaller ships/drones? (like flak cannons/shot guns) While this sort of treads on smartbomb territory, I think it could create an interesting niche where blasters would be effective against larger or smaller targets but less effective than autocannons against ships of the same size. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:56:00 -
[728] - Quote
tallest, thanks for reading. please take your time on these changes. dont rush to roll out something incomplete just to please the players temporarily.
remember, blaster are COMPLETELY robbed of their role by PULSES and AC'S currently. given what youve done so far, blasters will remain unused, i promise you. the rail buff is better, but you have to have another look at hybrid ammo to give people more viable options (ideally different damage types).
- if you're gonna keep blaster range the same, significantly increase the damage, and speed and/or resilience of ALL blaster boats - you can fix blaster range by playing around with hybrid ammo, especially Null; in this case, closely keep an eye on the damage and maybe the ships dont need as much tweaking
DO NOT FORGET -
there are some ridiculously OP Minmatar boats that can put out impressive damage with impressive tracking and falloff, while maintaining top speeds and decent tanks. Machariel, I'm looking at you. seriously consider dealing with autocannons as well. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
102
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:02:00 -
[729] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:I have never understood how Caldari are rail boats. They have Optimal Range bonus, they should be Blasters platforms (BlasterRokh ;)
Back when rails and range sniping was valid tactic. Since then, lasers and projectiles had great buffs and sniping tactic is no longer valid.
Then becomes worst with blasters, while the +optimal might be nice on paper doesn't compensate the fact that the ship is slow, terribad agility, sign explosion if it ever uses mwd, can't fit a decent active tank or passive one with all modules required to make blasters work, overall is a terrible ship with blasters.
With the new blaster fitting requirements and stats it can maybe become something interesting to use. Needs some tests on sisi thou. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:13:00 -
[730] - Quote
I think Tallest is beginning to realize the laundry list of requisite changes to bring hybrid ships up to par is massive.
I hope he also realizes that the simple alternative is to take a look at projectiles and sorch first, necessitating fewer and less extensive buffs to hyrbids. At present, I don't see how a rokh, eagle, diemost, etc. is going to compete. They'll use a bit less cap, but still die to neuts (popular additions to any minmatar loadout). They'll be slightly more mobile, but still fail to catch speedy minmatar ships. Rails will have slightly more dps, but they'll still be dramatically sub-par to artillery and lasers at realistic engagement ranges. Blasters will still have problems applying their dps in any engagement. |
|
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:20:00 -
[731] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:I think Tallest is beginning to realize the laundry list of requisite changes to bring hybrid ships up to par is massive.
I hope he also realizes that the simple alternative is to take a look at projectiles and sorch first, necessitating fewer and less extensive buffs to hyrbids. At present, I don't see how a rokh, eagle, diemost, etc. is going to compete. They'll use a bit less cap, but still die to neuts (popular additions to any minmatar loadout). They'll be slightly more mobile, but still fail to catch speedy minmatar ships. Rails will have slightly more dps, but they'll still be dramatically sub-par to artillery and lasers at realistic engagement ranges. Blasters will still have problems applying their dps in any engagement.
Many Hybrid ships have needed fixing for a long time, so why not now? |
ArmyOfMe
TEDDYBEARS. Excuses.
43
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:22:00 -
[732] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote: 1. When your strategy is to drop right on top of your target (see my other post - and feel free to flame), you don't need a MWD. Also, assuming that you've trained up your energy management skills, you don't need a cap booster - not in a buffer tanked Gallente gunship. The Thorax, Brutix, and Megathron, with a full rack of T2 neutrons, are cap stable, without any mods/rigs. At close range, you don't need a sebo, and when your opponent does less DPS and has less tank than you, you don't need a tracking disruptor. So, yes, there is room for a scram and two webs.
Sizeof Void wrote: You jump the blaster boat within blaster range, get it? There is no approach, and thus no issue in your hand.
Im trying very hard to deside if your a troll or really this dumb
CCP, for the love of god boost the deimos..... |
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:26:00 -
[733] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote:Sizeof Void wrote: 1. When your strategy is to drop right on top of your target (see my other post - and feel free to flame), you don't need a MWD. Also, assuming that you've trained up your energy management skills, you don't need a cap booster - not in a buffer tanked Gallente gunship. The Thorax, Brutix, and Megathron, with a full rack of T2 neutrons, are cap stable, without any mods/rigs. At close range, you don't need a sebo, and when your opponent does less DPS and has less tank than you, you don't need a tracking disruptor. So, yes, there is room for a scram and two webs.
Sizeof Void wrote: You jump the blaster boat within blaster range, get it? There is no approach, and thus no issue in your hand.
Im trying very hard to deside if your a troll or really this dumb
It's a troll. That and Digital Gaidin. Under his name there's an arrow > Hide Posts XD |
Cordo Draken
ABOS Industrial Enterprises
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:32:00 -
[734] - Quote
What about the Eagle? No speed boost to that? With it's name, it should be a fast moving, hard hitting and agile ship. Plus, the Eagle is one ship that desperately needs to dump the Moa hull and redesigned with something more befitting of its name. Hell the Hookbill looks more like a striking Bird than the lame Moa. The Scorpion got a much needed face-lift, the Eagle does too!
+1 for the Hybrid Boosts! eëÆWhomever said, "You only get one shot to make a good impression," was utterly wrong. I've made plenty of great impressions with my AutocannonseëÆ eÉà |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
35
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:37:00 -
[735] - Quote
Moonaura wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:I think Tallest is beginning to realize the laundry list of requisite changes to bring hybrid ships up to par is massive.
I hope he also realizes that the simple alternative is to take a look at projectiles and sorch first, necessitating fewer and less extensive buffs to hyrbids. At present, I don't see how a rokh, eagle, diemost, etc. is going to compete. They'll use a bit less cap, but still die to neuts (popular additions to any minmatar loadout). They'll be slightly more mobile, but still fail to catch speedy minmatar ships. Rails will have slightly more dps, but they'll still be dramatically sub-par to artillery and lasers at realistic engagement ranges. Blasters will still have problems applying their dps in any engagement. Many Hybrid ships have needed fixing for a long time, so why not now?
I'm not saying they shouldn't be fixed now. I'm saying the best and most efficient means of fixing them also involves nerfing projectiles and scorch. |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:41:00 -
[736] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Lekgoa wrote:Enyo with neutrons + NULL: 212 gun dps @ 4.2+3.9 Wolf with 200's + HAIL: 286 gun dps @ 0.8+9
It's the same story across all gun sizes. With these changes, Minmatar's close-range high-dps ammo outranges Gallente's long-range low-dps ammo. Matari ships are still significantly faster than their Gallente counterparts (Wolf 987 m/s, Enyo around 900 m/s post-patch).
etc etc etc Man, null vs hail ??? Maybe you need to compare void vs hail. Null vs barrage. Do not create false comparison with other type ammos. Enyo with neutrons + void + overheat 312dps+20dps from drone=332 dps Wolf with 200's + HAIL+overheat: 286 gun dps (with your numbers) but just that 240 without overheat with one gyro and full lvl5 skill More one thing, with overheat the Wolf's damage is just 276 and not 286dps. etc etc etc
Train Reading Comprehension to 4 and reread my post. The point was that with no falloff penalty Hail hits farther than Null, which is just plain silly.
As for my numbers, they use 4 guns + 1 damage mod + 2 damage rigs on both ships. Both are cold dps. |
Vrykolakasis
Trinity Operations Aurora Irae
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:44:00 -
[737] - Quote
I honestly still don't know if I'll use hail with a 25% falloff penalty. I might. It's an improvement over what it is now for sure, I'd have to actually play around with it to see if it would become useful like that.
I do understand the "young players should be useful" bit about t2 ammo but I also think there should be a good bit of reward for actually training t2 stuff, and that t2 ammo should be pretty freaking good.
Edit: yeah, hail needs the reduction in falloff unless blasters can be improved more. I STILL might not use it, but can't ask for that kind of unfairness. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:48:00 -
[738] - Quote
Moonaura wrote: Many Hybrid ships have needed fixing for a long time, so why not now?
THIS. CCP, seriously...now is the time. fix them all. seriously. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:50:00 -
[739] - Quote
Specific fix,
hyperion : -Add a low slot, reduce drone bay, to have same slot number as the abaddon (20), and same or less drone, to have a REAL TRUE ONLY blasterboat.
Work on the armor rep amount bonus, to have incoming remote rep bonus too, or a standard resist bonus.
Deimos : -Move1 hight slot for a med or a low, OR add a turret hardpoint.
Eagle : -Add a turret hard point, add a bit powergrid, change damage bonus for ROF bonus. |
Anvil44
Independent Traders and Builders MPA
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:52:00 -
[740] - Quote
I've seen so many solution ideas that run all over, that I am beginning to think Gallente should not be changed in any way. Then have the war with the Caldari restart, say the Gallente was all wiped out and bring it down to 3 races with the remnants of the Gallente empire broken among the remaining 3 empires.
I always considered Artillery to be a high ROF but lower on the alpha than a Rail Gun. Rail Guns should be massive kinetic damage from an impressive range. Autocannon should have high ROF and blasters high damage. Neither should out-range the other by any significant amounts. It will fall down to speed vs tracking.
I wish I could give better examples but too many people here have far more knowledge and experience than myself, but I can give this final thought: I am Gallente but have trained to Caldari as it is far more favorable to have a ship that gets decent speed, decent damage, decent range and decent tank, or nice combos of 2 or 3 of those (Drake has no speed but good range, damage and BS level tank). With a Gallente ship it is either tank or damage...forget speed. And even range is pretty weak compared to comparable Caldari and it's range/damage. Why fly Gallente? |
|
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 19:54:00 -
[741] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Kiev Duran wrote:While most people see these changes as a Gallente boost, let's not forget that Caldari use hybrids and could use a little love too.
The role that CCP seems to have envisioned for Caldari ships does not exist.
The Caldari, based on most ship bonuses, are put into the "medium damage from extreme range" role. A role that no longer truly exists on any level of play. This does not just affect railguns, but missiles also. However, I'll focus on hybrids as they are the focus of of this thread and devblog.
Extreme ranges are usually considered 150 - 250 km out, and the Caldari have several ships that can, in theory, reach out and touch someone from those ranges. The real question is why would you want to do this. Considering the simple facts that not everyone flys or enjoys flying Caldari means that several people in any sufficiently large fleet will not be able to shoot from more than about 100 - 120 km. The fleet's optimal range is only as long as the member with the shortest optimal range. This means that any Caldari pilots will be forced to fit for shooting at literally half of their optimals. This means that Caldari could potentially choose a new ammo so that he'd do more damage, but in many cases this can actually lead to a damage reduction or an insignificant increase in DPS (if not using faction ammo) as spike does do significant damage for it's range bonus. Furthermore, at any ranges exceeding the warp range, it is no trouble at all for a covert ops to place himself where the enemy fleet can simply warp to their optimals. With the changes to scanning, this can take any organised fleet as few as about 12 to 13 seconds.
In smaller scale and solo stuff long range just doesn't work because of the range of warp disruptors and scramblers.
The extreme range role simply doesn't (and perhaps cannot) exist I have never understood how Caldari are rail boats. They have Optimal Range bonus, they should be Blasters platforms (BlasterRokh ;)
Basically Caldari boats suffer too much from low speed and horrible agility to get close enough and stay close enough to use blasters in most situations. Even in small gang stuff where Caldari blaster boats can work, you run into the problem of being thrashed by bigger ships due to the effect shield mods and the MWD has on your signature radius. Though this is most likely intended and shouldn't be changed without first re-evaluating the entire signature resolution/radius and explosion radius/velocity system of damage reductions (something that, in my opinion, doesn't need to happen). |
Sam Bowein
Sense Amid Madness
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:02:00 -
[742] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:"Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible... etc." Keep posting specific examples. We can't fix everything at once, but hearing the problems from you helps us prioritize what needs to be looked at
That's easy to do. Just download a software called EFT and create the following setups: - a Rokh (tier 3 battleship) with 8x425mm Railguns II, and load Javelin ammo (T2 short range) - an Apocalypse (tier 2 battleship) with 8xMega Pulse II, and load Scorch ammo (T2 long range)
And then compare: - The Apoc does slightly more DPS - The Apoc has more than twice the range in optimal (62km vs 27km) - The Apoc is cap stable, the Rokh will cap out in 7min - The Apoc has 77% powercore usage, the Rokh 101% - The Apoc has 3x times more tracking than the Rokh (and remember, Javelin is short range, Scorch long range...)
Shoud I continue or did you get it ???? Now please, fix this. And don't forget to compensate for all the years hybrids have been ****** (that means MAKE HYBRID THE NEW FOTM, NOT JUST SOME HALF ASS BOOST) |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
276
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:06:00 -
[743] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Hello all. Sorry for not replying more. I've been a tad busy. We're trying to get these changes to SISI so we can start playing around with them. Once this is on SISI, please post more feedback in the test server feedback forums.
Here are some responses to your concerns.
"Hail boost is too much" Possibly... I might change it to a 25% falloff penalty instead of removing it completely.
"Tech II ammo needs to be rethought" I agree that we need to take a better look at this. What I did was just reacting to some issues that I found to be very obvious when comparing them to tech 1 ammo.
"Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible... etc." Keep posting specific examples. We can't fix everything at once, but hearing the problems from you helps us prioritize what needs to be looked at.
"Reduce hybrid ammo size" That's a pretty good idea. I'll look into it.
"Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
"This isn't enough, we need bigger boosts to damage" That is entirely possible but I believe this is a good starting point.
Thank you for the feedback, CCP Tallest. Looking forward to an updated list of changes, |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 20:17:00 -
[744] - Quote
Sam Bowein wrote: Shoud I continue or did you get it ???? Now please, fix this. And don't forget to compensate for all the years hybrids have been ****** (that means MAKE HYBRID THE NEW FOTM, NOT JUST SOME HALF ASS BOOST)
No. As much as I want to be pre-trained for the new "best" setup, this does not need to (and should not) happen. Making hybrids the new fotm will only get them directly nerfed or nerfed by neglect in future patches. Balancing everything in regards to everything else asap should be the desired outcome, as no one race should ever be required to be viable in any aspect in the game. Lasers and projectiles have had their fun in the sun and that's fine; hopefully soon, all weapon types will be equally viable for all forms of combat, whether they be lasers, projectiles, hybrids, or even missiles. |
m3talc0re X
SandStorm. The Babylon Consortium
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:09:00 -
[745] - Quote
Okay, this is all well and good. But when the hell are we going to get the other turrets reloading/changing ammo as quickly as lasers or at least faster than they are now. 10s is stupid... |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:21:00 -
[746] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:thoth rothschild wrote:The best deimos fix is already on tranquility. it is called adrestia. perfect blaster boat, perfect hybrid fix
now compare adrestia with deimos and it will be clear why it is perfect. Either that or the proteus. 900dps with 180k EHP, or 400dps with 400k ehp. Basically those two ships are the only blaster ships ive flown that work.
Too bad a Proteus costs about 1B and a Hurricane about 25M (but thats just a side note) :P |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
49
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 21:26:00 -
[747] - Quote
Lekgoa wrote: Train Reading Comprehension to 4 and reread my post. The point was that with no falloff penalty Hail hits farther than Null, which is just plain silly.
As for my numbers, they use 4 guns + 1 damage mod + 2 damage rigs on both ships. Both are cold dps.
The wolf is a weird boat with two direct damage bonuses as well as a falloff bonus. The enyo SHOULD have two damage bonuses as well to compete, but only has one. I started a thread to nerf Minmatar so don't read this the wrong way but this isn't the best ship to do an example off of. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 22:47:00 -
[748] - Quote
Hamox wrote:Too bad a Proteus costs about 1B and a Hurricane about 25M (but thats just a side note) :P
Proteus fitted is around 1B +/- yes but Canes base T2 fitted at 25M ???
Let me know where I'll buy a few dozens |
Ugleb
Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
69
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:01:00 -
[749] - Quote
What if some of the blaster boats were given a bonus to warp scram range? Not on a level with the dedicated recons/EAF's but something to let them shut down the targets mwd more easily so that they can catch up to it.
This thought probably involves changing the bonuses on alot of ships mind you. ;) http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/ |
Hamox
Global Economy Experts Stellar Economy Experts
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:01:00 -
[750] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Hamox wrote:Too bad a Proteus costs about 1B and a Hurricane about 25M (but thats just a side note) :P Proteus fitted is around 1B +/- yes but Canes base T2 fitted at 25M ??? Let me know where I'll buy a few dozens
OK I'm sorry, I overdrawed it a little. Naked Proteus is only about 600M-700M and Cane with T2 fitting is more than 25M (naked cane is around 25M).
Was a stupid answer from my side anyways becouse the question was how to improve die-most, so we should compare die-most with proteus (nevertheless I think the Proteus also needs some rethinking at some aspects) ;) |
|
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:22:00 -
[751] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:"Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
My personal outlook is that this is a horrible idea; armor buffering has been a detrimental mechanic to Eve Online for a long time now by providing minimal penalties to the ship while dramatically increasing their staying power on the battlefield. If anything, there are too few penalties as things stand to adding trimarks and armor plates to ships.
I would not change the speed modification aspect of trimark rigs, but I would definitely consider adding a stacking nerf to armor plates and rigs; you get far too much bang for your buck with a set of rigs, 1600mm plates, and pushing it way over the edge, slave pirate implants. |
Gecko O'Bac
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:22:00 -
[752] - Quote
Kiev Duran wrote:While most people see these changes as a Gallente boost, let's not forget that Caldari use hybrids and could use a little love too.
*snip*
Yeah, don't forget about us! I understand that Gallente are the primary users of Hybrid guns, but just a little under half of the subcap ship of the Caldari line are (supposed to be) hybrid gun platforms...
While I like in concept the extreme range niche the Caldari have, the truth is it doesn't have place in EVE. There are many reasons for that... On grid scanning and heterogeneous fleet compositions are the most important imho... On grid scanning may be fixed, fleet composition is hard to overcome since it depends on trained skills as well...
Also, beside battleships, trying to outrange your enemy by setup alone is useless... If you're a frigate then a cruiser will outrange you (even if it's not a caldari cruiser), if you're a cruiser a BS will outrange you... Since sniper ships normally aren't nimble enough to dictate range, this leaves the "Sniper" niche to only battleships (Yeah I know, there are sniper hac gangs... Guess what is the most common counter to a sniper hac gang? A sniper battleship gang). Pidgeon-holing the caldari into extreme range sniping, while suffering heavily on the damage side seems quite daft.
The only way I can see an extreme range sniper setup working is if downgrading ammo trading range for damage is feasible. Like noted before, right now Spike deals much more damage than most T1 (and often faction) ammo, even with quite short ranges... Perhaps a bigger damage modifier on the lower ranged ammo could help caldari getting on par with the other snipers, while still retaining the "extreme range" philosophy...
Otherwise a completely different philosophy must be implemented. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
53
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:32:00 -
[753] - Quote
I've just EFTed up two ships fit for the blaster role of getting up close and applying a cubic litre of DPS.
Ship A has 720 DPS, 1471 m/s, 134 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 38k EHP. Ship B has 727 DPS, 2484 m/s, 227 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 36k EHP.
These two ships have very similar DPS. But one is over 1 km/s faster and much more agile, at the cost of 2k EHP. Given that the blaster role involves getting up close quickly and applying DPS, what are these two ships and which fulfils the blaster role better? |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:37:00 -
[754] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:I've just EFTed up two ships fit for the blaster role of getting up close and applying a cubic litre of DPS.
Ship A has 720 DPS, 1471 m/s, 134 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 38k EHP. Ship B has 727 DPS, 2484 m/s, 227 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 36k EHP.
These two ships have very similar DPS. But one is over 1 km/s faster and much more agile, at the cost of 2k EHP. Given that the blaster role involves getting up close quickly and applying DPS, what are these two ships and which fulfils the blaster role better?
Ship B is better at the job; this is a non-question. But, which ship is which? |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:43:00 -
[755] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:I would not change the speed modification aspect of trimark rigs, but I would definitely consider adding a stacking nerf to armor plates and rigs; you get far too much bang for your buck with a set of rigs, 1600mm plates, and pushing it way over the edge, slave pirate implants.
Yeah because every armor pilot undocks every day with his slave set to blow/get blown in cheap throw away stuff.
It's not because SC/Titan pilots HAVE to use those (see the diff of price tag for the hulls?) that each and every amarr/gallente pilot uses them, if you know a lot of them send them in to low/null sec pee vee pee with their uber sets, I'll be glad to free them of that pain.
And no, speed trade off is not adapted to blaster ships precisely, has for armor hit points you should know by now armor doesn't self regenerates.
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
250
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:43:00 -
[756] - Quote
A few primers for ship balancing...
Maybe the active tanking bonus on Gallente t1 hulls (and commandships) needs to be re thought? (as every one of those ships is a problem one)
Compare an active tanking Hyperion as best as you can with an active tanking Abaddon even with the PG reduction.
Maybe the caldari optimal range bonus needs to be rethought?
Myrmidon needs less turrets and more drones, so it behaves less like a brutix or a vexor.
Maybe the Eos should become the field commandship? (with more drones)
Maybe ALL fleet commandships should get HP bonuses? (together with on grid boosting only, this would be a excellent commandship buff)
Work out what the differences between effective tracking of pulses or autocannons at optimal, optimal+fall off is compared with blasters, then tell me whether a 20% tracking bonus was enough.
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:44:00 -
[757] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote:Gypsio III wrote:I've just EFTed up two ships fit for the blaster role of getting up close and applying a cubic litre of DPS.
Ship A has 720 DPS, 1471 m/s, 134 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 38k EHP. Ship B has 727 DPS, 2484 m/s, 227 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 36k EHP.
These two ships have very similar DPS. But one is over 1 km/s faster and much more agile, at the cost of 2k EHP. Given that the blaster role involves getting up close quickly and applying DPS, what are these two ships and which fulfils the blaster role better? Ship B is better at the job; this is a non-question. But, which ship is which?
Obvious is too obvious, ship B is Winmatar.
|
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:53:00 -
[758] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote: The wolf is a weird boat with two direct damage bonuses as well as a falloff bonus. The enyo SHOULD have two damage bonuses as well to compete, but only has one. I started a thread to nerf Minmatar so don't read this the wrong way but this isn't the best ship to do an example off of.
That's fair. Even without bonuses though, autos with RF EMP (or Hail w/o falloff penalty) outrange similarly-sized blasters with Null. I don't want blasters to be able to hit out to Barrage range, but their long-range ammo should at least outrange autos' short-range ammo. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
277
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 23:57:00 -
[759] - Quote
@Tanya Powers
Quite so.
Meanwhile, on this other ring we got ships with superior EHP, comparable DPS and can switch instantly between close range ammo and long range ammo. Their long range ammo lets them hit up to 50km away. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
54
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:03:00 -
[760] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:Gypsio III wrote:I've just EFTed up two ships fit for the blaster role of getting up close and applying a cubic litre of DPS.
Ship A has 720 DPS, 1471 m/s, 134 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 38k EHP. Ship B has 727 DPS, 2484 m/s, 227 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 36k EHP.
These two ships have very similar DPS. But one is over 1 km/s faster and much more agile, at the cost of 2k EHP. Given that the blaster role involves getting up close quickly and applying DPS, what are these two ships and which fulfils the blaster role better? Ship B is better at the job; this is a non-question. But, which ship is which? Obvious is too obvious, ship B is Winmatar.
Yeah, Ship A is the Deimos, Ship B is a ******** Vagabond lolfit, with 425s and quad gyros, fit up for the blaster "role". You can quibble over certain aspects of the fits but the basics are there.
Of course, nobody uses a Vaga like this, but that's because going into scramble range is so dangerous, and the Vaga has the speed and range to not need to do this. But it kinda demonstrates that even if you massively nerfed the Vaga, restricting its falloff such that it couldn't apply DPS from outside scramble range (i.e., turned it into a blasterboat), it'd would still be arguably better than the Deimos. This illustrates the scale of the AC-blaster balance problem. |
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
253
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:06:00 -
[761] - Quote
Re rigs: Rigs: - Armour Rig penalties changed from -% speed to -10% shield HP - Shield Rig penalties changed from +% signature to -10% armour HP
Done. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Gynoceros
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:14:00 -
[762] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Hello all. Sorry for not replying more. I've been a tad busy. We're trying to get these changes to SISI so we can start playing around with them. Once this is on SISI, please post more feedback in the test server feedback forums.
"Tech II ammo needs to be rethought" I agree that we need to take a better look at this. What I did was just reacting to some issues that I found to be very obvious when comparing them to tech 1 ammo.
"Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
Aside from Null being underpowered and the OP Hail change, I think the changes to T2 ammo are pretty good.
What other penalty would you give to Armor Rigs? Agility decrease? Blaster boats with terrible agility aren't quite as bad as those with terrible speed, but it's still bad. Armor plates already nerf agility and weight enough. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:14:00 -
[763] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:Gypsio III wrote:I've just EFTed up two ships fit for the blaster role of getting up close and applying a cubic litre of DPS.
Ship A has 720 DPS, 1471 m/s, 134 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 38k EHP. Ship B has 727 DPS, 2484 m/s, 227 m/s/s average acceleration under MWD and 36k EHP.
These two ships have very similar DPS. But one is over 1 km/s faster and much more agile, at the cost of 2k EHP. Given that the blaster role involves getting up close quickly and applying DPS, what are these two ships and which fulfils the blaster role better? Ship B is better at the job; this is a non-question. But, which ship is which? Obvious is too obvious, ship B is Winmatar. Yeah, Ship A is the Deimos, Ship B is a ******** Vagabond lolfit, with 425s and quad gyros, fit up for the blaster "role". You can quibble over certain aspects of the fits but the basics are there. Of course, nobody uses a Vaga like this, but that's because going into scramble range is so dangerous, and the Vaga has the speed and range to not need to do this. But it kinda demonstrates that even if you massively nerfed the Vaga, restricting its falloff such that it couldn't apply DPS from outside scramble range (i.e., turned it into a blasterboat), it'd would still be arguably better than the Deimos. This illustrates the scale of the AC-blaster balance problem. You also left off that a larger percentage of that DPS would land on target as the ammo-type can be switched to optimize against the targeted ship, assuming the Vagabond has at least 10seconds notice before the fight starts and knows what it is fighting. Essentially, the DPS gap would be even larger as mitigated DPS would put Ship B well over a 1% increase in DPS over Ship A. Also, if utility modules like Nuetralizers or Smartbombs are fit, Ship B knowing it is Minmatar would likely have a longer usage of the utility module, especially if it is using an EHP tank rather than an active tank. Everything I just said is BEFORE you take into consideration the accelleration and speed of the ships in question. |
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:14:00 -
[764] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Re rigs: Rigs: - Armour Rig penalties changed from -% speed to -10% shield HP - Shield Rig penalties changed from +% signature to -10% armour HP
Done.
If you're going to switch the penalties to things which are utterly inconsequential you may as well just remove them altogether.
edit: having said that, rigs, their effects, calibration, and penalties are all over the place and need looking at one way or another anyway. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
96
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:22:00 -
[765] - Quote
make the 7.5% bonus to internal armor repair mods work also for external incomming Remote Repair mods...
Example a Large Tech II Remote Armor repair goes from doing 384 hp every 4.5 seconds = 85.33 hp per second to
528 hp every 4.5 seconds = 117.33 hp per/sec
this will help gallente/minmatar make up for have much lower effective hit points... as it stands you will end up being 2% more efficiant for internal and external(receiving end) then ammar/caldari but ammar/caldari usually have more then 20% more ehp then gallente/minamatar... |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
253
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:26:00 -
[766] - Quote
HELIC0N ONE wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:Re rigs: Rigs: - Armour Rig penalties changed from -% speed to -10% shield HP - Shield Rig penalties changed from +% signature to -10% armour HP
Done. If you're going to switch the penalties to things which are utterly inconsequential you may as well just remove them altogether. edit: having said that, rigs, their effects, calibration, and penalties are all over the place and need looking at one way or another anyway. Sig reduction is inconsequential most of the time, especially in the amounts prescribed by current rigs. Speed apparently isn't. -HP is a half way house between the two, although I wouldn't bat an eye lid if penalties where just removed similar to CCC rigs. Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:46:00 -
[767] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:@Tanya Powers
Quite so.
Meanwhile, on this other ring we got ships with superior EHP, comparable DPS and can switch instantly between close range ammo and long range ammo. Their long range ammo lets them hit up to 50km away.
Well actually I'm gallente first, minmatar second train then calamari for lulz, So the almost insta reload time I don't have it with my pvp toon but is something I'm used to.
When with 2 of these I don't have to change whatever ammo to apply effective dps from 0 to over 20km I consider it has a huge advantage over the last one. It just doesn't have the choice while he's still pinned but to reload ammo, loosing 10sec + activ etc is more about 12/13, your being hit by ammo perfectly selected to your weakest dmg (yes from people knowing how DS works or intell chans) and once you reload the longest range ammo you scratch paint and in the middle of your screen "miss", "what tha f...." I'm in straight line... And for all this time you were taking every single ounce of dps in the face.
Too much is too much. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
54
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:51:00 -
[768] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote: Curious though, but Vagabonds pretty much never push past 530 DPS (even factoring in the Warriors), but no specialty implants. Deimos on the other hand push 785 using a very basic setup triple mag stab with Hammerhead II's. Your numbers are off... or I should say your EFT-whoring sucks.
Also, even the most basic Deimos fit will push past 1650 m/s using an MWD without any speed modules, and some polycarbs, thrusters, or nanofibers will help that along quite nicely. Sure, the Vagabond leaves it in the dust, but the Deimos isn't nearly as gimped as you imply. If we're going to have THIS discussion, lets use real numbers, shall we?
Vagas never normally push past 530 DPS because people don't fit quad gyros and use 425s with Hail. I said it was a stupid use of a Vaga, but if you were fitting up a Vaga for maximum close-range DPS, that's what you'd do. Adding an AML in the last highslot is harder to justify, but it's only 20 DPS. It's 707 DPS without it. I used Hobgoblins instead of Warriors because you don't need the faster Warriors against a scrambled target.
The Deimos fit I used had dual MFS, the triple MFS fit seemed a bit thin. I didn't use Hammerheads on it, Hobgoblins and EC-300s to give it some semblance of frigate defence. Speed 1471 m/s comes from 800 mm plate and a single trimark (ACR other rig) - you only get 1650 m/s if you have no armour at all. Switching the trimark for an Aux Thrusters is an option, it costs 4.5k EHP but takes the speed back up to 1661 DPS. You have less EHP than the Vaga then though.
You mention nanofibres, but you seem to be suggesting a triple-MFS nanofibre Deimos with tank limited to a DC. That's, erm, brave. |
Deviana Sevidon
Jades Falcon Guards
61
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 00:56:00 -
[769] - Quote
When started EVE, several years ago, hybrids were a decent weapons choice, that was before a lot of buffs to others ships and races and nerfs to Gallente of course.
One thing that would help hybrids in general is to take back the resistance nerf that was applied in 2007, before that Lasers were weapons that struggled with heavy armor tanks and projectiles had a bit of trouble with shields, since most of their ammo was of the explosive type.
The resistance nerf turned things a bit upside down, especially with lasers. On T2 hulls EM is often one of the weakest resistance types, so lasers are basically a good choice against armor and shield, while hybrids struggle with the fact that thermal kinetic is often of the strongest resistance in many setups.
Blasters have also far too many drawbacks compared to pulses and AC.
The problem with armor rigs and speed penalty is only part of a much bigger problem and that is the imbalance between active and passive tanks and between armor and shields. I think buffer tanks need a nerf, on both the side of armor and shield and active tanks could need a boost, but since I doubt that CCP will touch this anytime soon, it would probably be better to remove the active armor bonus from gallente ships and replace it with something useful. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites
117
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 01:20:00 -
[770] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Re rigs: Rigs: - Armour Rig penalties changed from -% speed to -10% shield HP - Shield Rig penalties changed from +% signature to -10% armour HP
Done.
this is good, but in all honesty, the only rigs that actually have a reason to decrease speed/increase sig, are the trimarks and core shield extenders. you are, after all, adding plates/increasing shields of a ship
the resist and armour/shield repping rigs however, I don't see a reason why they shouldn't decrease HP on their counterpart. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
23
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 02:00:00 -
[771] - Quote
Deviana Sevidon wrote:When started EVE, several years ago, hybrids were a decent weapons choice, that was before a lot of buffs to others ships and races and nerfs to Gallente of course.
One thing that would help hybrids in general is to take back the resistance nerf that was applied in 2007, before that Lasers were weapons that struggled with heavy armor tanks and projectiles had a bit of trouble with shields, since most of their ammo was of the explosive type.
The resistance nerf turned things a bit upside down, especially with lasers. On T2 hulls EM is often one of the weakest resistance types, so lasers are basically a good choice against armor and shield, while hybrids struggle with the fact that thermal kinetic is often of the strongest resistance in many setups.
Blasters have also far too many drawbacks compared to pulses and AC.
The problem with armor rigs and speed penalty is only part of a much bigger problem and that is the imbalance between active and passive tanks and between armor and shields. I think buffer tanks need a nerf, on both the side of armor and shield and active tanks could need a boost, but since I doubt that CCP will touch this anytime soon, it would probably be better to remove the active armor bonus from gallente ships and replace it with something useful. I've done a bit of EFTing over the past few years. I can honestly say at this point that for doctrinal fits that have Omni-tank priority, the hole shifts based on race and ship type. EM is a great choice often enough because people want to minimize the amount of hardeners they use on their setups, and especially when it comes to armor the base 50% combined with EANM's often make EM the lowest because its an afterthought to tank against it more than the base. There are some setups however which have EM in the top two resistances. It varies is basically what I'm trying to say.
Gypsio III wrote:Vagas never normally push past 530 DPS because people don't fit quad gyros and use 425s with Hail. I said it was a stupid use of a Vaga, but if you were fitting up a Vaga for maximum close-range DPS, that's what you'd do. Adding an AML in the last highslot is harder to justify, but it's only 20 DPS. It's 707 DPS without it. I used Hobgoblins instead of Warriors because you don't need the faster Warriors against a scrambled target.
The Deimos fit I used had dual MFS, the triple MFS fit seemed a bit thin. I didn't use Hammerheads on it, Hobgoblins and EC-300s to give it some semblance of frigate defence. Speed 1471 m/s comes from 800 mm plate and a single trimark (ACR other rig) - you only get 1650 m/s if you have no armour at all. Switching the trimark for an Aux Thrusters is an option, it costs 4.5k EHP but takes the speed back up to 1661 DPS. You have less EHP than the Vaga then though.
You mention nanofibres, but you seem to be suggesting a triple-MFS nanofibre Deimos with tank limited to a DC. That's, erm, brave. And here I was thinking you pulled numbers out of your arse. Nice response, even though I'm a bit more daring with my Deimos fits because if I'm flying Deimos, I'm flying glass cannon for a reason
As it is now, I have very little reason to use anything but drone setups for Gallente ships, with the one exception being interceptors as I love flying the little bug eyed speed demons or Nemesis for some extra Scorch loving. |
Kalot Sakaar
CragCO
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 02:35:00 -
[772] - Quote
Without a doubt the Gallente/blaster issue has been around for some time and a lot of very experienced players have provided some great input. Not sure if messing with rigs is the right answer as that has greater impact than on just Gallente boats.
I know that Caldari has issues with hybrids that need addressing but frankly that problem seems easier since no matter what it's a long range weapon system and with the tweaking of number directly to the gun can solve the problem. Gallente is vastly more complicated for all the reasons everyone has mentioned, for years. And years of buffs and improvements to other races/weapons have left the blaster boats, and frankly the drone boats also far behind. Nothing new here.
So I would simply say that CCP needs to just take a step back and try to deal with this holistically and clearly articulate what they want to accomplish with Gallente.
Example: So CCP if the mission is to create a viable, fun to fly, challenging family of ships that excels in close in combat that also relies on a variety of drones to play havoc upon their enemies then list out the things that are needed to make that happen. And it needs to do it better hands down than any other race because that is going to be their niche. Also use the existing ships and get rid of that horrible armor repair bonus and replace it with what is needed to make them appealing to fly. They will utilize hybrid blasters which should be the marrying of the BEST of lasers and projectiles to do it, but have very short range. Hybrid should not mean the worst of both systems, what engineer does that? Use CAP, and Ammo, and slow reload, and terrible range, damage type all the same and about the same damage in close as other weapons (AC's)? That sucks. How about a bit of CAP, yes ammo, instant ammo changes, high tracking, and absolutely no doubt the highest DPS in close of anything bar none. Still short range.
So what's absolutely needed for a close in fighter: 1) a way to get there, and good tactics with viable mechanics, not just being faster is legit since i know Minmatar is the holy cow of the game and can't possibly be nerfed/out raced. 2) the ability to gain lock in time to tackle target 3) sufficient tank to fight close in and sustain the expected high damage 4) The systems to sustain that range. 5) Doesn't have to exist all on one ship, this is a team sport, for example give the Brutix a 20% range bonus per level to scram and scram only. The Myrm 20% bonus per level to web range. Something like that where a team of Gallente pilots working together can achieve the mission statement. Or scram drones that shut down MWD. Look at the mission statement and come up with a complete plan instead of just a tweak here and a tweak there that will just lead to a thousand other problems down the line. If the design fails to do this, then change the design. If that means making Gallente shield tank, then so be it, if it means changing slot layout, so be it. What's important is that they fill the close in fighting style--- if that is the goal of CCP.
The suggestions to the Brutix and Myrm are just examples, doesn't have to be that. But the problem has to be approached holistically, not just a small change in my opinion. But what I sense, and the Talos changes (loss of the web) sort of confirms it, is that CCP is very unsure of what they want to do with Gallente Ships/Hybrids etc. Which is probably why this has been left unsolved for years. |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 02:48:00 -
[773] - Quote
How about changing armor rig penalties from speed to mass? Makes more sense to me, anyway... Heavier ships handle worse in orbit, accelerate more slowly, while keeping the top end speed. Sound like a good compromise? Our you could do what I do, and fit a gun rig in there... |
Gynoceros
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 04:10:00 -
[774] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:How about changing armor rig penalties from speed to mass? Makes more sense to me, anyway... Heavier ships handle worse in orbit, accelerate more slowly, while keeping the top end speed. Sound like a good compromise? Our you could do what I do, and fit a gun rig in there...
Increasing mass reduces both agility and top MWD/Afterburner speed. Unless it's a very small mass increase, it is almost certainly a worse penalty for Gallente blaster ships. |
RackotPrime
CONCORD OF UKRAINE Flame Bridge
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 05:29:00 -
[775] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:make the 7.5% bonus to internal armor repair mods work also for external incomming Remote Repair mods...
Example a Large Tech II Remote Armor repair goes from doing 384 hp every 4.5 seconds = 85.33 hp per second to
528 hp every 4.5 seconds = 117.33 hp per/sec
this will help gallente/minmatar make up for have much lower effective hit points/Resistances... as it stands you will end up being 2% more efficiant for internal and external(receiving end) then ammar/caldari but ammar/caldari usually have more then 20% more ehp then gallente/minamatar...
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
277
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 05:33:00 -
[776] - Quote
Increasing ship survivability would make a long way to make Gallente ships viable in fleets after changes to hybrids are found satisfactory.
|
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 07:23:00 -
[777] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Re rigs: Rigs: - Armour Rig penalties changed from -% speed to -10% shield HP - Shield Rig penalties changed from +% signature to -10% armour HP
Done.
This is a fail solution. If rig penalty changed those effects will be change for the other ships too. Faster ship than blaster ship will be faster. Amarr ships which have optimal advantages from scorch will be faster too. etc This is a bad idea.
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 07:45:00 -
[778] - Quote
the thing about the deimos....navy vexor with 4 gardes and a rack of ions has about the same EHP but does about 800dps. half of this dps is from the gardes, which can hit 10-36km. it's hands down the best gank cruiser/bc gallente have. navy vex and the brutix are about equal is dps and EHP, but the navy vex has more range with sentries.
deimos needs so much more. i really hope hybrids turn into something decent. the poor proteus needs to be viable with rails. |
Walextheone
The Red Circle Inc.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 08:10:00 -
[779] - Quote
There needs to be a compelling reason to use blasters.
All other weapon systems have something that they excel at (no cap use, fast switching ammo, damage type, long range, no ammo usage etc)
By giving blasters a ~15% increase in damage it would at least be good at something and make up for being in scram range all the time. |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 08:55:00 -
[780] - Quote
Walextheone wrote:There needs to be a compelling reason to use blasters.
All other weapon systems have something that they excel at (no cap use, fast switching ammo, damage type, long range, no ammo usage etc)
By giving blasters a ~15% increase in damage it would at least be good at something and make up for being in scram range all the time.
Blasters are already quite good in blaster range. The problem is that so are ACs and Pulse, and those weapon systems are far more flexible in addition. They have the range and tracking, to engage outside of the dangerzone of web/scramble range, and to engage smaller ships.
Just adding more damage to blasters does not solve the fundamental problem, which is that ACs and Pulse are far too effective in blasters' realm, unless it's a truly absurd, gamebreaking damage increase, pushing 50%. If you can still get away with using Pulse or ACs at close range, if they can still apply "acceptable" DPS there, there is no reason to use inflexible, one-dimensional blasters. This is even before considering the absurdity of fitting the shortest-range weapons to slowarse hulls.
CCP's power creep and the insane projectile boost has forced them into a corner. Blasters are not worth using while the other weapon systems, with all their advantages of range and flexibility, are also able to do blasters' job. Projectiles are supposed to be a weak weapon system, because their hulls have the powerful advantages of speed and agility. CCP has, over the years, repeatedly failed to properly appreciate the importance of mobility - the nano era (when blasters were also useless), the Angel ships, jump mechanics etc - the unnecessary projectile boost was just another example of this, it looked distinctly like a case of balancing weapons -but we don't fly weapons, we fly ships. |
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
56
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:05:00 -
[781] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:make the 7.5% bonus to internal armor repair mods work also for external incomming Remote Repair mods...
This is a good idea in principle but unless you also balance Minmatar with Gallente in general, it actually works out as another Minmatar boost. This is because the ships that are more powerful today will benefit more from such a change, making it a relative boost to the Sleipnir over the Astarte, the Cyclone over the Brutix, and in particular, the Maelstrom over the Hyperion. Not clever.
Quote:Rigs: - Armour Rig penalties changed from -% speed to -10% shield HP - Shield Rig penalties changed from +% signature to -10% armour HP
As noted by others, this idea has the same problem - the biggest beneficiaries are the Amarr armour-rigged ship. Also, it's a pretty rubbish drawback, it's the same as its benefit, just an EHP modifier. |
Kazetsu Davaham
North Star Networks The Kadeshi
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:24:00 -
[782] - Quote
Hello
would it not be cool if blasters had a small splash dmg ? similar to shotguns.
this would give them advantage over smaller ships/drones |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 09:52:00 -
[783] - Quote
Honestly i dont think CCP is willing to do a revamp of the hybrid weapons system. They see it as working as intended and just needing a little love. I get this from the dev responses i have seen. So in that regard best we will get is them playing with the current system and just adjusting stats. With the Hail buff that made its way in with the peculiar absence of corresponding void and conflag buffs i can assume they have no intention of de-throning projectiles as king of the hill or making hybrids a worthy challenger. Hopefully they just add a skill re-allocation option as the primary buff to hybrids.
Just curious but has anyone ever taken the Gallente hulls switched the hybrid bonuses to projectiles and done some eft projections with them with AC's and arties to see what would happen? I would be curious to see if they would be more effective. Man i think a dual repped Hyperion with bonused AC's would be very nice :) or an arty Dominix with t2 sentries.... ohh man that would be a damm fine ship. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 11:06:00 -
[784] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:Just curious but has anyone ever taken the Gallente hulls switched the hybrid bonuses to projectiles and done some eft projections with them with AC's and arties to see what would happen? I would be curious to see if they would be more effective. Man i think a dual repped Hyperion with bonused AC's would be very nice :) or an arty Dominix with t2 sentries.... ohh man that would be a damm fine ship.
Arty megathrons out dps rail megathrons (yes they loose all bonus but they do more dps, go figure)
425mm Brutix kicks ass (shield is far better)
The ones I've tested and are clearly better, In brutix case is the ability to apply dmg from far distances and select dmg that makes it better than blaster option, but for gank mackinaws sure go with blasters.
Edit: also 425mm AC Myrmidon kicks ass and you should try the shield brutix with rails+AM full lows of TE's MFS's, of course the armor rep is very useful on a better ship with shield tank than armor |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 12:14:00 -
[785] - Quote
Creat Posudol wrote: For top-grade rails the fitting requirements are (were?) much more of an issue in my opinion, but those do NOT provide a significant damage advantage over their smaller versions. Their distinguishing attribute is range! Higher grade rails have significantly higher optimals, but the damage barely increases. This is especially true if you include the reload time, since the internal ammo storage halves for every step up in size/grade. This leaves (T2) small and medium rails with about 1 dps advantage (around 3-5%) for each bigger size on a hybrid bonused platform, and about 2 dps for larges (about 5%). Even with the 10% damage increase this is really FAR away from the 50% increase you suggested. More like 15% at best...
You are 100% correct and I'm an idiot.
I compared damage mod stats on the guns only. I was actually fitting guns to ships in EFT, but only to check PG usage, not the DPS.
Talk about embarrassingly stupid - I did the same exact damn thing I've accused some other posters of doing in this thread - ie. comparing raw stat numbers and not actual performance.
Good catch, Creat Posudol - you have my respect. Everyone else has my apologies.
Creat Posudol wrote: Which brings me to my next point: the reduced fitting requirements will not allow you to go up a grade for your guns. So any fit that doesn't use the highest grade guns already can now do so only by reducing the tank (if it had that much free PG it was a really REALLY bad fit).
I did not mean to say that you could simply replace neutrons for ions, or 425's for 350's, and the PG usage would work out to be the same. I apologize if my poor wording led to the wrong conclusion.
My point is that many of the Gallente ships suffer difficulties in balancing gank vs. tank, due to the high PG reqs of both hybrid guns and armor plates. There are many potential fits which won't work because of tight PG issues. This is true for the buffer-tanked blaster boat - for example, where using neutrons puts you just a bit over on PG, because you were also trying to fit an 800mm plate. So, since that fit won't work, you might downgrade to ions to keep the 800mm plate, or switch to a 400mm plate to keep the neutrons. If you insist on keeping the gank of neutrons, plus the tank of the 800mm plate, you might make it work by adding a PG mod/rig, or by swapping the single 800mm plate for two 400mm plates. But, in this case, you are sacrificing a low slot or rig slot - which everyone hates to do.
With the PG reduction on guns, in this example, I'm saying that the original neutron gank + 800mm plate tank might now fit, without a PG mod/rig. If so, you would no longer need to downgrade to ions, downgrade to a 400mm plate, or sacrifice a low/rig slot to make things fit.
I probably should have written something more like:
If you had to settle for electrons in one of your old loadouts, you might now be able to redesign your loadout to use ions.
If you had to settle for ions, you might now be able to redesign your loadout to use neutrons.
If you had to use two 400mm plates, you might now be able to use a single 800mm plate.
If you had to use two 800mm plates , you might now be able to use a single 1600mm plate.
If you had to use a PG mod/rig (such as an RC, PDS, or ACR), you might now be able to get rid of it.
If you free up a low slot or rig slot, you can now use it to fit for additional gank, tank. or speed. |
AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 12:45:00 -
[786] - Quote
There was an issue with parsing this post's BBCode GÇ£You go into combat, and itGÇÖs NOT going to be WagnerGǪindustrial techno or really hard drum and bassGÇ¥
Reynir Hardarson, founding member of CCP Games, 2002. |
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries The Black Armada
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 13:43:00 -
[787] - Quote
IMHO, minmitar weapon systems are better all the way around when compared to hybrids which go against the idea of weapon systems filling niches
Blasters vs Auto cannons After the speed nerf (for the most part) minmitar keep their ability to dictate ranges with speed on auto cannons boats as compared to GallenteGÇÖs blaster boats. Back in the day, the only thing going for Gallente blasters boats is the huge damage modifier and the ability to get in close fast and web the **** out of foes before their cap ran dry and melt face. This tactic is somewhat the same for auto cannon boats but, unlike blaster boats, auto cannon boats have awesome tracking which allow them to maximize their DPS while in a GÇ£dog fightGÇ¥ doing their Ricky bobby thing that they do orbiting their target. Contrasting this with the tactics used for Gallente, in a blaster boat you get in close with MWD and web down your target and have a good slug fest until they melt before you.
IMHO, CCP needs to give all Gallente blaster boats a web bonus and small boost to speed. This will allow the boats to get in close fast again, to start the slug fest, and the web will allow them to keep them there. To balance this, I would reduce the mid slots or nerf CPU in most blaster boats so in most cases pilots will have to choose between sebos, points, webs, and ect. Also, I would consider reducing all the blaster boats sensor strength so they would be more susceptible to ECM. This will make ECM bursts useful again as well and a good tactic if you want to disengage with a blaster boat in small gang warfare.
Rails vs Arty Rails are ****, complete **** in PvP. Artys have amazing alpha (as they should) but crap DPS because of crap ROF. Contrasting with rail, rails have **** alpha, crap damage, and normal ROF To fix rails, I would increase the ROF while keeping damage low. This will allow an increase in DPS without making rails **** face at long range. To balance this I would nerf the CPU or reduce the mids and increase the base lock time for rail boats. The reduce cpu/mids would limit the number of sebos and would pigeon toe the rail boats into the high lock time.
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:09:00 -
[788] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:Honestly i dont think CCP is willing to do a revamp of the hybrid weapons system. They see it as working as intended and just needing a little love. I get this from the dev responses i have seen. So in that regard best we will get is them playing with the current system and just adjusting stats.
CCP, if this is the case, you really need to wake up. hybrids need either a serious buff (10x what youre doing now), or a complete revamp.
|
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies Joint Venture Conglomerate
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:10:00 -
[789] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: "Armor rigs should not reduce speed" Possibly... I definitely considered it and haven't completely dismissed it.
Re-group tanking rigs into active tanking and passive tanking rigs rather than armour and shield.
Give the passive tanking rigs the current armour rigs speed penalty and give the active tank rigs the sig radius penalty that is currently for shield rigs.
|
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:20:00 -
[790] - Quote
HELIC0N ONE wrote:Pattern Clarc wrote:Re rigs: Rigs: - Armour Rig penalties changed from -% speed to -10% shield HP - Shield Rig penalties changed from +% signature to -10% armour HP
Done. If you're going to switch the penalties to things which are utterly inconsequential you may as well just remove them altogether. edit: having said that, rigs, their effects, calibration, and penalties are all over the place and need looking at one way or another anyway. This.
And, why do we need the penalties at all? Energy grid rigs don't come with a penalty. |
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
97
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 14:28:00 -
[791] - Quote
Gypsio III wrote:MeBiatch wrote:make the 7.5% bonus to internal armor repair mods work also for external incomming Remote Repair mods...
This is a good idea in principle but unless you also balance Minmatar with Gallente in general, it actually works out as another Minmatar boost. This is because the ships that are more powerful today will benefit more from such a change, making it a relative boost to the Sleipnir over the Astarte, the Cyclone over the Brutix, and in particular, the Maelstrom over the Hyperion. Not clever.
yes that is true with todays hybrids... but hopefully hybrids are going to get another round of boosts that should bring them on par with the other weapon systems and then it wont been seen as a major boost for minnie over gallente...
your argument could be used to compare the rokh and the abbadon... sure the abbadon is the better ship now but lets see what happens after the boost hits sisi and ccp tallest has some time to play around with the numbers...
|
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:03:00 -
[792] - Quote
Currently ships with bonus for active tank is at a disadvantage due to the massive dps people can dish out with ease thx to tier 2 battlecruisers and a massive influx of players the last few years. In my opinion it is long overdue to boost the hitpoints repaired for all shield boosters and armor repairers. Today you will have to use a serious amount of pricey modules and make sure to only fight very few ships at a time. And then you also have to be carefull about neutralizing which has become rather common :-)
I believe the active tank bonus is the main reason people are not using Hyperion a lot for pvp. The Maelstroms are used as alphaships in 0.0 warfare and only rarely used as intended in lowsec and for otherwise only for carebearing.
Also the poor performance is why super capitals neglect the capital reppers and get an insane RR-tank instead... |
Bluemelon
Polaris Rising PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:21:00 -
[793] - Quote
To cut all the whining and flaming going on.
This is a very good start, CCP. There are some issue's in the fact that it is not a gallente EXCLUSIVE buff.
The additional speed and Inertia has been a long time coming, however It will not be enough to make the gallente ships competitive. Armor boats are slow, especially the trimarked ones. A megathron would be dead or close to it by the time he even got close to a tempest.
In order to make Gallente a viable, usable and appealing race, the gallente ships need a bigger buff than this.
This change will let us see more Brutix's and Mega's....but still barely any compared to the prefered Cane, Tempest, Maelstrom, Drake and Amarr ships.
Just my little input there
-Blue
|
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:24:00 -
[794] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:Currently ships with bonus for active tank is at a disadvantage due to the massive dps people can dish out with ease thx to tier 2 battlecruisers and a massive influx of players the last few years. In my opinion it is long overdue to boost the hitpoints repaired for all shield boosters and armor repairers. Today you will have to use a serious amount of pricey modules and make sure to only fight very few ships at a time. And then you also have to be carefull about neutralizing which has become rather common :-)
I believe the active tank bonus is the main reason people are not using Hyperion a lot for pvp. The Maelstroms are used as alphaships in 0.0 warfare and only rarely used as intended in lowsec and for otherwise only for carebearing.
Also the poor performance is why super capitals neglect the capital reppers and get an insane RR-tank instead... If anything, I take this as a call to reduce the remote repair power of Logistics and Non-Triaged Capital ships!
Using a dedicated "healer" or "repairer" is a force multiplier, allowing for more EHP and the ability to repair faster. For those who understand resistances over raw hitpoints, some truly nasty combinations can be fielded which makes for a very challenging time to kill even a single hostile ship (see Hellcat configuration for Abaddons).
Gallente/Minmatar both lends themselves to active tanks, while Amarr/Caldari lend themselves to passive tanks. Is it no wonder why the latter two are better fleet ships? If Caldari weren't so married to missiles and/or hybrids weren't as gimp as they are, they'd be used a lot more in fleets (for now, Tengu/Drake armies are the primary fleets running Caldari). Amarr are obviously used in the AHAC and Hellcat arenas for their tanks, and Minmatar are primarily used because of their weapon system AND their ability to fit a reasonably high shield buffer tank in their high slots combined with plenty of damage/speed mods in the lows. Gallente don't have the slot layout or weapon system to run a fleet setup using shield buffer tanks, and when they run armor buffers their usefulness falls below that of most Caldari gunboats due to their weapon systems (drone boats being an exception with very large tanks AND very reasonable DPS, but game mechanics make Drones marginal at best for real PvP outside of empire). |
Vrykolakasis
Trinity Operations Aurora Irae
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:34:00 -
[795] - Quote
Role bonus: 65% damage bonus to hybrid turrets on Deimos. Skill bonus - 12% bonus to the speed increase of MWD per level with 7.5% increase in capacitor cost of MWD per level (which skill? idk... total of 60% mwd speed increase at level 5 but it can't go fast for long)
Thoughts?
Please note this is a brainstorm style idea and it hasn't been thought out in full, or really much at all. I'll let you guys do that for me. It makes "Ship A" from earlier a better blaster boat by a good bit. A crazy high dps boat at super short range that has the ability to get in close but does it at the expense of cap. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:37:00 -
[796] - Quote
Vrykolakasis wrote:Role bonus: 65% damage bonus to hybrid turrets on Deimos. Skill bonus - 12% bonus to the speed increase of MWD per level with 7.5% increase in capacitor cost of MWD per level (which skill? idk... total of 60% mwd speed increase at level 5 but it can't go fast for long)
Thoughts?
Please note this is a brainstorm style idea and it hasn't been thought out in full, or really much at all. I'll let you guys do that for me. It makes "Ship A" from earlier a better blaster boat by a good bit. A crazy high dps boat at super short range that has the ability to get in close but does it at the expense of cap. A "dash" bonus for blaster boats wouldn't be too bad of an option if implemented reasonably across the board (very similar to the capacitor reduction bonuses for Amarr gunboats). It accomplishes the same thing as the agility idea a few pages back, without introducing too many game breaking mechanics (like insta-align).
I'd rather see blaster boats have their weapons revamped rather than just push a massive damage multiplier, but something like you said where blaster boats have a "+15% bonus to the speed increase of MWD per level" would do rather nicely. With MWD penalties already in place via the modules, it might be interesting to hold off on a penalty and give Gallente pilots the option of having long burn with the right fits, but slower if not burning. With tracking on blasters the way it is, and generally only blaster boats receiving this bonus, Gallente will need to slow down once in their targeting envelope to land hits due to the close range of their weapon systems and the potential for traversal to play a much greater role. This would also push Gallente away from afterburner fits, and make cap stability a challenge to balance with active tanking and capacitor usage on guns. |
lexa21
RED ROSE THORN RED Citizens
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:43:00 -
[797] - Quote
Hum... When i saw topic on forum i was glad, but then i read it. There were only one thing You tell right. Powergrid requirements for neutron medium blasters are too much for any tank fitting. All other stuff is not necessary but railgun damage. 10% is not enough. All of eve community were waiting for that day. And what do we see? 600 dps of rail mega changed to 630? Thats not enough. And by the way the first page of this topic on Russian forum is shining of facepalms, tears and answers about artillery buff. |
Digital Gaidin
Manetheren Rising
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:45:00 -
[798] - Quote
lexa21 wrote:Hum... When i saw topic on forum i was glad, but then i read it. There were only one thing You tell right. Powergrid requirements for neutron medium blasters are too much for any tank fitting. All other stuff is not necessary but railgun damage. 10% is not enough. All of eve community were waiting for that day. And what do we see? 600 dps of rail mega changed to 630? Thats not enough. And by the way the first page of this topic on Russian forum is shining of facepalms, tears and answers about artillery buff. 10% of 600 is what? Not 630... lol! Also, if that is added to base damage, once bonus multipliers are added it gets even larger. |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:58:00 -
[799] - Quote
Bluemelon wrote:
There are some issue's in the fact that it is not a gallente EXCLUSIVE buff.
The Gallente do not need an exclusive buff. Balancing hybrids affects both the Caldari and Gallente, and while these changes may help some missioners, the biggest area of EVE these changes will affect is PvP. From this point of view it's arguable that Caldari need the buff more than Gallente. I've never met a FC that would prefer a Caldari damage ship over a Gallente damage ship, as the damage rails add to a fight is minimal to non-existent, missiles can take up to 20 or more seconds before applying damage, and most Caldari ships simply can't spare the mid-slots to fit a MWD/AB, web, and scram/disruptor: three required mods in small scale and solo combat. While Gallente blaster boats are in need of buffs to bring them up to par, simply having other people to help web targets can make them somewhat of a threat in small scale PvP, something that can't be done to fix the failings of Caldari combat.
Don't get me wrong, Gallente need this, but so do Caldari. |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:00:00 -
[800] - Quote
Okay....... I've actually resubbed via hours for PLEX to put a PLEX on my account to be able to post on the forums. Daft that I actually have to have an active Eve account to post on the forums after years of subs but meh...... I want in on this debate.
Right. These initial balances are a step in the right direction. A baby step but it is at least in the right direction. I also want to thank CCP for making a concerted effort and listening to the player base for feed back.
Now.... Onto balancing these damn guns!
TL;DR:- Nerf Pulse tracking. Nerf AC damage and increase fitting reqs. Buff Blaster tracking and damage and reduce fitting costs. Rework Ammo to be useful for something other than Damage or Range
First off. We have to accept that the whole turret system is pretty borked. Pulses and AC's work at close range and in some cases outperform Blasters because of certain problems with hulls. Pulse lasers can track far too well at close range. AC's simply deal far too much damage. In order to fix this issue we need to give the weapons highly defined roles. To put it bluntly when talking about short range weapons only: Pulse should be the king of "Long Range" Blasters should be the king of "Short Range" AC's should be the king of "Versatility"
Basically speaking in a rock paper scissor environment: Pulse Laser boat should always try to out range it's target where it has the damage advantage. Blaster boat should always try to get within very close range where it will out damage its target (vs AC's) and speed tank it's target (vs Pulse) AC boat is always going to choose to out range vs Blaster or get under the guns vs Pulse in order to out damage it's target. These weapons systems should never ever outperform another weapons system inside of that weapon's operation zone. AC's should never out DPS Blasters at close range or out DPS Pulses at long range Pulses should never out track Blasters or AC's at close range. However, currently some of the above is true. AC's simply do too much damage overall and Pulse lasers simply track far too well at close range. Blasters (at present) can't deal enough damage or track their targets well enough within their optimal ranges. So: Nerf Pulse tracking, Nerf AC damage, Buff Blaster damage and tracking. Another problem with turrets (Hybrid & Energy) is their ammo. It's simply too unilateral in you choose either short range hi dmg or long range low dmg. This idea basically makes 6/8ths of the ammo availible to each weapon redundent as people will always choose either close range (AM/MF) or long range (Iron/Radio). The other ammo types need to be appealing to use for different hulls and situations. To that end I would change Hybrid and Energy turret ammo's into something like this:
Multifrequency (short range EM) : Remains as is except high EM low Thermal Gamma (short range hi RoF) : +50% RoF -50% Damage -50% optimal X-Ray (Short Range hi tracking) : -50% optimal +10% tracking low dmg Ultraviolet (Mid range Mid dmg) : +25% optimal Standard (V.Low Cap Use Mid Rng) : +25% optimal -50% cap use -20% damage Infra-red (Short rng Thermal) : As MF but with hi thermal damage Microwave (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal +15% Cap use Radio (Extreme long range) : +60% optimal
Antimatter (Short rng Thermal) : Remains as is High Thermal low Kinetic damage Uranium (Short rng Hi RoF) : +50% Rof -50% dmg -25% optimal -25% falloff Plutonium (Short rng Hi tracking) : -25% optimal & falloff +10% tracking low dmg Thorium (Hi falloff low optimal) : +50% Falloff Lead (Hi optimal Low falloff) : +50% Optimal Iridium (Short rng Kinetic) : As AM with hi kinetic low Thermal Tungsten (Sniper/Alpha low RoF) : +50% dmg -50% Rof +40% optimal & falloff +15% Cap use Iron (Extreme long range) : +60% Optimal & fall off
The idea behind this is that certain hulls will favour RoF over damage due to hull bonuses and because these weapons are locked into EM & Thermal and Thermal & Kinetic the short range ammo at least has a bit of a choice between the two similar to projectile ammo which has a choice between all damage types. The idea behind the "Sniper/Alpha" ammo is to give these ships a realistic Sniper option as alpha is king in sniper roles. This won't however deal greater alpha than Arties but will have a decent volley damage. The idea behind Hybrids getting one ammo for falloff and one ammo for optimal is because of Gallente and Caldari having the differing bonuses but using the same weapons. **All numbers are just for example purposes and are subject to change to satisfy balancing** |
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:06:00 -
[801] - Quote
Along with the above post I would change several hulls in the game to make them competitive in their class and to start removing the tier system...... Here is an idea of the types of changes I would make to ships including the buff/nerf to weapons I posted above:
Eagle: +1 turret slot. More PG less CPU. Combine the double optimal bonus into a single +20% Hybrid optimal per HAC lvl Add +5% Hybrid RoF Bonus per Caldari cruiser lvl This would make the Eagle a very attractive Blaster or Rail boat.
Ferox: +1 turret slot. More PG less CPU This would make the Ferox a very good Blaster or Rail boat but does not outperform the Eagle
Deimos: +1 turret slot. More PG less CPU Switch one of the +5% Hybrid dmg bonuses for a +5% RoF Bonus Increase hybrid falloff bonus to 7.5% per level This would give the Deimos exceptional closerange DPS and better performance with Rails
Brutix: Remove armour rep bonus and replace with a 7.5% hybrid falloffper BC lvl bonus More PG less CPU Removing the Rep bonus for a falloff bonus clearly defines the Brutix's role and segregates it from the Myrmidon instead of just making it a lower tier BC.
Myrmidon: Increase Dronebay to 200m3. Increase Drone bandwidth to 100Mbit Remove 2x turret hardpoints but keep the hi slots as utility slots. This is to increase the Myrmidons versitility as a solo/fleet platform.
Prophecy: Replace energy turret cap usage for a 10% per lvl optimal bonus This gives the Prophecy a far better role as Fire support rather than just a tank. Useful with Pulse or Beams without stepping on the Zealots toes.
Cyclone: This ship is simply a little low on CPU. A little more CPU would push this already decent BC into an excellent solo platform.
Hyperion: More PG. Needs 125 Mbit drone bandwidth and 150m3 Drone bay. This will allow the Hyperion to actually compete with the other 3rd tier BS's
Also..... All blaster boats need to be super fast but have low agility. This way they can get into range easily but also be out manoeuvred by Minmatar hulls which shouldn't be faster but should have much higher agility. We need to accept that Minnie shouldn't have the speed and agility to easily fly circles around everyone. Just the agility is enough with some clever piloting. |
ConXtionS
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Cascade Imminent
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:31:00 -
[802] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:Hello all. Sorry for not replying more. I've been a tad busy. We're trying to get these changes to SISI so we can start playing around with them. Once this is on SISI, please post more feedback in the test server feedback forums.
Here are some responses to your concerns.
"This isn't enough, we need bigger boosts to damage" That is entirely possible but I believe this is a good starting point.
So, 3 years, thousands of complaints, another 37 pages of "I think you need to look at this harder" and you STILL THINK this is a good starting point?????
|
Betid
Dead poets society The Laughing Men
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:36:00 -
[803] - Quote
Please paste this into the dev blog: All warps to probed ships less than 5au away introduce a 95% chance of landing between 20km and 60km from the target.
People don't need fitting changes to crave rails. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:00:00 -
[804] - Quote
Kazetsu Davaham wrote:Hello
would it not be cool if blasters had a small splash dmg ? similar to shotguns.
this would give them advantage over smaller ships/drones
Ideas that propose to give blasters some form of area damage are not thought through. There have been proposals a couple of pages back where a sort of "focused smartbomb" was proposed. How do you discriminate between targets? What if a fleet member is close to the target (maybe also with blasters)? Or it only applies to targeted ships, which would be one solution, but then you open another can of worms: What about the mate I have targeted because I want to remote repair him, or tracking link him or whatever? This would also put target count limits on ships in a completely new perspective due to a single weapon system requiring multiple targets. Will 5 (ish) targets be enough for a cruiser sized blaster boats? what if he wants to shoot at drones, where a single enemy already brings 5 of those (plus the enemy himself)?
It also means you basically can't use blasters in high-sec (depending on how you decided you want to distribute the damage), or your target just parks a cloaked ship (non-WT) close by just to get you concorded. There's a reason nobody uses smartbombs in high... Or he decloaks right before your salvo if it doesn't work on cloaked ships (generally AoE weapons do work just fine though).
It would also likely cause additional server stress. You'd have to check if you hit a target for every possible target. This includes selecting the target (via cone ot proximity to actual target), then performing normal "hit checks" for every one of those. They only relatively recently reduced the server load by grouping guns as those are not as cheap to perform as you might think! Just to put the magnitude of this problem into perspective: Imagine 20 blasterboats shooting at a group of "whaterver"-target-ships, grouped close enough that you have a chance to hit them all. After this change it would need to calculate which ship is a target for 20 shots and 19 potential targets (one is the primary target, no need to check there), then have hit/damage checks for the resulting ships (I propose half as an example). So we'd have: 20 shots with 19 potential targets + 10 hit checks each = 3800 checks (!!!!) Currently a salvo of the blaster fleet would cause 20 hit-checks. That's it... Now have a guess what will happen with 200 ships on each side...
If you somehow derive if the surrounding ships are hit from the hit check on the primary target you'll get exploits. Say a fleet is attacked by a skirmish-like gang of smaller ships they can't properly hit. They start shooting one of their own ships (heavily tanked, potentially with logistics or something) to hit the surrounding smaller ships.
All in all: incredibly STUPID and IMPRACTICAL idea! |
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:03:00 -
[805] - Quote
Blaster boats do not need sped. engagement starting at 15 and what.. flying toward target, target kiting you, so you need more speed to catch them.. and even more speed to catch faster than he could kill you.. And then we have second minmatar.
Blaster boats need acceleration and agility that it could dash short range faster than opponent (projectile user.). Leave speed for minmatar, give blaster boats agility.
Without revamping whole blaster concept we wouldn't move from this dead point. ships are to sluggish to be used with shortest range gun system. if we give range, it would be invasion to other system fields, mainly projectiles. |
Kiev Duran
Grand Solar Trinity
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:16:00 -
[806] - Quote
Betid wrote:Please paste this into the dev blog: All warps to probed ships less than 5au away introduce a 95% chance of landing between 20km and 60km from the target.
People don't need fitting changes to crave rails.
Rails, as they are now, are really only useful for the +150 km ranges. Landing even 100 km away from the targets would most likely put the rail fleet at a severe disadvantage. Landing at anything closer than 60 km would in most cases spell the death of the rail fleet, as those ranges start to see speed out-tracking rails.
Opting instead for 20 km to 60 km deviation from desired warp in point would be a better potential fix, but would almost always spell death for a FC that warps his fleet; as the fleet could end up scattered over an area of 120 km. This could still work as a fix, however, by not applying the deviation to ships in fleet warped to. Thus forcing someone to act as a dedicated prober in hopes of quickly getting to a good staging point for the rest of the fleet.
This is approach would be making rails better by trying to shoehorn the extreme range role back into the game, and while CCP could take this route, I'd prefer a more elegant solution in tweaking the ships and modules themselves.
What about the introduction of a third T2 ammo for both hybrid systems? Something that gave strong damage (somewhere near antimatter and plutonium) at 0% range bonus. This, combined with a modest increase to railgun damage (at the cost of some range) and blaster tracking and optimal (at the cost of some falloff) could go a long way towards fixing hybrids. |
DHB WildCat
Club Bear The Seventh Day
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:32:00 -
[807] - Quote
LMAO at all the sniping changes!
They act like sniping is even viable in this game. We dont care about Rails / or long range ammo. Just blasters......
Maybe if you fix it so snipers cant be scanned in under 8 seconds then we will care about powergrid / cpu of rails, and long range ammo of any kind other than barrage.
You cant really be that out of touch with your own game? |
NutyNUTS
Federation Mission Acedemy
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:37:00 -
[808] - Quote
Yes, Yes, Yes. with these changes I will now finally have a point having large railguns on my domi instead of just afking and letting my drones do all the work like others i know who fly them. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:37:00 -
[809] - Quote
Digital Gaidin wrote:lexa21 wrote:Hum... When i saw topic on forum i was glad, but then i read it. There were only one thing You tell right. Powergrid requirements for neutron medium blasters are too much for any tank fitting. All other stuff is not necessary but railgun damage. 10% is not enough. All of eve community were waiting for that day. And what do we see? 600 dps of rail mega changed to 630? Thats not enough. And by the way the first page of this topic on Russian forum is shining of facepalms, tears and answers about artillery buff. 10% of 600 is what? Not 630... lol! Also, if that is added to base damage, once bonus multipliers are added it gets even larger.
While you caught his 10% error, you're completely wrong about the increase in damage if it's applied to the base. Adding 10% is a multiplication, everything that adds ors reduces damage in game is also a multiplication (ship bonuses, gun damage modifier, tracking, signature vs resolution, ...). Multiplications are commutative. The order doesn't matter. 10% more base damage is 10% more damage in the end. Period.
Example time! "mythical ammo" has 6.5 base damage. Adding 10% makes it 7.15. If you have a gun with a multiplier of 7 and a ship bonus of 25% you get 6.5 * 7 * 1.25 = 56.875. Adding 10% results in 62.5625. If we start with the already added 10% we get 7.15 * 7 * 1.25 = 62.5625. Who would have though?
Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commutative_property
Spugg Galdon wrote:Also..... All blaster boats need to be super fast but have low agility. This way they can get into range easily but also be out manoeuvred by Minmatar hulls which shouldn't be faster but should have much higher agility. We need to accept that Minnie shouldn't have the speed and agility to easily fly circles around everyone. Just the agility is enough with some clever piloting.
Yes! Exactly! THIS! like I've been saying! No need be agile or nimble (that's Minmatar), give us Gallente huge engines that gives us alot or straight line speed but the turning radius and time of a planet :) |
Hyrath Rotineque
Atlas Research Group Vanguard Venture Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 17:49:00 -
[810] - Quote
Overall I think that a few additional fixes could be thrown in and not make everything super crazy right away.
I really like the idea of blaster boats getting a MWD speed boost at the expense of additional cap drain - Could be the extra sprint mechanic that everyone seems to agree that is needed. (Remove active repper bonus on the boats)
People are saying that if the ships are going faster they'll need more tracking so give blasters just that. Even more tracking to make sure that it's not going to hinder blaster boats even more to make them fly up to something and miss most of it's shots because of it. (Not giving an actual number because personally I have no idea what is exactly needed)
Also on the issue of rails being useless at super long ranges possibly change the warp distance requirement. It was mentioned in a thread not too long ago that I read, something in the area of 200km distance required to warp so Hybrid Rails may have some further use in game again for PvP. |
|
Imawuss
United Atheist League
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 18:34:00 -
[811] - Quote
I'm curious why these changes are so tame? CCP themselves (at least in a dev blog) said a little unbalance is a good thing. Having FoTM is good, it forces people to adapt, train new skills, learn new strategies, and explore more of the game. CCP's words not mine (paraphrased).
So a company that thinks FoTM is good why is this hybrid "rebalance" so mediocre?
My thoughts? the devs love their winmatar boats they fly and have not had their fill yet, hence the buff to hail increasing AC's best ammo DPS range by 50%.
So why CCP are you choosing to go against your own ideology when it come to hybrids? |
Alara IonStorm
RvB - BLUE Republic
328
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 18:47:00 -
[812] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: "Tech II ammo needs to be rethought" I agree that we need to take a better look at this. What I did was just reacting to some issues that I found to be very obvious when comparing them to tech 1 ammo.
"Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible... etc." Keep posting specific examples. We can't fix everything at once, but hearing the problems from you helps us prioritize what needs to be looked at.
Hi Tallest I would like to bring a couple of things up.
I have noticed that the fleet weapons tend to have several traits in common. Range between 35-70KM, accuracy and High DPS/Alpha.
To that regard the major choices are Heavy Missiles, 1400mm Artillery and Scorch Weapons.
Rails meet the range requirement but even with the buff this is how they will compare to the above.
* Mega Pulse Scorch, less Dmg, less accurate. * Heavy Missiles, Large Rails slightly more Dmg but way less accurate. Medium Rails do not even come close to comparing range or Dmg wise. * Artillery, Lower DPS and way less Alpha.
Beams suffer as well. Having less DPS then Scorch and less Alpha then Artillery.
If you want better balance then you need fleets using LR Weapons again. You have to make 1400mm less OP and bring Scorch back to a Short Range Weapon.
If you do not Beams and Rails will just be a PvP foot note. Along with it the Rokh, Ferox, Moa and Eagle will never be the fleet ships they are supposed to be and will always be squarely in that suck column. You should also look into a Damage Bonus as is standard for every fleet ship.
Another thing you should look into if you are going to put in the time to really fix Rail Gun Ships would be to give Gallente a dedicated Rail Ship. increasing Hybrid Tracking you could throw the Megathron, Deimos, and a Proteus Sub system a 10% Optimal Range Bonus. Or remake the Hyperion out to be one. Really any change that gives Gallente a viable fleet choice would be nice.
|
Alara IonStorm
RvB - BLUE Republic
328
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 18:50:00 -
[813] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Prophecy: Replace energy turret cap usage for a 10% per lvl optimal bonus This gives the Prophecy a far better role as Fire support rather than just a tank. Useful with Pulse or Beams without stepping on the Zealots toes.
Honestly no, it would still be a pretty sad ship but it could tickle at a longer range.
The Harbinger is pretty bad off too. It has a crap bonus as well. Give it an Optimal Range Bonus instead of Laser Cap and Give the Prophecy a Damage Bonus and make it a serious brawler.
With the Zealots Sig and Speed none of this will touch it's toes.
|
AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
34
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 18:52:00 -
[814] - Quote
CCP Guard wrote:CCP Tallest brings yet more news of balancing. This time he tells us what he's doing to hybrid weapons and tech II ammo this winter!
Make sure you tell Tallest what your thoughts are about the changes. He's waiting for your feedback.
Feeding back as requested:
This does not address the key issue; kiting.
Cannot get into range Cannot dictate range Cannot lay down effective DPS
Why you have decided to ignore this key issue is beyond comprehension.
All this says to anyone wishing to fight a blaster ship is: "carry on using the same tactic you've been using since we introduced the speed-nerf."
Blasters were designed in a world where webs slowed ships down to max 90% and mwd would only turn themselves off if the pilot pushed the button.
Webs are still at 60% and the enemy can turn off someone's mwd if they fit a scram.
Blaster will therefore be at perpetual arms length to any ship, outside their optimal, repping armour until death.
Fix the ships using bonuses and attributes applicable to reversing the speed-nerf.
CCP Tallest...please please please please look into the root cause of the speed nerf, hopefully you will find out why the speed nerf was introduced in the first place.
Go through the dev blogs, looks at the feedback, look at the changes that were made PRIOR to the speed-nerf concerning agility, mass and all related hull upgrade modules.
Where we are today is a direct result of this, not the speed nerf; that was purely an attempt to correct a mistake, and it was very poorly thought-out.
What made the dev blog on the speed nerf worse was it was written in the style of someone who lost too many ships to a blasterboat, and changes the rules to affect their style of play - I'm not insinuating this is the case, purely that the dev blog was written in that style.
AK GÇ£You go into combat, and itGÇÖs NOT going to be WagnerGǪindustrial techno or really hard drum and bassGÇ¥
Reynir Hardarson, founding member of CCP Games, 2002. |
Niamota Olin
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 19:36:00 -
[815] - Quote
Ok I've been a stubborn Gallente pilot for a while now, and hearing about some buffs for Hybrids I was very excited... but now I've seen them.
Think I'll stick to my miny pilot with 1/3 the skill points who can out fly this character in every category they can fly for PvP.
IE FAIL
Thanks for the PvE rail buff though, it really makes up for the years of disappointment so far.
Guess I should try and come up with easy fixes... because anything more complicated, I will not wait years for.
Make the difficulties of getting into range with blasters WORTH it with a significant blaster damage bonus. With all the problems of getting an armoured tank ship in close, make it worthy of the challenge rather than just a bit more damage. Make an ammo for blaster with low (comparative damage) but huge fall off bonus. Faster reload time to all hybrids, be that nice tweak of flavour.
And scrap the idiotic Hail buff, the last thing AC's need is any form of buff. |
Yazzinra
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 20:32:00 -
[816] - Quote
as an interceptor pilot, im none too happy about this. if the taranis and ares arent getting a speed boost, why the agility hit? ceptors need agility.
that said, if you remove that god aweful turret from the roof of my taranis, ill call it even. i havent even flown the thing since you put a hat on it :( not all of us fly fully zoomed out.
that said, hybrid improvements look decent, looking forward to testing them out on sisi. winters gonna be alot of fun. |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 20:32:00 -
[817] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:CCP Tallest wrote: "Tech II ammo needs to be rethought" I agree that we need to take a better look at this. What I did was just reacting to some issues that I found to be very obvious when comparing them to tech 1 ammo.
"Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible... etc." Keep posting specific examples. We can't fix everything at once, but hearing the problems from you helps us prioritize what needs to be looked at.
Hi Tallest I would like to bring a couple of things up. I have noticed that the fleet weapons tend to have several traits in common. Range between 35-70KM, accuracy and High DPS/Alpha. To that regard the major choices are Heavy Missiles, 1400mm Artillery and Scorch Weapons. Rails meet the range requirement but even with the buff this is how they will compare to the above. * Mega Pulse Scorch, less Dmg, less accurate. * Heavy Missiles, Large Rails slightly more Dmg but way less accurate. Medium Rails do not even come close to comparing range or Dmg wise. * Artillery, Lower DPS and way less Alpha. Beams suffer as well. Having less DPS then Scorch and less Alpha then Artillery. If you want better balance then you need fleets using LR Weapons again. You have to make 1400mm less OP and bring Scorch back to a Short Range Weapon. If you do not Beams and Rails will just be a PvP foot note. Along with it the Rokh, Ferox, Moa and Eagle will never be the fleet ships they are supposed to be and will always be squarely in that suck column. You should also look into a Damage Bonus as is standard for every fleet ship. Another thing you should look into if you are going to put in the time to really fix Rail Gun Ships would be to give Gallente a dedicated Rail Ship. increasing Hybrid Tracking you could throw the Megathron, Deimos, and a Proteus Sub system a 10% Optimal Range Bonus. Or remake the Hyperion out to be one. Really any change that gives Gallente a viable fleet choice would be nice.
+1
excellent points. it's necessary that we have a mobile, deadly, cruiser-size rail platform. Deimos, Proteus, whatever.
in addition, there's no reason to be so "timid" about buffing hybrids....theyve fallen so far behind...everything. all 3 weapon systems have a role (we can nitpick about beams, but pulses are just so good), and it's about time for hybrids to have their place in small gangs and fleets. |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
94
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 21:03:00 -
[818] - Quote
Maybe I'm biased towards my own question? But I thought it was fairly relevant to ask for clarification on the rational for being hesitant in adjusting hybrid platform ships?
Quote:CCP Tallest: "I agree that those issues need to be taken into account, but I don't think they are the best place to start when we rebalance hybrid turrets."
Why? Could you elaborate on this please? |
Jane Idoka
LoneStar Industries Comatose Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 21:10:00 -
[819] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Along with the above post I would change several hulls in the game to make them competitive in their class and to start removing the tier system...... Here is an idea of the types of changes I would make to ships including the buff/nerf to weapons I posted above:
Eagle: +1 turret slot. More PG less CPU. Combine the double optimal bonus into a single +20% Hybrid optimal per HAC lvl Add +5% Hybrid RoF Bonus per Caldari cruiser lvl This would make the Eagle a very attractive Blaster or Rail boat.
Ferox: +1 turret slot. More PG less CPU This would make the Ferox a very good Blaster or Rail boat but does not outperform the Eagle
Deimos: +1 turret slot. More PG less CPU Switch one of the +5% Hybrid dmg bonuses for a +5% RoF Bonus Increase hybrid falloff bonus to 7.5% per level This would give the Deimos exceptional closerange DPS and better performance with Rails
Brutix: Remove armour rep bonus and replace with a 7.5% hybrid falloffper BC lvl bonus More PG less CPU Removing the Rep bonus for a falloff bonus clearly defines the Brutix's role and segregates it from the Myrmidon instead of just making it a lower tier BC.
Myrmidon: Increase Dronebay to 200m3. Increase Drone bandwidth to 100Mbit Remove 2x turret hardpoints but keep the hi slots as utility slots. This is to increase the Myrmidons versitility as a solo/fleet platform.
Prophecy: Replace energy turret cap usage for a 10% per lvl optimal bonus This gives the Prophecy a far better role as Fire support rather than just a tank. Useful with Pulse or Beams without stepping on the Zealots toes.
Cyclone: This ship is simply a little low on CPU. A little more CPU would push this already decent BC into an excellent solo platform.
Hyperion: More PG. Needs 125 Mbit drone bandwidth and 150m3 Drone bay. This will allow the Hyperion to actually compete with the other 3rd tier BS's
Also..... All blaster boats need to be super fast but have low agility. This way they can get into range easily but also be out manoeuvred by Minmatar hulls which shouldn't be faster but should have much higher agility. We need to accept that Minnie shouldn't have the speed and agility to easily fly circles around everyone. Just the agility is enough with some clever piloting.
u want fries with that? |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 21:21:00 -
[820] - Quote
Speaking of rigs....
In the past, I almost never bother using hybrid weapon rigs, since the PG penalty on top of the high PG req of hybrids is severe - esp. on a gunboat with 5-8 PG hungry blasters or rails.
But, with the reduction in PG for hybrids, it looks like the gun rigs can be used more often now.
A quick EFT test of a T1 Hybrid Collision Accelerator on a old Brutix loadout, with seven T2 heavy neutrons, looks like it will add around 7% to the DPS. The T2 version looks to add around 11%.
Another quick EFT test on an old PVE mission rail loadout showed that the 30% cap reduction of hybrids allowed swapping a CCC rig for a HCA rig, one for one, boosting DPS while still remaining cap stable. Also, the T1 HCA rig is much cheaper than the T1 CCC rig - so, more bang for the buck. |
|
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 23:28:00 -
[821] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Speaking of rigs....
In the past, I almost never bother using hybrid weapon rigs, since the PG penalty on top of the high PG req of hybrids is severe - esp. on a gunboat with 5-8 PG hungry blasters or rails.
But, with the reduction in PG for hybrids, it looks like the gun rigs can be used more often now.
A quick EFT test of a T1 Hybrid Collision Accelerator on a old Brutix loadout, with seven T2 heavy neutrons, looks like it will add around 7% to the DPS. The T2 version looks to add around 11%.
Another quick EFT test on an old PVE mission rail loadout showed that the 30% cap reduction of hybrids allowed swapping a CCC rig for a HCA rig, one for one, boosting DPS while still remaining cap stable. Also, the T1 HCA rig is much cheaper than the T1 CCC rig - so, more bang for the buck.
Can your share your fit? |
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
39
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 23:44:00 -
[822] - Quote
I am extremely skeptical of adding tracking over damage to blasters. It was never poor tracking that drove me to using Projectiles and then Lasers. It was damage. Blasters just don't have it. They also don't have range - so even should they have reasonable damage they just don't have the range for me to use it. I understand that the ship changes are intended to help alleviate that, but I remain skeptical.
I don't promise to ***** this thread - send me a mail if you want me to expound on this.
-Liang |
Oxeu
Garnithos seal of the Covenant The Heaven's Devils
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 23:56:00 -
[823] - Quote
The issue to me seems you want blasters to be the king of short range dps, but auto cannons do that job better and at longer ranges.
I would sooner reduce blaster damage and give them a 10k optimal with short range ammo or something park them in between the auto cannons and the pulse lasers. Makes more sense to on slower ships.
But above all to me the fact is you got 1 gun type to many meaning it is hard to give it a job it is good at without over doing it or making other weapons seem pale.
Also rails need a lot more damage than just 10% their dps is pathetic and 10% to it makes it still worthless and really fine with your range talk, but not a soul in this damn game snipes from 150-250k away for all the right reasons. I would vote to reduce artillery cannons accuracy at ranges due it being a crude weapons, reduce rail range to and add to rail dps. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
109
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 00:02:00 -
[824] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:I am extremely skeptical of adding tracking over damage to blasters. It was never poor tracking that drove me to using Projectiles and then Lasers. It was damage. Blasters just don't have it. They also don't have range - so even should they have reasonable damage they just don't have the range for me to use it. I understand that the ship changes are intended to help alleviate that, but I remain skeptical.
I don't promise to ***** this thread - send me a mail if you want me to expound on this.
-Liang
If you're web and manage to orbit blaster bs with your cane at 1.5km, he will almost never hit you, I consider this has serious tracking issue.
Everything other than frigates, webbed and under 10km should have to pick their teeth wiht broken fingers at best.
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
98
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 01:02:00 -
[825] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:I am extremely skeptical of adding tracking over damage to blasters. It was never poor tracking that drove me to using Projectiles and then Lasers. It was damage. Blasters just don't have it. They also don't have range - so even should they have reasonable damage they just don't have the range for me to use it. I understand that the ship changes are intended to help alleviate that, but I remain skeptical.
I don't promise to ***** this thread - send me a mail if you want me to expound on this.
-Liang
OMG you're back!!!!! YAY! |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 01:39:00 -
[826] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:
Prophecy: Replace energy turret cap usage for a 10% per lvl optimal bonus This gives the Prophecy a far better role as Fire support rather than just a tank. Useful with Pulse or Beams without stepping on the Zealots toes.
Honestly no, it would still be a pretty sad ship but it could tickle at a longer range. The Harbinger is pretty bad off too. It has a crap bonus as well. Give it an Optimal Range Bonus instead of Laser Cap and Give the Prophecy a Damage Bonus and make it a serious brawler. With the Zealots Sig and Speed none of this will touch it's toes.
Harbinger is already in a good place and is a serious Brawler. Without Cap Bonus to turrets it would cap it's self out far too quickly with 7 guns. I stick with my original suggestion of turning the Prophecy into a fire support platform with an optimal range bonus instead of Cap.
Jane Idoka wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:Stuff I said u want fries with that?
Yes I do. But tell me why any of these fixes wouldn't work.
Eagle/Ferox would both perform exceptional as either a blaster or rail setup
Deimos gets its very heavy DPS at close range and the falloff bonus helps for sniper fits
etc etc
|
Vigilant Archer
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 02:09:00 -
[827] - Quote
In my experience the problem with hail wasn't the fallof but the optimal, I've tried everything I can in a rifter using t2 200mm's and I simply can't get close enough to get within optimsl rsnge when orbiting at 500m, falloff was fine for me decreasing optimal penalty might help it bring it up to par.
Also I find that it's kind of depressing to see that a blaster fit battleship can be outranged very easily by a frigate using rails, artillery or even beams, haven't applied the math of the buff yet but pretty sure it's still the same scenario.
Also on a side note I kind of feel the jaguar's optimal bonus and the wolf's falloff bonus should be switched, but that's for another day, |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
187
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 02:27:00 -
[828] - Quote
Right, so since Gallente is bloody damn powerful up close already, but rails are fail and blasters have fallen out of favour (it never was made for nullsec blob fights anyway, but hey), here's my take on what could solve this;
Give Gallente an innate 90% web bonus (as others suggested). But - give it a massive stacking penalty. I.e. if you apply two webs, they'll only be 90.1% or something. It would be ridicilous if we came back to the point where we can't get back to gates purely because there's Gallente sitting on the field.
To put some perspective where I'm coming from: http://kenny.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=10928688 That happened just some day ago. The Drake jumped through the gate I was sitting on, I single-webbed (yes, not dual web) him and he only got about halfways back to the gate before he died. The Machariel did not even join in until five seconds before the Drake died, I believe, just to get on the killmail.
I.e. Vindicator functions like the old Megas did, and work "as a Gallente/blaster-ship". If Gallente would work innate like that, it would make blasters bloody damn powerful even at current stats, and solve alot of the issues. But multiple webs would just make it gamebreaking, and that's something even I (even tho I'd benefit from it) wouldn't want to see. (not to mention how overpowered every railship would be, they could just web-kite anything to death) this is a signature |
Vigilant Archer
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 02:41:00 -
[829] - Quote
I've been looking over the buff a bit more hybrids especially blasters would still need some serious buffing even after this buff, I say blasters don't need a damage increase but an optimal and falloff increase as mentioned in my last post currently from my math an artillery fit frigate can outrange a blaster fit battleship,and not to mention even if the frig was in range the bs still couldn't hit it (as should be). |
Chicken Pizza
Penumbra Institute Inver Brass
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 03:00:00 -
[830] - Quote
Good babysteps. Still needs more work, though.
I may have to break out my 330m ISK Daredevil in minor celebration after the patch. 20% tracking bonus? Yes please! |
|
Calbanite
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 04:40:00 -
[831] - Quote
Not sure if It's been brought up yet in this thread but someone suggested a while back to give blasters a higher chance to score those wrecking hits we all love. It wouldn't fix them of course... you still have that "getting into range while not capping out or exploding into a ball of wreckage" problem.
Hybrids need 2 special aspects just like the other weapon systems for starters. We could even take a better look at the ammo we use. Anyone seen those crates of Hybrid ECM charges floating around? Go ahead and look them up in game. Maybe have a charge that slows the target down or something... |
Cornette
Solar Revenue Service TAXU
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 05:20:00 -
[832] - Quote
When I read this thread and Dev post back and forth a couple of times I come to the conclusion that these proposed changes while nice won't really fix the situation with blasters and rails. The main reason is because Gallente ships are simply to slow.
Read that again dear devs: THEY. ARE. SLOW.
Giving them only a 10 / 5 increase in base speed is like farting in the wind. Hardly noticeable.
For blasters to be viable Gallente ships need to be at least 20% faster.
In comibination with overload that would bring Gallente ships almost near Minmatar normal speed, in that critical stage when you need to reach your target to apply facemelting dps to it.
That means Gallente need to become the second fastest race in game. A position that now is currently hold by Amarr.
So a 20% increase in speed pls.
Or I will continue to fly Minmatar in 90% of the times.
Another thing that needs to be done is a NERF.
Tracking Enhancers are simply to powerful for the advantage they give to autocannons/arties.
The 30% falloff need to be cut in half, to force people that use them, mostly Minmatar, to fight closer.
And your fixes to blasters are nice but they don't go the full length.
Being hit by a blaster should be the equivalent of getting hit by a shootgun. Enormous damage up close but drasticly reduce the further away the target is.
Anything within 10k range, normal webifier range, should feel the full pain.
But I know you at CCP are afraid of making them too powerful, so perhaps a compromise could do:
a 10% increase in base damage
and
a 50-100% increase in blaster optimal.
Lastly, I'm not sure about rails, but a 10% increase in damage won't cut it, maybe double that? |
Manar Detri
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 06:37:00 -
[833] - Quote
While it's all clear both rails and blasters need buffs, i'm going to say few things on just blasters.
Blasters lack dmg gap between pulse lasers and autocannons, the range is small, so the damage or something else should make the blasters win at close range. The tracking buff is something that i'd reckon is enough (as a tracking buff)_, but would actually have to test it rather than just look at the numbers.
But, we can't only be looking at the weapon system enough, and just giving more speed/agility to blaster boats doesn't cut it.
As an example, an abaddon with blasters can receive the same ehp as a hyperion while doing more dmg with the blasters (can fit 2 mag stabs and even put a rig on, hype can just fit one magstab without killing its tank). This is a problem, and any change solely on blasters will just push that weapon system on to better platforms where they can be used better than on gallante platforms.
What i'd suggest is fixing those gallante bonuses, take a good look at the drone bays (i'd go as far as 50 bandwidth + 75 m3 dronebay on cruiser size and 125 bandwidth with 150 drone bay on bs size). Secondly, make those drones work, allow em warping with you or "instantly docking" back into ur drone bay, it's a hassle of a weapon system when it can be left behind due to fastmoving required (this stings sentrys the most).
Anywho, devs need to look at the ships themselves also, bad platforms never get used. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 06:55:00 -
[834] - Quote
CCP why buffed matars ? Because everyone used before matar weapon buff the amarrian ships. Amarrian ships was overpowered above all ship types because their ridiculous scorch range. Shot from 45km range from optimal without any bonus and + 10km from falloff ??? Matar ships with their paper hull was the worst ship after speed nerf and needed to compensate them. Thx but not need matar nerf again, when amarrian can shot with scorch like a long range weapon. Need a fine solution for hybrid and rail platform for bring back to line them, but not need nerf any other weapon system. I never understand crying babies on forum, who cry because of falloff. Shot from falloff is crap. Never was better a gun with 5km optimal+25km falloff than a 30km optimal range weapon which have better tracking and which have more +10km falloff too. I know hybrid system need rethinking, but the other nerf is unacceptable when other ships "finaly" useable.
Need smarter changes than nerf. |
Sylthi
Coreward Pan-Galactic Holy Empire of The Unshaven
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 08:45:00 -
[835] - Quote
Ok.... so Hybrid turrets will now not suck as BADLY as before.... but they will still very firmly SUCK.
They are STILL: heavy on grid (for the dps, range, and tracking), heavy on CPU (for the dps, range, and tracking), heavy on cap (for the dps and tracking you get out of the crappy things), they require easily exhaustible ammo (i.e. it takes up too much space for what you get out of the crappy stuff), and you are limited to a single set of damage types. No other single weapon type carries ALL of these negatives.
It is true that some, but not nearly all, of the Gallente ships counterbalance this with nice drone bonuses and bays. But, drones are slow to respond, easy to nerf, are destructible, and the controls of which have been and seemingly always will be buggy as hell because the devs refuse (or are unable to) fix them.
So, yeah, Gallente boats are still easily in the "my recommendation to skip to my newer players" folder. (Which there have been fewer and fewer newbies around lately I've noticed CCP..... you might want to see to that.... just a recommendation if you guys all like having your jobs and indeed a company and all....)
Oh, and before I **** off all the Gallente boat drivers out there, I am in no way saying that Gallente boats are useless. They DO have their uses. But, they are BY FAR the LEAST useful tool in my arsenal, and these "balances" do NOTHING to change that.
It's like I always say to my newer players: "Trust the rust, the gold, and occasionally the steel if you must.... but avoid the mean green unless you can't be seen in anything else." I know, the saying sucks, but the newbies seem to be able to remember it; so what the hell. ;)
Peace all.
Out.
|
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 10:32:00 -
[836] - Quote
Well, after all these ideas about rebalancing hybrids, and his problems in every one of his possibilities, It's time to change for productive possibilities:
Option 1: - Drop hybrids. - Gallente -> Laser - Caldari -> Projectile
Option 2: - Drop hybrids. - Gallente -> Projectile - Caldari -> Laser
Option 3: - Minmatar -> Blasters - Gallente -> Projectile
All these with a remapping of hybrid skills SP. I would choose 1, as 3 would cause wrath on Minmatar players. |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 10:52:00 -
[837] - Quote
Would increasing minimum warp to distance to 250km not be a major help to rails too? This would allow extreme range sniper fleets. Even if they're a bit fail on alpha |
Manar Detri
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:02:00 -
[838] - Quote
even if we would increase ranges and such we are still stuck in current trend of alphaing stuff, and with time dialation coming the response times for logistics becomes even better making alphaing even more useful. If we want low alpha snipers to work we need a very much redone ewar and other utility to use against logistics.
But on a real side, lets just buff hybrids to opness, make em fotm for 6 months, while doing small balancings for it in the coming 6 months, in the end we should end up with a balanced weapon system and balanced gallante/caldari hybrid ships. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:18:00 -
[839] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Right, so since Gallente is bloody damn powerful up close already, but rails are fail and blasters have fallen out of favour (it never was made for nullsec blob fights anyway, but hey), here's my take on what could solve this; Give Gallente an innate 90% web bonus (as others suggested). But - give it a massive stacking penalty. I.e. if you apply two webs, they'll only be 90.1% or something. It would be ridicilous if we came back to the point where we can't get back to gates purely because there's Gallente sitting on the field. To put some perspective where I'm coming from: http://kenny.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=10928688That happened just some day ago. The Drake jumped through the gate I was sitting on, I single-webbed (yes, not dual web) him and he only got about halfways back to the gate before he died. The Machariel did not even join in until five seconds before the Drake died, I believe, just to get on the killmail. I.e. Vindicator functions like the old Megas did, and work "as a Gallente/blaster-ship". If Gallente would work innate like that, it would make blasters bloody damn powerful even at current stats, and solve alot of the issues. But multiple webs would just make it gamebreaking, and that's something even I (even tho I'd benefit from it) wouldn't want to see. (not to mention how overpowered every railship would be, they could just web-kite anything to death)
Webs should be just like DCU's, you shouldn't be able to fit more than one, has for warp jamers but it's another problem since Damps are crap and it's gallente reccon bonus has well, maybe these hulls could fit more than one after changes (if).
Now everyone is afraid of 90% webs, just do the math with 10% per level on 60% webs knowing most people don't train the 5th point on T2 ships since the time training is totally ridiculous for such small reward.
Either 10% web strgth per level or 15% range on web and scram (not disruptor) - this would probably help blaster hulls get to the range and do the job without forum threads and rivers of tears because of 90% webs almost no one would have. |
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:19:00 -
[840] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Would increasing minimum warp to distance to 250km not be a major help to rails too? This would allow extreme range sniper fleets. Even if they're a bit fail on alpha It will not. Now, the ship can be found in 10 seconds, with combatprobs. Warp, aproch, scram = you're dead.
|
|
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 11:36:00 -
[841] - Quote
Shmekla wrote:Blaster boats do not need sped. engagement starting at 15 and what.. flying toward target, target kiting you, so you need more speed to catch them.. and even more speed to catch faster than he could kill you.. And then we have second minmatar.
Blaster boats need acceleration and agility that it could dash short range faster than opponent (projectile user.). Leave speed for minmatar, give blaster boats agility.
Without revamping whole blaster concept we wouldn't move from this dead point. ships are to sluggish to be used with shortest range gun system. if we give range, it would be invasion to other system fields, mainly projectiles.
That is the wrong way around... What if an engagement starts at 25 km? With gates this can happen quite easily, and now the acceleration is no longer enough to get the blaster close to the target, he's kited again. Same with any longer distance where acceleration no longer trumps speed. More agility only helps for distances which are already close to the range of blasters. How close depends on the agility boost and if the speed is changed at all for this. Also this has severe side effects, like a thorax orbiting a rupture not only easily but also faster, after all agility is what limits your speed when going a circle of a certain (small) radius. Also keep in mind that you can of course still mount projectiles on that blasterboat, making it uncatchable again (with range advantage) for a real blasterboat. Lastly it just doesn't fit with the lore or stats of Gallente ships, which tend to be quite heavy. Minmatar are the light ones and should be quick to turn. Which is one of the effects of good agility, not just acceleration...
With speed on the blaster side it would be something quite different. With nerfed agility it would effectively translate to straight-line speed. This has been requested many times in the form of a MWD or AB bonus, which I just don't think you can justify. Only specialized ships (ewar, remote rep) have a role bonus to become useful in their role. You can't give all blasterboats a role bonus just because the weapon system won't work without, you'd have to replace one of the existing bonuses. Then it becomes a disadvantage, since all other ships have 2 bonuses, helping them somehow, and not just something that's just necessary for them to do damage in the first place. |
Zhephell
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 12:43:00 -
[842] - Quote
I think that it is a good idea to improve hybrid weapons because there are penalized, but I see there are many players that don t understand that it is a balance, and it is complicated and need to be tactful. The intention is to balance weapons, not to have a balanced ship if you use bad fittings with other players that use good fittings.
Blasters have good dps, and gallente ships use many drones, so I-¦m not agree to increase the damage, IGÇÖm agree to improve the tracking, or put a 5% bonus to blaster optimal range. There are many players that say that pulsars have an optimal range of 45 km and blasters not, but amarr ships can t use mwd, and they use one of the 2 bonus to reduce capacitor consumption, bonus that gallente ships use to increase the damage, increase gallente ships speed is understandable, but some minmatar ships as tempest have to be faster that an hyperion because the tempest has less HP and can t tank as an hyperion. But I am agree with actual blaster balancing , I think blasters buffs aren-¦t a problem, and I will not discuss to change 10 m/s by 5 m/s
For me the problem is in Rails. I am agree to improve 10% the damage, but I am totally disagree to reduce a 12% the power need to rail guns, ( I-¦m not talking about blaster pw) Rails are long range weapons that use less power, that others ( t2 425 mm rails use 2625 of pw, and t2 tachyons 4125 of pw, and t2 1400mm use 3575 of pw) so with this change t2 425 mm will use 2300 of pw aprox. It-¦ll be overpowered in power grid , an apocalipse with 8 t2 tachyons need with ALL SKILL at lvl 5 2 slots with 2 reactor control unit 2 that gives 15% more pw, or 1 slot and 1 rig to increase the pw, and use 1 bonus to reduce lasers capacitor use. And I -¦m not talking about other bs with tachyons. At this moment an hyperion with all skills to lvl 5 can use 8 x t2 425 mm rails and it don-¦t need to increase the power grid, as the megathrone, and rocks needs only +1 of power grid Caldari Ships have to be improved to be better in rails so i-¦m agree with increase a 10% the damage, but if this 12% pw reduction is apply I-¦ll be possible to use hyperion snipers that will be better that other snipers in 150-225 km range , I have use the eve fitting tools 2 and if you have the skills at lvl 5 this-¦ll be the result:
Low slots : 2 tracking enhancer II , 3 magnetic field stabilizers II , 1 damage control II Med slots: 3 sensor booster II (2x targeting range), 1 tracking computer II (opt range) , 1 cap recharger II High slots : 8x425 mm t2 rail guns Rigs: 1 large field ionic projector I , 1 Large hybrid collision accelerator, 1 Large hybrid locus coordinator.
Now it can be used because you need more power grid and has only 8 min of capacitor, but doing this changes this-¦ll be the results : (skills lvl 5) Dps with long range charges (no drones) : now 425 , with 10% more damage = 470 Effective HP = 58k Targeting 250 km , scan resolution 178.8, optimal range : 191 + 58 of falloff , and more speed that other snipers
With this no one will want a rock or an apoc as sniper (true snipers will be worst), so please don-¦t do this 12% pw reduction in rails, and if you do this change the 5% damage bonus of gallente ships to 5% damage bonus only with blasters, and put a 10% blaster optimal range as compensation, but please don-¦t put a t2 and a t3 high dps sniper and fast high dps blaster boats at the same time. T T
|
Manar Detri
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 12:49:00 -
[843] - Quote
Zhephell wrote:I think that it is a good idea to improve hybrid weapons because there are penalized, but I see there are many players that don t understand that it is a balance, and it is complicated and need to be tactful. The intention is to balance weapons, not to have a balanced ship if you use bad fittings with other players that use good fittings.
Blasters have good dps, and gallente ships use many drones, so I-¦m not agree to increase the damage, IGÇÖm agree to improve the tracking, or put a 5% bonus to blaster optimal range. There are many players that say that pulsars have an optimal range of 45 km and blasters not, but amarr ships can t use mwd, and they use one of the 2 bonus to reduce capacitor consumption, bonus that gallente ships use to increase the damage, increase gallente ships speed is understandable, but some minmatar ships as tempest have to be faster that an hyperion because the tempest has less HP and can t tank as an hyperion. But I am agree with actual blaster balancing , I think blasters buffs aren-¦t a problem, and I will not discuss to change 10 m/s by 5 m/s
For me the problem is in Rails. I am agree to improve 10% the damage, but I am totally disagree to reduce a 12% the power need to rail guns, ( I-¦m not talking about blaster pw) Rails are long range weapons that use less power, that others ( t2 425 mm rails use 2625 of pw, and t2 tachyons 4125 of pw, and t2 1400mm use 3575 of pw) so with this change t2 425 mm will use 2300 of pw aprox. It-¦ll be overpowered in power grid , an apocalipse with 8 t2 tachyons need with ALL SKILL at lvl 5 2 slots with 2 reactor control unit 2 that gives 15% more pw, or 1 slot and 1 rig to increase the pw, and use 1 bonus to reduce lasers capacitor use. And I -¦m not talking about other bs with tachyons. At this moment an hyperion with all skills to lvl 5 can use 8 x t2 425 mm rails and it don-¦t need to increase the power grid, as the megathrone, and rocks needs only +1 of power grid Caldari Ships have to be improved to be better in rails so i-¦m agree with increase a 10% the damage, but if this 12% pw reduction is apply I-¦ll be possible to use hyperion snipers that will be better that other snipers in 150-225 km range , I have use the eve fitting tools 2 and if you have the skills at lvl 5 this-¦ll be the result:
Low slots : 2 tracking enhancer II , 3 magnetic field stabilizers II , 1 damage control II Med slots: 3 sensor booster II (2x targeting range), 1 tracking computer II (opt range) , 1 cap recharger II High slots : 8x425 mm t2 rail guns Rigs: 1 large field ionic projector I , 1 Large hybrid collision accelerator, 1 Large hybrid locus coordinator.
Now it can be used because you need more power grid and has only 8 min of capacitor, but doing this changes this-¦ll be the results : (skills lvl 5) Dps with long range charges (no drones) : now 425 , with 10% more damage = 470 Effective HP = 58k Targeting 250 km , scan resolution 178.8, optimal range : 191 + 58 of falloff , and more speed that other snipers
With this no one will want a rock or an apoc as sniper (true snipers will be worst), so please don-¦t do this 12% pw reduction in rails, and if you do this change the 5% damage bonus of gallente ships to 5% damage bonus only with blasters, and put a 10% blaster optimal range as compensation, but please don-¦t put a t2 and a t3 high dps sniper and fast high dps blaster boats at the same time. T T
And what will you do when i warp next to you in my cheetah armed with 2 ac's and pop your ass? :) |
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 12:53:00 -
[844] - Quote
Creat Posudol wrote:
That is the wrong way around... What if an engagement starts at 25 km? With gates this can happen quite easily, and now the acceleration is no longer enough to get the blaster close to the target, he's kited again. Same with any longer distance where acceleration no longer trumps speed. More agility only helps for distances which are already close to the range of blasters. How close depends on the agility boost and if the speed is changed at all for this. Also this has severe side effects, like a thorax orbiting a rupture not only easily but also faster, after all agility is what limits your speed when going a circle of a certain (small) radius. Also keep in mind that you can of course still mount projectiles on that blasterboat, making it uncatchable again (with range advantage) for a real blasterboat. Lastly it just doesn't fit with the lore or stats of Gallente ships, which tend to be quite heavy. Minmatar are the light ones and should be quick to turn. Which is one of the effects of good agility, not just acceleration...
With speed on the blaster side it would be something quite different. With nerfed agility it would effectively translate to straight-line speed. This has been requested many times in the form of a MWD or AB bonus, which I just don't think you can justify. Only specialized ships (ewar, remote rep) have a role bonus to become useful in their role. You can't give all blasterboats a role bonus just because the weapon system won't work without, you'd have to replace one of the existing bonuses. Then it becomes a disadvantage, since all other ships have 2 bonuses, helping them somehow, and not just something that's just necessary for them to do damage in the first place.
Oh come on. Engagement at 25km? Then you turn and warp of. Orbiting faster? Does this was exactly when veb was 90%? Speed and no agility with shortest wepons? And then you will be outmanuvered even more badly than now. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
282
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:16:00 -
[845] - Quote
(copy before posting, does wonders to your sanity)
What a pickle we have been all these years.
First, Gallente use hybrids, the worse turrets in the game by far.
Blasters have poor range, bad tracking, consume too much capacitor. Very easy to fix:
Change#1)Increase range, increase tracking, reduce capacitor usage.
Blasters should have the optimal almost as ridiculous as autocannons but little to no falloff whatsoever. That's right, a Brutix with the optimal of a nanocane. This ensures Gallente will always come out on top in close range brawls, as it is meant to be. If he wants to do his tango in his falloff we switch to null and bulldoze through. Forcing him to either warp off or force him to take his point off, allowing the Gallente pilot to disengage. If he wants to hold point on us he'll have to get way deep into void range taking away his risk free kill.
Which also reminds me!:
Change #2) Remove all penalties of T2 Blaster ammo. Simple.
Change #3) Either further increase optimal of Null or add some god-like autocannon amount of falloff.
Hybrids always needed some unique charm for them and this would be it. would be that their T2 ammo has no flaws and only change damage and range. T1 and Faction ammo also can do either more kinetic or more thermal damage, similar to Conflag and Multifrequency with Amarr. This with their drone bays would allow them to take on a much more varied amount of targets. So if a Brutix and a Hurricane warp to zero at belt 1 it can go either way, with player skill and fittings deciding who's traveling back to in a pod.
These changes have to be severe and make an impact. Instead of making confections for the cake, you need to start over from the beginning.
Secondly, we have Gallente hulls, which only qualities are enerally a larger drone bay and higher structure. Those don't make it worth it by the way. I'll propose my list of railguns and hull changes after work. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:37:00 -
[846] - Quote
Shmekla wrote:Creat Posudol wrote:
That is the wrong way around... What if an engagement starts at 25 km? With gates this can happen quite easily, and now the acceleration is no longer enough to get the blaster close to the target, he's kited again. Same with any longer distance where acceleration no longer trumps speed. More agility only helps for distances which are already close to the range of blasters. How close depends on the agility boost and if the speed is changed at all for this. Also this has severe side effects, like a thorax orbiting a rupture not only easily but also faster, after all agility is what limits your speed when going a circle of a certain (small) radius. Also keep in mind that you can of course still mount projectiles on that blasterboat, making it uncatchable again (with range advantage) for a real blasterboat. Lastly it just doesn't fit with the lore or stats of Gallente ships, which tend to be quite heavy. Minmatar are the light ones and should be quick to turn. Which is one of the effects of good agility, not just acceleration...
With speed on the blaster side it would be something quite different. With nerfed agility it would effectively translate to straight-line speed. This has been requested many times in the form of a MWD or AB bonus, which I just don't think you can justify. Only specialized ships (ewar, remote rep) have a role bonus to become useful in their role. You can't give all blasterboats a role bonus just because the weapon system won't work without, you'd have to replace one of the existing bonuses. Then it becomes a disadvantage, since all other ships have 2 bonuses, helping them somehow, and not just something that's just necessary for them to do damage in the first place.
Oh come on. Engagement at 25km? Then you turn and warp of. Orbiting faster? Does this was exactly when veb was 90%? Speed and no agility with shortest wepons? And then you will be outmanuvered even more badly than now.
Yes of course you are outmaneuvered at close range. At least by Minmatar, it's what they do. The are nimble and can turn quickly. But that's why we got that extra tracking speed, so we have a chance to keep up with weapons. Not by moving the ship, but by moving the guns. Load tracking speed to tracking computer(s) and hope he isn't fit for full speed/agility but has a semblance of tank/dps. What he can't do is just fly away, since he'll have to do that in a more or less straight line or with actual pilot skill. Should he use the first, I'm faster. With the second it comes down to how well I can fly, which is exactly how it should me. He might get away, he might not.
Now to the 25km-not-engaging: Are you serious? So in your eyes it's like this: "Gallente are a fine race, but can only engage an enemy if closer than 20 km. Any more and they have to run and rewarp (hopefully) to a closer distance (because his target is gonna sit still in the meantime). Also if their target brought a tackler (tackle inty for example, can point from twentysomething km) they are severely screwed." Also note that the tackler can just be lucky at the gate (to keep the example) and be closer than that. It does NOT make a real difference if our Gallente ship also brought a tackler, only in very specific situations... I'm sorry but there has to be at least an option for Gallente to at the very least fit for this. Currently they can't, not without gimping their tank to such a degree that they don't stand a chance anyway. Raising speed above Minmatar level and reducing maneuverability to such a degree that an average blaster orbit for such a ship results in approx. the same speed as it does now would resolve this, returning the advantage to the better pilot instead of basically having a fixed outcome depending on the range the fight was initiated. |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:37:00 -
[847] - Quote
BooooooBeeeeeer wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:Would increasing minimum warp to distance to 250km not be a major help to rails too? This would allow extreme range sniper fleets. Even if they're a bit fail on alpha It will not. Now, the ship can be found in 10 seconds, with combatprobs. Warp, aproch, scram = you're dead.
But on grid warping won't work... you would have to leave grid or move out of 250km |
David Xavier
The Scope Gallente Federation
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:40:00 -
[848] - Quote
Zhephell wrote:*snip* For me the problem is in Rails. I am agree to improve 10% the damage, but I am totally disagree to reduce a 12% the power need to rail guns, ( I-¦m not talking about blaster pw) Rails are long range weapons that use less power, that others ( t2 425 mm rails use 2625 of pw, and t2 tachyons 4125 of pw, and t2 1400mm use 3575 of pw) so with this change t2 425 mm will use 2300 of pw aprox. It-¦ll be overpowered in power grid , an apocalipse with 8 t2 tachyons need with ALL SKILL at lvl 5 2 slots with 2 reactor control unit 2 that gives 15% more pw, or 1 slot and 1 rig to increase the pw, and use 1 bonus to reduce lasers capacitor use. And I -¦m not talking about other bs with tachyons. *snip*
Railguns use more CPU than beam lasers. in case of your comparison a tech II 425mm railgun uses 77 while a tech II Tachyon only requires 63.
In case of 8 weapons the difference is 112 CPU, that is quite a lot. So live with it, Hybrid weapons require more CPU in exchange for less PG.
Let's looks at the rest :
- Lasers have far better tracking. This frees up module or rig slots.
- Even if you use tech II crystals you need far less cargo space to carry your ammunition with you, in case you need a new one you can change to that instantly.
- Have better damage, that is for now.
So instead of tracking enchanters you can fit other modules. Not to mention probes made sniping from 150km (warp range) or farther pointless.
On a side note artillery turrets require both less PG and less CPU than lasers, why don't you whine about that ? |
RackotPrime
CONCORD OF UKRAINE Flame Bridge
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:40:00 -
[849] - Quote
i do not support range increase ammo remake, damage increase, ships balance, armor tank balance - YEAS, but i don`t wont new AC or lasers under blasters mark |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 13:51:00 -
[850] - Quote
Shmekla wrote:
Oh come on. Engagement at 25km? Then you turn and warp of. Orbiting faster? Does this was exactly when veb was 90%? Speed and no agility with shortest wepons? And then you will be outmanuvered even more badly than now.
Only by a good pilot in a minnie ship
Straight line speed means you can either try to charge at them or run away... a high agility ship will be able to fly circles around it only if the minnie pilot is good and the gallente pilot is bad.
Straight line speed is one of the keys to fix blaster boat hulls. Agility remains the area of Minnie ships. Remember, speed isn't everything if you can't turn quick enough.
Oh and engagement at 25km. overloaded points push out to 28km before we even think about faction points and skirmish links
|
|
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 14:49:00 -
[851] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Straight line speed is one of the keys to fix blaster boat hulls. Agility remains the area of Minnie ships. Remember, speed isn't everything if you can't turn quick enough.
Wrong. Simple example.. taranis vs crusader. you must be very good pilot ant it is hard to approach target and stay in optimal range. and if you do not have agility you ease overshot. In other side crusader pilot has plentiful range so he not blathering himself with similar problems as taranis.
As blaster boats you must accelerate and desecrate fast, be agile because you have very small range for maneuvering. if galente will get more speed and no agility it would be boost for minmatar. Because then, flying minmatar I would dash toward galente and his speed will screw him because he wouldn't stop in time (turn around) and overshot.. And then he will be at low speed (scramed webed) with small optimal.. just target for practice.
In other hand if blaster boats would have great agility, it would leave much smaller range for maneuvering for minmatars.
Spugg Galdon wrote: Oh and engagement at 25km. overloaded points push out to 28km before we even think about faction points and skirmish links
That ok, this is variable that make engagement more unpredictable.
General there is no point of talking about engagement at bigger ranges than 24km, because the main point is that you prey wont escape.
|
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:04:00 -
[852] - Quote
The way I see it ether way minmatar will have to give something up to the gallente. Speed or range take your pick but it will have to one of those 2. |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:22:00 -
[853] - Quote
Shmekla wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:
Straight line speed is one of the keys to fix blaster boat hulls. Agility remains the area of Minnie ships. Remember, speed isn't everything if you can't turn quick enough.
Wrong. Simple example.. taranis vs crusader. you must be very good pilot ant it is hard to approach target and stay in optimal range. and if you do not have agility you ease overshot. In other side crusader pilot has plentiful range so he not blathering himself with similar problems as taranis. As blaster boats you must accelerate and desecrate fast, be agile because you have very small range for maneuvering. if galente will get more speed and no agility it would be boost for minmatar. Because then, flying minmatar I would dash toward galente and his speed will screw him because he wouldn't stop in time (turn around) and overshot.. And then he will be at low speed (scramed webed) with small optimal.. just target for practice. In other hand if blaster boats would have great agility, it would leave much smaller range for maneuvering for minmatars.
First of all: bad example! Interceptors aren't exactly the typical blaster boats even if they happen to fit blasters (like a Taranis). Interceptor fighting is even more problematic as a comparison since your controls are delayed (from the time you doublelick to turn to the time the ship actually reacts) and that makes a much bigger difference at 4 km/s compared to 1.5 km/s with a BS that needs at about half a minute to reach that speed.
How about we look at a thorax vs. rupture or mega vs. tempest? If I see the rupture/tempest come straight at me I can doubleclick in the reverse direction to "actively break" (twice as good deceleration compared to ctrl-space), if timed right he'll be right beside me when our speeds match, commence face melting. If I screw it up he'll have the advantage, as I said it comes down to pilot skill. Not as much with interceptors as the inherent control delays screw you much more than the actual opponent does. If he decides to immediately try and keep range on me I'm screwed with just acceleration. I can't catch up, EVER. With straight line speed I'll at least get closer over time until I can start shooting, at which point he can try to break away, giving me trouble keeping up with his fast turns. But unless I'm in range I have a pretty easy time to compensate: If he is 15km away (I won't hurt him that much, even with large blasters) and does a 90-¦ turn, I only need to compensate about 20-¦ or so to adjust to a new interception point, which even with such a sluggish ship is not too big of a deal. If he then reverses I have to readjust (including distance I already closed to him) more like 60-¦, taking more time and speed, but I'm also closer and am therefore dealing at least some more damage.
But in any case: if I'm slow (web/scram), he's also slow for the same reason! Furthermore with a BS he WILL be in kill range! depending on the fit also mostly for cruiser sized ships/guns. The only time this is a serious problem is with frigs! Have I mentioned how badly that example represents what is generally referred to as blaster boats?
BTW: can't wait to get real-time joystick control! I do hope that happens some day soon... |
Zogra
The Dirty Rejects Scelus Sceleris.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:31:00 -
[854] - Quote
Hello, game balance is fine players have adopted to it there is no need to change anything if you want my opinion.
Messing up with balance will result in an unbalance making hybrids OP and speed and interia modifier will make things even worst.
Sorry to say it but its a desperate BAD call in order to lure old ex hybrid players back into game but ur risking loosing your loyal dedicated players that are currently into game.
Blaster is already deadly from close range and its hard to walk away from a blaster when ur dual webed and mwd scramed.
Wrong wrong wrong balance tweaks i only agree on t2 Hail ammo changes otherwise its useless t2 ammo
I mean come on matar got the worst t2 ammo both from dmg types and stats dont they need some love?
leave the balance as it is dont mess with it dont change things we players have adopted and got used to.
How the hell i am gone walk away from the highest dps BS vindicator now that u buff its blasters and its speed and its interia modifier??
Nice balance tweaks u make gallente and maybe caldari OP and let matar and ammar to rot?
Wrong wrong wrong DONT tweak anything or else EvE crysis is inc.....
Game is already dying and now you show matar and ammar the exit door, nicely done CCP.......
Especially the matar will be in rly bad place cause ammar still got the highest dps and rage and tracking weapon the OP lazors but the matar had speed only and now u buff half of the ships with more speed making matar less attractive..
WRONG TWEAKS PERIOD. |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:48:00 -
[855] - Quote
Shmekla wrote: Wrong. Simple example.. taranis vs crusader. you must be very good pilot ant it is hard to approach target and stay in optimal range. and if you do not have agility you ease overshot. In other side crusader pilot has plentiful range so he not blathering himself with similar problems as taranis.
As blaster boats you must accelerate and desecrate fast, be agile because you have very small range for maneuvering. if galente will get more speed and no agility it would be boost for minmatar. Because then, flying minmatar I would dash toward galente and his speed will screw him because he wouldn't stop in time (turn around) and overshot.. And then he will be at low speed (scramed webed) with small optimal.. just target for practice.
In other hand if blaster boats would have great agility, it would leave much smaller range for maneuvering for minmatars.
Interceptors are a different kettle of fish but I totally disagree about agility vs speed. With agility, a faster ship with similar or (really) better agility (minmatar) will always always kite you. You can't do anything other than watch him fly around you at a speed you can only dream of. However, you hit the nail on the head with the line "I would dash toward galente and his speed will screw him because he wouldn't stop in time (turn around) and overshot". This is you using your agility to your advantage to out manoeuvre your target. If you get it wrong you're scrammed, webbed, and ******. Cause once you're in that <10km bracket you should die unless you're lucky.
Another thing about slow blaster blaster boats is that once you engage you're utterly committed. You don't have any means of escape other than spitting some ECM drones out and praying for the jam. A high speed low agility boat can point in a direction and try to burn away. You now have survivability too.
|
Deviana Sevidon
Jades Falcon Guards
68
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:48:00 -
[856] - Quote
With the last test on singularity I can only say that something radical needs to be done about hybrid weapons, ships and range.
A lot of people will flame me probably, but it might be best if we switch either the speed or the weapon bonuses with Minmatar.
For example Minmatar get to be still the fastest ships, but their projectile weapons now fill the role of blasters and rails.
Or the Gallente get the speed and agility of Minmatar hulls, while the Minmatar get the speed and agility of Gallente ships. |
Kietay Ayari
Monopoly Money Operations
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:50:00 -
[857] - Quote
Just want to remind everyone that Caldari use Hybrids toooo D: Want damage bonus not range bonus on rails pleeeease. Ferox #1 |
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 15:56:00 -
[858] - Quote
Quote:Zogra wrote: .............
Zhephell wrote: ........
Or is it a Troll invasion. Or lovers of Minmatar and amar afraid that Gallenteans cease to be whipping boys. |
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 16:00:00 -
[859] - Quote
BooooooBeeeeeer wrote:Quote:Zogra wrote: .............
Zhephell wrote: ........ Or is it a Troll invasion. Or lovers of Minmatar and amar afraid that Gallenteans cease to be whipping boys.
At leat Zhephell argued his position. Zogra has been aded to ignore list. ******* ***** plague... |
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
42
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 16:21:00 -
[860] - Quote
WTF is this ****? Did you people suddenly go brain dead? Guess I should post what I said earlier so you people can ******* clue in.
Tracking and fitting were issues but so is damage. Currently blasters have barely any DPS edge over AC without the range, versatility, capless firing, ammo size, customizable damage, escapability, etc that AC's and Minmatar have. I know you people doubt me about the damage statement but you can see it in EFT for yourself with just raw DPS numbers, much less all the variables you then have to add in.
As a blaster pilot you plow into the center of the battle and commit yourself 100% and subject yourself to all the scrams, drones, neuts, webs, etc. The blasters have pitiful range. They barely out damage AC's even in the optimal of that range and because of the range they need to be in they require tons more tracking. Add to the fact that blasters in their hay day were also combined with things like a Thorax launching 7 heavy drones. Then CCP buffed HP on all ship hulls. Then came rigs which buffed EHP even more. Then the other weapon systems got boosted. Blasters no longer were TOTALHELLDEATH if you came in range of them.
The changes are a first step but they are hardly enough. There needs to be not a range bonus or speed but a massive DPS and tracking boost to make them acceptable for the risk of flying straight into a fleet and committing 100% to the battle with no hope of escape. That is the Gallente way and IT WILL BE GLORIOUS! |
|
Cailais
Rekall Incorporated
93
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 16:31:00 -
[861] - Quote
I dont think blasters need more range. Traditionally they have always been about close up damage - straight to the face.
Trying to turn blasters into another form of lasers just homogenizes the weapons in EVE. It might be difficult for blaster boats to get on top of a target but when they do the pilot should reap the dividends. Adding a bit more CPU to allow blaster boats to more comfortably fit dual webs and a splash more damage and the solution is there.
C.
|
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 16:48:00 -
[862] - Quote
Oh FFS. My post ended up as last on the page. Sigh. GO READ IT. Eh fuckit. Will just repost for the trolls.
WTF is this ****? Did you people suddenly go brain dead? Guess I should post what I said earlier so you people can ******* clue in.
Tracking and fitting were issues but so is damage. Currently blasters have barely any DPS edge over AC without the range, versatility, capless firing, ammo size, customizable damage, escapability, etc that AC's and Minmatar have. I know you people doubt me about the damage statement but you can see it in EFT for yourself with just raw DPS numbers, much less all the variables you then have to add in.
As a blaster pilot you plow into the center of the battle and commit yourself 100% and subject yourself to all the scrams, drones, neuts, webs, etc. The blasters have pitiful range. They barely out damage AC's even in the optimal of that range and because of the range they need to be in they require tons more tracking. Add to the fact that blasters in their hay day were also combined with things like a Thorax launching 7 heavy drones. Then CCP buffed HP on all ship hulls. Then came rigs which buffed EHP even more. Then the other weapon systems got boosted. Blasters no longer were TOTALHELLDEATH if you came in range of them.
The changes are a first step but they are hardly enough. There needs to be not a range bonus or speed but a massive DPS and tracking boost to make them acceptable for the risk of flying straight into a fleet and committing 100% to the battle with no hope of escape. That is the Gallente way and IT WILL BE GLORIOUS! |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
100
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 17:51:00 -
[863] - Quote
FYI THE BOOST IS NOW LIVE... Please down load the test cleint and start teasting out the boosted hybrids... then post on this thread for comments... |
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 17:54:00 -
[864] - Quote
Creat Posudol wrote: First of all: bad example! Interceptors aren't exactly the typical blaster boats even if they happen to fit blasters (like a Taranis). Interceptor fighting is even more problematic as a comparison since your controls are delayed (from the time you doublelick to turn to the time the ship actually reacts) and that makes a much bigger difference at 4 km/s compared to 1.5 km/s with a BS that needs at about half a minute to reach that speed.
How about we look at a thorax vs. rupture or mega vs. tempest? If I see the rupture/tempest come straight at me I can doubleclick in the reverse direction to "actively break" (twice as good deceleration compared to ctrl-space), if timed right he'll be right beside me when our speeds match, commence face melting. If I screw it up he'll have the advantage, as I said it comes down to pilot skill. Not as much with interceptors as the inherent control delays screw you much more than the actual opponent does. If he decides to immediately try and keep range on me I'm screwed with just acceleration. I can't catch up, EVER. With straight line speed I'll at least get closer over time until I can start shooting, at which point he can try to break away, giving me trouble keeping up with his fast turns. But unless I'm in range I have a pretty easy time to compensate: If he is 15km away (I won't hurt him that much, even with large blasters) and does a 90-¦ turn, I only need to compensate about 20-¦ or so to adjust to a new interception point, which even with such a sluggish ship is not too big of a deal. If he then reverses I have to readjust (including distance I already closed to him) more like 60-¦, taking more time and speed, but I'm also closer and am therefore dealing at least some more damage.
But in any case: if I'm slow (web/scram), he's also slow for the same reason! Furthermore with a BS he WILL be in kill range! depending on the fit also mostly for cruiser sized ships/guns. The only time this is a serious problem is with frigs! Have I mentioned how badly that example represents what is generally referred to as blaster boats?
BTW: can't wait to get real-time joystick control! I do hope that happens some day soon...
Taranis is typical blaster user, as Thorax, Deimos or Mega. I put this example to show how easy speed can backfire on blaster boat, but you failed to catch my point. Also in engagement if you will wait to see what opponent will do - you'll die. you take out of content my point about dashing, or even not read post clearly.
Creat Posudo wrote: If he decides to immediately try and keep range on me I'm screwed with just acceleration. I can't catch up, EVER. .
And again you failed to understand, that blaster boat must get speed faster than opponent. That mean in first seconds if your opponent traveled 5 km, you already covered 10.
If you bet on speed that mean blaster boat need to go faster than minmatars, and way faster because blaster boats must catch target before dies. But speed is for minmatars.... so there is a little contradiction, isn't it?
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:00:00 -
[865] - Quote
Bummer, I was hoping to see a CCP response today. Even a couple of lines can help focus the discussion.
Things are starting to look a bit grim with the silence. Wonder what we are going to see. The idea of messing with rigs seems like a poor idea. It affects too many aspects of the game and in the end will only make the other platforms that much better over the hybrid boats, particularly if Amarr gets a speed bonus from changes to armor rigs and the shield tanked Minmatar boats don't get a sig radius increase from shield rigs, because they already enjoy a very low sig radius to start with. Messing with rigs just impacts so many other aspects of ship designs of all the races. The changes need to be Gallente boats specifically. Caldari long range rails I think is simpler to deal with directly to the rail gun stats.
I think the most succinct argument to date is that there is just no good reason to fly Gallente boats. Whether you are talking solo/small groups or in bigger fleets. They tend to be more expensive and every time you go into a fight, you are committed 100%. All the other races can fight aligned or kite out of damage and warp. Even fighting within single point range is viable and can be exited from with MWD. Gallente fight inside scram/web/neut range. The cost/benefit just isn't there. In the POP,POP, POP of fleet fights its often very frustrating for a Gallente pilot to try and get into range of primary as targets change. Right as you get there, primary goes pop and now new primary is far away again. Even with frigate tackler support most Hurricanes have such high tracking that if frigs try to tackle with a scram on, they die. But scram is what is need to slow the immense speed of these ships.
There has to be a reason to fly Gallente over other options. Currently there are none, except maybe the Arazu.
SPEED/AGILITY arguments: These boats need both but I think agility cannot be overlooked or nerfed. The speed required to catch a kiting target is ridiculously high and only viable for small ships. We don't have to be faster than Minmatar, but we need a bit more than now. Tactics and using a cloaky or a inty is key to this effort. But even if you can land at zero on a kiter, by the time you align, approach, target and try to apply scram/web, they are out of range. So the ability to quickly achieve speed is key for any hope of catching targets. This also applies to orbiting w/ speed in a fight and the ability to rapidly change direction in fleet fights as different targets are called. And we must do this as we lack weapon range to be effective otherwise. CCP is on the right track with increasing this directly to Gallente ships, they just need a larger increase directly applied to overcome the rig penalties a bit. Removing rig penalties or changing them only then make the other races more appealing.
The SECOND BONUS: Any Gallente ship that has the horrible 7.5 armor repair bonus(and the stupid Thorax's MWD cap bonus) should have that replaced with something that assists with controlling range in a fight. My recommendation would be for some, like the Brutix to have a significant range bonus to SCRAMs only. Some should have a bonus to WEB velocity factor or WEB range. This would make them much more capable of achieving a lock down when warping in on someone. Catching a kiter is rarely viable in a pure speed race. That requires good use of cloaky's and inty's.
Tank: Fine, Gallente should be shield tanked to be a close in brawlers w/speed, but they are not. Even some ships that will attempt shield tanking like the Myrm and Hyperion just aren't as effective since their sig radius are already big, and when shield tanked the Myrm is almost Battleship size. A fully shield tanked cane is roughly the same sig radius as a armor tanked Mrym. CCP will not support 3 shield tanked races. So the tank needs to be impressive on a brawling, close in fighter that has to commit 100% every time to every fight. Half the reason why people don't fly gallente is that they get tired of being killed because they have to commit every time to do so. Can't warp of like every one else. So do a slight plug of the Explosive hole in every Gallente ship to help increase tank. Maybe 20% to T1 hulls, higher in others.
HYBRIDS: Ok, Blasters. They have the worst aspects of lasers and projectiles and none of the benefits. 1) Since they will deal with the highest transversal (closest to the center of the orbit circle), they should have the highest tracking. This needs serious boost since low slots on armor tanks have to be dedicated to armor unlike the shield tanked Minmatar boats. 2) Instant ammo changes to help control application of DPS in the high stress/quick decision cycle of close in fighting. 3) Much lower CAP usage as we fight in Neut territory. I'd say remove all together frankly. Or give a utility high slot to every Gallente boat for a vampire perhaps. (which some have, and probably boost performance of vampires in general) 4) Increase damage by 30%. Make them dominate the close in fight and give people a reason to commit to the fight and probably still lose their ship. 5) Increase range by just a bit of optimal. Not crazy but on some of these its damn near seems like zero. Just perhaps 10% to optimal. 6) Get rid of void's tracking/cap penalty. If you can get this close, you deserve to **** your target. DRONES: Add a Scram drone. That would help with catching kiters. They still have a chance to blow up the drones before you catch them. I would think that with 3 light scram drones applying effects, that should be enough to shut down the MWD. the other 2 are buffer or even web drones. Some of the Gallente Drone boats need some love. A bit of bandwidth would help some for the Mrym for sure.
So that's my piece of advice that will absolutely get ignored and probably trolled. |
Zhephell
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 18:50:00 -
[866] - Quote
Sry, in my post in page 43 I have wrote at the end: (GÇÿGÇÖWith this no one will want a rock or an apoc as sniper (true snipers will be worst), so please don-¦t do this 12% pw reduction in rails, and if you do this change the 5% damage bonus of gallente ships to 5% damage bonus only with blasters, and put a 10% blaster optimal range as compensation, but please don-¦t put a t2 and a t3 high dps sniper and fast high dps blaster boats at the same time. T TGÇÖGÇÖ)
I was trying to say this: (With this no one will want a rock or an apoc as sniper (true snipers will be worst), so please don-¦t do this 12% pw reduction in rails, and if you finally do this modification ( the 12% of power reduction), change the 5% damage bonus of gallente ships to 5% damage bonus only with blasters, and put a 10% blaster optimal range as compensation, but please don-¦t put a t2 and a t3 high dps sniper and fast high dps blaster boats at the same time. T T)
David Xavier wrote:@Zhephell Railguns use more CPU than beam lasers. Using your comparison a tech II 425mm railgun uses 77 while a tech II Tachyon only requires 63. In case of 8 weapons the difference is 112 CPU, that is quite a lot. So live with it, hybrid weapons require more CPU in exchange for less PG. Let's looks at the rest :
- Lasers have far better tracking. This frees up module or rig slots.
- Even if you use tech II crystals you need far less cargo space to carry your ammunition with you.
- Should you need a new or other type of crystal you can change to that instantly.
- Have better damage, that is for now.
Instead of tracking enchanters you can fit other modules. Not to mention probes made sniping from 150km (warp range) or farther pointless. On a side note artillery turrets require both less PG and less CPU than lasers, why don't you whine about that ?
Well I don-¦t speak about artillery because this balance will be to hybrid weapons, not to projectile weapons.
Yes, you have reason cpu is bigger in rails, but they-¦ll reduce cpu to 74, now it is 77 and t2 tachyons need 63, this difference of cpu is 12, so t2 425mm rails cpu it is 22.2% higher that t2 tachyons, and caldari and gallente ships have more cpu. And now one tachyon t2 use 4125 of power grid and t2 425 rails 2625, this difference is = 1500 of power who is the same as 57.1% more power needed, but amarr ships have more power as gallente and caldari ships have more cpu, but it change much more 57.1% more power needed that a difference of 22.2% of cpu
And with this balance the cpu of t2 425 mm rails will be 74, so it-¦ll be 17.5% more cpu needed for t2 425mm rails, and if they reduce a 12% the power need in rails, t2 425mm rail power will be 2310 and tachyons 4125 and it is 1815 less that one tachion, so is the same as 78.6% more power needed to use one tachyon t2. One of bonus that has rails is that the need les power , so if they-¦ll balance rails they have to balance it on its handicaps, no on its advantages.
Well I know that lasers have better tracking, and don-¦t need ammunition, or that can change its crystals instantly, and have more damage, but as rails they can-¦t choose damage, but artillery has less tacking and range in return. With lasers you need one of your 2 ship bonus to reduce the capacitor used by weapons, this bonus is used by gallente as 5% more damage per lvl and caldari have 5% more resistances in shied per lvl So if you have your ship skill at lvl 5 ( 50% reduction in capacitor need by energy weapons) it continue using more capacitor, and now that hybrids capacitor need will be reduce 30% it ll be more perceptible, and long range bonus of energy weapons are 7.5% per lvl and not 10% as caldari long range bonus.
So I think that request that they remove the 12% reduction in power grid need to rails (not to blasters),or otherwise ( if they apply this power reduction), i request to change gallente ships bonus to 5% more of damage per lvl only to blasters with a compensation of 10% more optimal range in blaster guns (because now this ship damage bonus wouldn-¦t be for rails) it isn-¦t an exceeded request.
It is my opinion, not trying to criticize you |
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:02:00 -
[867] - Quote
Minmie trolls don't want to be worse than now (the perfect example of how a noob can win a 5-years old player) Amarr players don't want his lasers nerfed. Every time they lose their arguments they say that hybrid were the firsts OP in the game. And won't allow it happens again. But they don't think they are far better than before, and the others also need to be better -¼-¼
Make dissapear hybrid and put lasers to gallente and projectiles to Caldari. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:30:00 -
[868] - Quote
There's a fix that's been mentioned a few times, and I would like to bring-it-up again. I think it's a great idea. Hopefully if we get enough discusion, and support CCP will take notice.
The proposal is fairly simple. Some hybrid ships should get a bonus to MWD (and maybe AB) speed boost. I don't know what exact # would make the most sense, maybe 5% per skill level?
If it was thought that this would be too much of a buff, then it could come at the expence of increased cap-use.
That's it. That's the idea. I know it's already been said by a few people, but it's a kick-ass idea, and I think it deserves serious consideration.
Here's why I think this would be good.
What's the #1 problem most blaster boats face in PVP?
Blasters have such a short optimal, that you have to be super-close to get good hits. Blaster-boats are usually passive armor-tanked slow-ass bricks. See the issue?
You're flying the slowest ship with the shortest-range guns.
If they could get a bonus to MWD speed boost, blaster-boats could actually get into range. They wouldn't be the fastest ship naturally, and the speed-boost would be temporary until the cap runs-out.
With blasters you have to get into range before you're out-of cap and armor. Right-now blaster boats can't do this (at least not without getting a lucky warp-in). Winmatar pilots just laugh thier asses-off blasting-away with ACs, kitting the sh!t out of you.
With the proposed fix, you could actually get into range before it's too late. You could actually USE the dmg of blasters to compensate for all the dmg take just getting into range. What an awesome balance that could bring.
With more speed and the buff to rail damage coming, who knows? We might even see rail-kiting as a viable strategy for some of these hybrid ships. Can you imagine the kiting slug-fest between a fast Rail-Brutix and a Cane? The Brutix could maintain range until the cap runs-low, then it's anybody's game. This could bring back rails (at least the medium ones) as a viable PVP weapon too.
Thoughts? |
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 19:40:00 -
[869] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote: If they could get a bonus to MWD speed boost, blaster-boats could actually get into range. They wouldn't be the fastest ship naturally, and the speed-boost would be temporary until the cap runs-out.
[...] What an awesome balance that could bring. [...]
Thoughts?
I have quoted the bad points of this idea: - You get into range. Let's put Hyperion. OK. Your cap is depleted (maybe) and you start hitting the kitter. In adittion, even with nerfed capacitor use of hybrids, they still use cap. The kitter is faster than you by base velocity. Your cap is fully depleted (maybe with good cap management skills you can shoot a bit more, maybe). 5 seconds later the kitter: - Switch on (again) his MWD, as their DPS don't use capacitor. Let's suppose Tempest. - Switch on (still and probably perma-run) his Shield Booster. Let's suppose Maelstrom.
And, in adittion, he's is still shooting you. Minmatar CAN'T BE fastest race of 4, specially against a race fat, slow and with the shortest range weapons. It's simple. |
Dare Devel
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:09:00 -
[870] - Quote
New Brawler-Rokh
Hign Slots
8x Neutron Blaster Cannon II (Caldari Navy Antimatar Charge)
Med Slots
1x Stasis Webifier II 2x Large Shield Extender II 2x Invulnerability Field II 1x Quad LiF Fueled Booster Rockets
Low SLots
4xMagnetic Field Stabilizer II 1xDamage Control II
Drone Bay
5x Valkyrie II
Rigs:
Large Hybrid Collision Accelerator I Large Hybrid Ambit Extension I Large Core Defence Field Extender I
AWU 5 Without MWD 24 mins cap Optimal - 7.76 Falloff-17.634 Tracking 0.071 DPS - 926 /CN Animatar optimal 19.4 Falloff - 22 Tracking 0.053 DPS - 738 /NULL
How does it look?
|
|
Lebowski31
Wings 0f Liberty Shadows of Damned
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:22:00 -
[871] - Quote
At last .... I welcome such excellent news !
But it might be still not enough for Gallente/Hybrids (like me) to face other races in solo PvP.
My advices and comments will be : - tracking speed needs much more than you already propose - will it be possible to create a 'tracking speed bonus' ratio per ammo ? - DPS should be increase a bit more
All other proposals are fine with me, as it was exactly what I was critisizing silently ...
It welcome CCP's new orientation on finally listening capsuleers.
Hope to check that soon on World Collide for example, prior solo PvP,
Thanks
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
188
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:23:00 -
[872] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Misanth wrote:Right, so since Gallente is bloody damn powerful up close already, but rails are fail and blasters have fallen out of favour (it never was made for nullsec blob fights anyway, but hey), here's my take on what could solve this; Give Gallente an innate 90% web bonus (as others suggested). But - give it a massive stacking penalty. I.e. if you apply two webs, they'll only be 90.1% or something. It would be ridicilous if we came back to the point where we can't get back to gates purely because there's Gallente sitting on the field. To put some perspective where I'm coming from: http://kenny.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=10928688That happened just some day ago. The Drake jumped through the gate I was sitting on, I single-webbed (yes, not dual web) him and he only got about halfways back to the gate before he died. The Machariel did not even join in until five seconds before the Drake died, I believe, just to get on the killmail. I.e. Vindicator functions like the old Megas did, and work "as a Gallente/blaster-ship". If Gallente would work innate like that, it would make blasters bloody damn powerful even at current stats, and solve alot of the issues. But multiple webs would just make it gamebreaking, and that's something even I (even tho I'd benefit from it) wouldn't want to see. (not to mention how overpowered every railship would be, they could just web-kite anything to death) If you give web strgth to some ships: Webs should be just like DCU's, you shouldn't be able to fit more than one, has for warp jamers but it's another problem since Damps are crap and it's gallente reccon bonus has well, maybe these hulls could fit more than one after changes (if). Now everyone is afraid of 90% webs, just do the math with 10% per level on 60% webs knowing most people don't train the 5th point on T2 ships since the time training is totally ridiculous for such small reward. Either 10% web strgth per level or 15% range on web and scram (not disruptor) - this would probably help blaster hulls get to the range and do the job without forum threads and rivers of tears because of 90% webs almost no one would have.
That's fine, the key is to not make webs as powerful as they were before, since these days we don't have nano in the same regard it has to be sensible. Not sure about the scram bonus you suggest tho, there's specific ships out there with those bonuses, and they fill that niche/role quite well. Proteus being a swiss army knife, Lachesis and Arazu suffering from crappy damps but at least having the scram-role. The web tho, I agree.
/below is not releated to your post btw, just general statement
And wtf is up with all people that ask for Gallente to have Minmatar speed, and want Blasters to compete with AC's for range? Heh. Why even have different weaponsystems if they're gonna be so similar? Blasters hit harder and Gallente are slower, that's how it functions, if you don't want to fly a slow but hard-hitting race, well then you trained wrong stuff my friend.
Misanth is whatever 100mil SP and have all BS 5, but he doesn't even have small projectiles t2. I chose to not train with him. I've got other characters to perform that role. You won't see me whining about Blasters being overwhelming, I actually rather use them. But I don't fly in nullsec blobs. With the current mobile-but-not-nano mechanics we have, the ongrid warping etc, it's just no point using Blasters. You'd want Rails. That's where you should complain, that's the weaponsystem you got for those ranges, and yes it does not work. Rails are the issue, not Blasters.
this is a signature |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
188
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 20:34:00 -
[873] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:CCP why buffed matars ? Because everyone used before matar weapon buff the amarrian ships. Amarrian ships was overpowered above all ship types because their ridiculous scorch range. Shot from 45km range from optimal without any bonus and + 10km from falloff against 3km optimal+17km falloff??? When matar ships didn't have falloff bonuses or enough speed was crap. Their main advantages was their speed over tanking. Matar ships with their paper hull was the worst ship after speed nerf and they needed to compensate them when lost their speeds. Thx but not need matar nerf again, when amarrian can shot with scorch like a long range weapon. Need a fine solution for hybrid and rail platform for bring back to line them, but not need nerf any other weapon system. I never understand crying babies on forum, who cry because of falloff. Shoting from falloff is crap. Never was better a gun with 5km optimal+25km falloff than a 30km optimal range weapon which have better tracking and which have more +10km falloff too. I know hybrid system need rethinking, but the other nerf is unacceptable when some other ships "finaly" useable. Need smarter changes than nerf. Need rethinking gallentean ship bonuses. They are too slow to reach their targets ?? Give to them scram range bonus 5 or 7.5%/lvl and they can be shut down enemy mwd from farther distance and they will be get the chances to aproaching their targets to shorter range in faster time. Or web 5 or 7.5% range/lvl and they can be slowing enemies from farther distances. If they can reach the paper hull targets faster there, they would be repeal them with their huge damage. Rails need better changes, need better DPS over all sniper ships, because they have worst alpha. 10% + damage multiplier wont be enough, need more 10 ROF too or wont be using them no one again after this patch. We want to see more useable ship types in fleets. Many ships is unuseable in games. I can flight at least 200 shiptypes with t2 guns, but most of ship unuseable and i don't want to flight with them. EW frigs ? Need rethinking. Gallentean ships need rethinking. Most of caldari ship unuseable in pvp. etc Dramiel ? I dont understand CCP why made a frig over interceptor speed ? Who want to using ceptors if a developer create a more powerful and faster ships in the frig class? Need better balances for ship usage or player base wont be use the other ships when they got a overpowered ships in their class.
Now, while annoying to read that (language and structure), it's one of the best posts I've seen in this whole thread. this is a signature |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:04:00 -
[874] - Quote
Sorry CCP, but you're in dire need of some more iteration here.
The important points that have gone unanswered: -Rails, why use them? Their dps post-buff isn't even up there with beams and their alpha is even lower. The entire concept of sniping at the range rails were designed around is gone because of on-grid probe mechanics. They are, in essence, the most fleet-dependant weapon system in the game and yet they have absolutely no desireable characteristics that would make them wanted in a fleet.
-Ship Bonuses on hybrid platforms: Range bonuses are absolutely sadistic (see above). Repair module bonuses are cute and niche, but it would help if they were more generally applicable.
There are a lot of ship stat modifications, rig modifications you might consider, but I don't think any of them in combination can really make up for the primary problems of when you'd even want to use railguns (or blasters) at all. Expand the effective usage of hyrbids, then worry about the ships individually. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:19:00 -
[875] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote: If they could get a bonus to MWD speed boost, blaster-boats could actually get into range. They wouldn't be the fastest ship naturally, and the speed-boost would be temporary until the cap runs-out.
[...] What an awesome balance that could bring. [...]
Thoughts?
I have quoted the bad points of this idea: - You get into range. Let's put Hyperion. OK. Your cap is depleted (maybe) and you start hitting the kitter. In adittion, even with nerfed capacitor use of hybrids, they still use cap. The kitter is faster than you by base velocity. Your cap is fully depleted (maybe with good cap management skills you can shoot a bit more, maybe). 5 seconds later the kitter: - Switch on (again) his MWD, as their DPS don't use capacitor. Let's suppose Tempest. It outranges your blasters. - Switch on (still and probably perma-run) his Shield Booster. Let's suppose Maelstrom. It tanks (enough) your blasters. And, in adittion, he's is still shooting you. Minmatar CAN'T BE fastest race of 4, specially against a race fat, slow and with the shortest range weapons. It's simple.
I understand what you're saying, but there has to be a draw-back otherwise MWD bonused ships would be the new "I win" button. The draw-back in this case is that you use-up a large portion of cap "sprinting" to get into range of the kiter.
There are other tactics that can be employed to help. The Hype is a good example as it has a few mid-slots. Fit a scram and dual-webs. If the kiter has a scram and web, you will still be-able to keep him in range because you have an extra web. If he doesn't have a scram, you can keep him in range. If he has scram and dual-web, he probably doesn't have much for tank, etc...
Another tactic would be to fit dual cap-boosters to ensure you still have enough cap left-over after your "sprint".
The kiter has to have some-way to excape/counter, otherwise blaser ships become overpowered. Remember the point is to bring better, more-interesting balance to the game. I think this idea does a good-job of that. Not knocking your post, it's good to entertain all arguments. I appreciate you respectfully bringing concerns to the table. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:38:00 -
[876] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:[quote=Misanth]stuff... And wtf is up with all people that ask for Gallente to have Minmatar speed, and want Blasters to compete with AC's for range? Heh. Why even have different weaponsystems if they're gonna be so similar? Blasters hit harder and Gallente are slower, that's how it functions, if you don't want to fly a slow but hard-hitting race, well then you trained wrong stuff my friend.
VERY few people are asking for Blasters compete with ACs for range. That's not a good fix, that makes them basically the same weapon.
The speed thing is KEY however. You say "Blasters hit harder and Gallente are slower, that's how it functions", but I don't think you realize the repercussions of this fact.
If you are flying a slow ship with a very short range, how in the *** are you going to kill anything without getting lucky?!?! Who would be dumb enough to get within range of you?! How could you possibly get close enough to hope to do any real damage?! The only-other ships you might be lucky-enough to catch are going to be heavily-armored, hard-hitting ships just like yours. So the only ships blaster-ships can engage are other blaster-ships. What's the point of that?
The idea I (and many others) have, is to allow blaster-ships to "sprint" for short periods of time at the expence of using lots of cap. They wouldn't naturally be the fastest, just fastest for short periods of time. This way at least they have a chance vs a kiter. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
285
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:43:00 -
[877] - Quote
To you people wanting Gallente ships to special little snowflakes GTFO my EVE. Seriously.
The only thing Gallente needs are buffs to guns and to hulls, no matter in what form as long they are adequate (which they aren't anywhere near close after playing a round of SiSi brawl with my corp a hour ago.)
CCP has their hands full with the Winter expansion, don't **** things up for the rest of us. |
Jeffrey Powel
My Horse is Amazing
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:50:00 -
[878] - Quote
Cailais wrote:I dont think blasters need more range. Traditionally they have always been about close up damage - straight to the face.
Trying to turn blasters into another form of lasers just homogenizes the weapons in EVE. It might be difficult for blaster boats to get on top of a target but when they do the pilot should reap the dividends. Adding a bit more CPU to allow blaster boats to more comfortably fit dual webs and a splash more damage and the solution is there.
C.
If i have more CPU, be sure i won't use it to fit a dual web.... i don't have enought med slot to waste them |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:58:00 -
[879] - Quote
Mekhana wrote:To you people wanting Gallente ships to special little snowflakes GTFO my EVE. Seriously.
The only thing Gallente needs are buffs to guns and to hulls, no matter in what form as long they are adequate (which they aren't anywhere near close after playing a round of SiSi brawl with my corp a hour ago.)
CCP has their hands full with the Winter expansion, don't **** things up for the rest of us.
LOL! For those of us who don't speak "incomprehendable", WTF does your post mean? |
Kietay Ayari
Monopoly Money Operations
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 22:08:00 -
[880] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Sorry CCP, but you're in dire need of some more iteration here.
The important points that have gone unanswered: -Rails, why use them? Their dps post-buff isn't even up there with beams and their alpha is even lower. The entire concept of sniping at the range rails were designed around is gone because of on-grid probe mechanics. They are, in essence, the most fleet-dependant weapon system in the game and yet they have absolutely no desireable characteristics that would make them wanted in a fleet.
-Ship Bonuses on hybrid platforms: Range bonuses are absolutely sadistic (see above). Repair module bonuses are cute and niche, but it would help if they were more generally applicable.
Pleeeease change all the rail range bonuses to damage ;D
Ferox #1 |
|
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
286
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 22:12:00 -
[881] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote:Mekhana wrote:To you people wanting Gallente ships to special little snowflakes GTFO my EVE. Seriously.
The only thing Gallente needs are buffs to guns and to hulls, no matter in what form as long they are adequate (which they aren't anywhere near close after playing a round of SiSi brawl with my corp a hour ago.)
CCP has their hands full with the Winter expansion, don't **** things up for the rest of us. LOL! For those of us who don't speak "incomprehendable", WTF does your post mean?
Obviously, it means some of you are missing out how narrow this balancing window is. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 23:34:00 -
[882] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:New Brawler-Rokh
Hign Slots
8x Neutron Blaster Cannon II (Caldari Navy Antimatar Charge)
Med Slots
1x Stasis Webifier II 2x Large Shield Extender II 2x Invulnerability Field II 1x Quad LiF Fueled Booster Rockets
Low SLots
4xMagnetic Field Stabilizer II 1xDamage Control II
Drone Bay
5x Valkyrie II
Rigs:
Large Hybrid Collision Accelerator I Large Hybrid Ambit Extension I Large Core Defence Field Extender I
AWU 5 Without MWD 24 mins cap Optimal - 7.76 Falloff-17.634 Tracking 0.071 DPS - 926 /CN Animatar optimal 19.4 Falloff - 22 Tracking 0.053 DPS - 738 /NULL
How does it look?
it looks like the enemy plays with the rokh until they get bored then just warp out i love the part without mwd... oh noes why to put mwd on it then if it doesnt need to use it... |
Ford Utama
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 00:36:00 -
[883] - Quote
I'm just going to throw this out there, and I'm not sure how practical it would be. Bear with me.
What about introducing a series of "thruster drones" that would produce either a reverse stasis web like effect(increasing your ships velocity, and perhaps agility) specifically for the Gallente hull? Alternatively, you could convert the current light, medium, and heavy drones by adding an ability for the drones to attach to your Gallente hull, adding thrust. This would remove a portion of Gallente's DPS while in use, but would provide a speed boost to close the gap. Furthermore, in my eyes the drones could still be targeted while attached to your hull, and as such an enemy could counteract them, if they chose to go after the drones instead of your ship.
Keep in mind that you could justify that these drones to be used only in this way for Gallente, or CCP could make them for all races, *but* with a larger bonus to the effects of speed on the Gallente because of their drone background. You could also change that entirely, and allow drones to attach or interface with other races hulls, but to give them some other race independent bonus, like cap recharging rate for Amarr, increased Missile Velocity for Caldari, etc.
As for balance or overfit issues, CCP could introduce either a limit to how much one hull could be boosted, so that the effect would not be overpowered.
The idea here for me is that instead of using your drones for their typical role, you would have them attach and utilize their onboard microwarpdrive to provide additional thrust to the host ship. Obviously, this is just a thought, and as such I was throwing it out to see if more creative minds could find any way to make this work.
|
Oxeu
Garnithos seal of the Covenant The Heaven's Devils
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 01:08:00 -
[884] - Quote
Dare Devel wrote:New Brawler-Rokh
Hign Slots
8x Neutron Blaster Cannon II (Caldari Navy Antimatar Charge)
Med Slots
1x Stasis Webifier II 2x Large Shield Extender II 2x Invulnerability Field II 1x Quad LiF Fueled Booster Rockets
Low SLots
4xMagnetic Field Stabilizer II 1xDamage Control II
Drone Bay
5x Valkyrie II
Rigs:
Large Hybrid Collision Accelerator I Large Hybrid Ambit Extension I Large Core Defence Field Extender I
AWU 5 Without MWD 24 mins cap Optimal - 7.76 Falloff-17.634 Tracking 0.071 DPS - 926 /CN Animatar optimal 19.4 Falloff - 22 Tracking 0.053 DPS - 738 /NULL
How does it look?
I blow it to smithereens in my maelstrom without even trying hard....
I fly Minnie and Caldari, got equal Hybrid and projectile skills, yet I never fly a boat with hybrids into combat and this change won't make a difference. For caldari boats alone transform those USELESS range bonuses in damage serious no one fights outside 150k scan out warp scram death while doing a ******* 350 DPS WOOT! O NO NOT!
My rokh will remain a beautiful ship I love to fly around for looks, but in performance well screw it I get my maelstrom. |
Will DestroyYou
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 01:17:00 -
[885] - Quote
There really is only 3 ways to fix gallente.
1. Change hybrids to a new type of turrets, "flak". With a low volley damage, a fast rate of fire, thermal/explosive damage, and an explosion radius like missiles have. (this would also fix caldari ships in pvp at the same time)
-or-
2. Fix drones so they warp with their owner and can be used in more then 1 battle.
-or-
3. Both of the above. |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 01:30:00 -
[886] - Quote
Kumq uat wrote:Oh FFS. My post ended up as last on the page. Sigh. GO READ IT. Eh fuckit. Will just repost for the trolls.
WTF is this ****? Did you people suddenly go brain dead? Guess I should post what I said earlier so you people can ******* clue in.
Tracking and fitting were issues but so is damage. Currently blasters have barely any DPS edge over AC without the range, versatility, capless firing, ammo size, customizable damage, escapability, etc that AC's and Minmatar have. I know you people doubt me about the damage statement but you can see it in EFT for yourself with just raw DPS numbers, much less all the variables you then have to add in.
As a blaster pilot you plow into the center of the battle and commit yourself 100% and subject yourself to all the scrams, drones, neuts, webs, etc. The blasters have pitiful range. They barely out damage AC's even in the optimal of that range and because of the range they need to be in they require tons more tracking. Add to the fact that blasters in their hay day were also combined with things like a Thorax launching 7 heavy drones. Then CCP buffed HP on all ship hulls. Then came rigs which buffed EHP even more. Then the other weapon systems got boosted. Blasters no longer were TOTALHELLDEATH if you came in range of them.
The changes are a first step but they are hardly enough. There needs to be not a range bonus or speed but a massive DPS and tracking boost to make them acceptable for the risk of flying straight into a fleet and committing 100% to the battle with no hope of escape. That is the Gallente way and IT WILL BE GLORIOUS!
A whole race dedicated to suicide rushes is LOL. Your still talking bout a nich that has no place in large scale battles, it takes way to long to switch primary if you have to fly to him so this nich is limited to small gang/solo only
|
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 01:39:00 -
[887] - Quote
Ford Utama wrote:I'm just going to throw this out there, and I'm not sure how practical it would be. Bear with me.
What about introducing a series of "thruster drones" that would produce either a reverse stasis web like effect(increasing your ships velocity, and perhaps agility) specifically for the Gallente hull? Alternatively, you could convert the current light, medium, and heavy drones by adding an ability for the drones to attach to your Gallente hull, adding thrust. This would remove a portion of Gallente's DPS while in use, but would provide a speed boost to close the gap. Furthermore, in my eyes the drones could still be targeted while attached to your hull, and as such an enemy could counteract them, if they chose to go after the drones instead of your ship.
Keep in mind that you could justify that these drones to be used only in this way for Gallente, or CCP could make them for all races, *but* with a larger bonus to the effects of speed on the Gallente because of their drone background. You could also change that entirely, and allow drones to attach or interface with other races hulls, but to give them some other race independent bonus, like cap recharging rate for Amarr, increased Missile Velocity for Caldari, etc.
As for balance or overfit issues, CCP could introduce either a limit to how much one hull could be boosted, so that the effect would not be overpowered.
The idea here for me is that instead of using your drones for their typical role, you would have them attach and utilize their onboard microwarpdrive to provide additional thrust to the host ship. Obviously, this is just a thought, and as such I was throwing it out to see if more creative minds could find any way to make this work.
Great another way to make nano drakes and nano canes even faster. For crying out loud guys stop talking bout buffing drones, ALL 4 races use them and any buff to drones will buff everyone and do nothing for blasters |
Nikollai Tesla
Crytec Enterprises SRS.
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 02:10:00 -
[888] - Quote
I put some actual data in EFT together. To compare turrets
Initial Test Settings Ground rules were cruisers 5 turret equivalents. 1000 PG, fighting best guns possible 2 weapon damage upgrades No Drones No Resists/Damage type were factored in. of EHP No MWD, NO afterbuner or WEB
*minmitara still had 500 PG for tank and other things while the rest were at cap
Test Results Here you can see Blasters, quickly loose the DPS strength at about 7KM and get surpassed by the Autocannons. They megapulse lasers also almost do the same damage as Blasters. In this situation Lasers are longer range and Autocannons do more damage.
Faction Ammo, high Transversal
Here the attacking ship is closing with the defending one to cut the traversal, with the better tracking the blasters to large amounts of damage. Yet are still quickly surpassed withing 6-7km. Additionally autocannons can choose weakest resist damage type doing additional damage.
Faction Ammo , low Transversal
Next 2 use close range faction ammo:
Ammar megapulses dominate becase the ship was designed entirely for guns, rupture still have ~400-500 PG to fit tank. Cutting back on guns should bring Scorch/Conflag damage down.
As you can see void still has a very narrow engagement range and quickly loses its DPS. Scorch is in its league of its own but costs cap, and has ludicrous fitting requirements.
Tech 2 Ammo, high Transversal
Tech 2 Ammo,low Transversal
Summary: -Autocannons are the lowest fitting requirement weapons -Minmittar has double bonus ships ROF+DMG, that effectively let them fly with 8 gun equivalents freeing up utility slots and tank space. -Gallente Ships tend to be slower, so once in optimal range it won't necessarily stay there -Faster ships can choose to disengage or change range -DPS/Damage bonus is negated after 6-10KM to where DPS drops to zero. In fleet engagements spreading out will nullify blasters.
Possible Idea:
"Particle blasters operate on a similar principle as the railgun except they fire a magnetically contained ball of subatomic particles. No other turret class can match the sheer destructive power of particle blasters, but due to the rapid dispersion of the containment field, it also has the worst range of all turrets. "
A magnetically contained ball of subatomic particles, is a PLASMA TORPEDO. Don't make blasters into an autocannon or lasers, make them even more hybrid by making them like HAMs, with good DPS.
Blaster Torpedo -Has Reload Time for Ammo (Same as Blaster) -Has Fixed Damage Type (Same as Blaster) -Has Cap Usage (Same as Blaster) -Short-Mid Range Optimal only Weapon (Same as HAMS, Better than Blaster) +No Range Damage degradation. (Better than Blaster, Same as Missile) -Travel Speed, not instantaneous (Worse than Blaster, Better than Missile) -Has Lifetime, very short (Shorter than Assualt Missiles)
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
188
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 02:28:00 -
[889] - Quote
RackotPrime wrote:i do not support range increase ammo remake, damage increase, ships balance, armor tank balance - YEAS, but i don`t wont new AC or lasers under blasters mark
This. this is a signature |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 02:42:00 -
[890] - Quote
Well ITS NOT enough. Its good starting point for next tweaks. And Please CCP give this gig to the guy who was "playing / trying to play" Gallente. If not this revmap will be rubbish.
Take this very serious coz lots of ppl wants to play gallente. If you loose this time. game is over, but you know that..
We need better range on hybrids. Now you are giving us something but its not enough with this revmap Gallente will be still balls suckers.
How to Christ Sake Gallente could won a WAR ? Any WAR ...
Ships are slow and range is close so WTF ? You made lots of mistakes with others revmaps and now sorry to say but you must "drink this beer"
I wasnt playing some time coz Im pissed on you Im going back coz Winter Expansion as you said will be about hybrids and space stuff. If Hybrids going to suck I'll quit again sorry...
Take Care and Mucho Luck coz clock is ticking . tic . tic
|
|
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
188
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 02:47:00 -
[891] - Quote
Kumq uat wrote:WTF is this ****? Did you people suddenly go brain dead? Guess I should post what I said earlier so you people can ******* clue in.
Tracking and fitting were issues but so is damage. Currently blasters have barely any DPS edge over AC without the range, versatility, capless firing, ammo size, customizable damage, escapability, etc that AC's and Minmatar have. I know you people doubt me about the damage statement but you can see it in EFT for yourself with just raw DPS numbers, much less all the variables you then have to add in.
As a blaster pilot you plow into the center of the battle and commit yourself 100% and subject yourself to all the scrams, drones, neuts, webs, etc. The blasters have pitiful range. They barely out damage AC's even in the optimal of that range and because of the range they need to be in they require tons more tracking. Add to the fact that blasters in their hay day were also combined with things like a Thorax launching 7 heavy drones. Then CCP buffed HP on all ship hulls. Then came rigs which buffed EHP even more. Then the other weapon systems got boosted. Blasters no longer were TOTALHELLDEATH if you came in range of them.
The changes are a first step but they are hardly enough. There needs to be not a range bonus or speed but a massive DPS and tracking boost to make them acceptable for the risk of flying straight into a fleet and committing 100% to the battle with no hope of escape. That is the Gallente way and IT WILL BE GLORIOUS!
Well in the hay day Gallente also had their nos-droneboats (completely making Amarr bullshit, remember the 3 years of "lol, Amarr" we had on the forums?), no bandwidth, overpowered damps, nano-dominix, for a while Eos was arguably the most powerful/overpowered ship in the game, and a bit later on they were doing great in the nano days with Ishtar etc. And by all means, when we still used sniper-bs, and before the Apoc was changed, the rail-Mega was easier to fit and generally more preferred and used than any Minmatar ships, and 'better' than the Armageddon. Amarr even flied with projectiles at times becuase of cap and fitting issues.
That doesn't make it right that hybrids have fallen behind. But if we're gonna look at what changed, we'll find this: the nos nullified the expensive cap consumption. Bandwidth was a necessary addition but overnerfed certain ships, like the Eos. Damps are now underwhelming instead of overpowered, where's the iteration CCP, it's only gone what, three-four years? Nano-BS was fixed, but instead we had nano from smaller ships - which was later changed, but in the same patch the 90% webs were removed. That was quite reasonable as everyone will be going alot slower now, but same time that was also a major blaster-nerf.
Eventually CCP fixed the "lol, Amarr" by iterating on their ships and weaponry. And even further on, the projectiles (remember noone flew minmatar for years in fleets? just the Vaga/Rapier in skirmish/smallscale warfare, the nano-snipers even preferred Eagle, Zealot and Cerberus over Muninns) were fixed. One of the fixes was a major boost to TE's.
TL;DR - there was necessary iteration on Amarr and Minmatar as they were underwhelming, and rightfully so. There was *no* iteration on these changes made tho, and many more changes followed. Making Gallente weaponry into projectiles is not a solution. Something else is needed. Something unique for Gallente. And a nerf to TE would not hurt either, but the core stats, functionality and balance between lasers and projectiles is very good. It's just hybrids who lack. Especially fai.. I mean rails. Blasters are close-range ships, they won't do well if they don't start fight (or get jump-in) on top of stuff. If you expect a mobile fight, and/or not camping a gate/station, don't fit blasters. That's when you should fit rails, if they actually worked. this is a signature |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
188
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 02:53:00 -
[892] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:Bummer, I was hoping to see a CCP response today. Even a couple of lines can help focus the discussion.
Things are starting to look a bit grim with the silence. Wonder what we are going to see. The idea of messing with rigs seems like a poor idea. It affects too many aspects of the game and in the end will only make the other platforms that much better over the hybrid boats, particularly if Amarr gets a speed bonus from changes to armor rigs and the shield tanked Minmatar boats don't get a sig radius increase from shield rigs, because they already enjoy a very low sig radius to start with. Messing with rigs just impacts so many other aspects of ship designs of all the races. The changes need to be Gallente boats specifically. Caldari long range rails I think is simpler to deal with directly to the rail gun stats.
I think the most succinct argument to date is that there is just no good reason to fly Gallente boats. Whether you are talking solo/small groups or in bigger fleets. They tend to be more expensive and every time you go into a fight, you are committed 100%. All the other races can fight aligned or kite out of damage and warp. Even fighting within single point range is viable and can be exited from with MWD. Gallente fight inside scram/web/neut range. The cost/benefit just isn't there. In the POP,POP, POP of fleet fights its often very frustrating for a Gallente pilot to try and get into range of primary as targets change. Right as you get there, primary goes pop and now new primary is far away again. Even with frigate tackler support most Hurricanes have such high tracking that if frigs try to tackle with a scram on, they die. But scram is what is need to slow the immense speed of these ships.
It's because you try to use short-range weaponry in a medium range engagement. The boost need to be to rails, the solution is not to give blasters more range. I'm a t2 large blaster pilot myself, I use them on multiple characters regulary, I love them, they are ******* awsome and really powerful. If people stopped trying to use blasters in medium- to longrange envinronment, and if fails/rails actually worked, this would be a non-issue.
Lasers are a medium range weaponry. Projectiles fight in falloff, they don't do their EFT damage, they usually do 40-60% of that in a regular fight. Blasters do their full damage IF they get in range. Rails on the other hand, are underwhelming. No alpha, poor damage, everything. this is a signature |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
188
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 02:56:00 -
[893] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Minmie trolls don't want to be worse than now (the perfect example of how a noob can win a 5-years old player) Amarr players don't want his lasers nerfed. Every time they lose their arguments they say that hybrid were the firsts OP in the game. And won't allow it happens again. But they don't think they are far better than before, and the others also need to be better -¼-¼
Make dissapear hybrid and put lasers to gallente and projectiles to Caldari.
Actually missiles were the first weaponsystem to be OP. this is a signature |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
188
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 03:13:00 -
[894] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote:Misanth wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:[quote=Misanth]stuff... And wtf is up with all people that ask for Gallente to have Minmatar speed, and want Blasters to compete with AC's for range? Heh. Why even have different weaponsystems if they're gonna be so similar? Blasters hit harder and Gallente are slower, that's how it functions, if you don't want to fly a slow but hard-hitting race, well then you trained wrong stuff my friend. VERY few people are asking for Blasters compete with ACs for range. That's not a good fix, that makes them basically the same weapon. The speed thing is KEY however. You say "Blasters hit harder and Gallente are slower, that's how it functions", but I don't think you realize the repercussions of this fact. If you are flying a slow ship with a very short range, how in the *** are you going to kill anything without getting lucky?!?! Who would be dumb enough to get within range of you?! How could you possibly get close enough to hope to do any real damage?! The only-other ships you might be lucky-enough to catch are going to be heavily-armored, hard-hitting ships just like yours. So the only ships blaster-ships can engage are other blaster-ships. What's the point of that? The idea I (and many others) have, is to allow blaster-ships to "sprint" for short periods of time at the expence of using lots of cap. They wouldn't naturally be the fastest, just fastest for short periods of time. This way at least they have a chance vs a kiter.
I realise very well how this functions. It means that when I fly blaster-fits, I make damn sure I enter get to warp on top of things, that I start on a gate or station where I can get stuff in range, or that I have a backup plan to GTFO if I need. I know my blaster-Taranis can be kited by alot of other frigs, you know how you counter that? By running from some frigs (rock, scissors, paper), by engaging others (rock, scissors, paper) and by out-maneuvering your opponent in other cases (skill and experience > shortage of skill and inexperience). One example of the latter is to burn away from your opponent, then quickly turn around/double back, overheat scrambler/web and/or mwd and try catch him with his pants down.
The same goes for battleship combat. I don't bring Amarr ships for station games. They are horrible at that engagement range. A blaster or torp boat (or, in some cases, projectiles - but that's generally artillery ironicly, for alpha) do that better. If I'd go for a POS shoot in null, we engage at 30km+, outside the bubble right? So that's right smackdab in Amarr optimal, and they don't use ammo. Minmatar would be better in alpha-fleets doing something else.
Generally speaking, where my Gallente ships fall short, is in the mid- to long range combats because I can't use rails because they are utter ****. In short range combat my Gallente ships perform great. See a red line here? There has never been a situation in the history of EVE, that every race has ships that are useful to perform all roles/tasks. For the longest time Amarr had to completely sit out on small skirmish PvP unless they flew a damp-Curse. Caldari has on/off been considered a PvE-race and struggled to fulfil certain fleet roles. Minmatar and their projectiles were pretty much laughed at, Vagas and Rapiers did ok because of nano/90% webs, but they couldn't do frig or bs-combat in null, only pirates would use their bs.
i could go on, but you see the point. Not every race has always been able to fill all roles. And as I repeatedly stated here, I fly Gallente myself on multiple characters, I love the race, there's many ships I find very powerful and/or useful. The only time you find issues with Gallente is when you try to perform a role that you currently are not suitable for. But might have been, and/or might be in the future. Rails can't compete on mid-/longrange levels, blasters can compete on short-range. There's nothing else to it really. As I said before, if you bring a short-range weaponry to a mid- or longrange fight, you brought the wrong ship. As much as I, as a young pilot, thought every race should be competitive on all arenas at all time, so I could focus on "my" race, that just never worked like that in EVE and never will. Crosstrain, or fly another ship. Bring an Eris instead of your mega to your nullsec blobs. Or a sentry-dominix to POS shoots. And pick your targets when in frig-/cruiser-/bc small scale combat. this is a signature |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 03:59:00 -
[895] - Quote
Shmekla wrote:Creat Posudol wrote: First of all: bad example! Interceptors aren't exactly the typical blaster boats even if they happen to fit blasters (like a Taranis). Interceptor fighting is even more problematic as a comparison since your controls are delayed (from the time you doublelick to turn to the time the ship actually reacts) and that makes a much bigger difference at 4 km/s compared to 1.5 km/s with a BS that needs at about half a minute to reach that speed.
How about we look at a thorax vs. rupture or mega vs. tempest? If I see the rupture/tempest come straight at me I can doubleclick in the reverse direction to "actively break" (twice as good deceleration compared to ctrl-space), if timed right he'll be right beside me when our speeds match, commence face melting. If I screw it up he'll have the advantage, as I said it comes down to pilot skill. Not as much with interceptors as the inherent control delays screw you much more than the actual opponent does. If he decides to immediately try and keep range on me I'm screwed with just acceleration. I can't catch up, EVER. With straight line speed I'll at least get closer over time until I can start shooting, at which point he can try to break away, giving me trouble keeping up with his fast turns. But unless I'm in range I have a pretty easy time to compensate: If he is 15km away (I won't hurt him that much, even with large blasters) and does a 90-¦ turn, I only need to compensate about 20-¦ or so to adjust to a new interception point, which even with such a sluggish ship is not too big of a deal. If he then reverses I have to readjust (including distance I already closed to him) more like 60-¦, taking more time and speed, but I'm also closer and am therefore dealing at least some more damage.
But in any case: if I'm slow (web/scram), he's also slow for the same reason! Furthermore with a BS he WILL be in kill range! depending on the fit also mostly for cruiser sized ships/guns. The only time this is a serious problem is with frigs! Have I mentioned how badly that example represents what is generally referred to as blaster boats?
BTW: can't wait to get real-time joystick control! I do hope that happens some day soon...
Taranis is typical blaster user, as Thorax, Deimos or Mega. I put this example to show how easy speed can backfire on blaster boat, but you failed to catch my point. Also in engagement if you will wait to see what opponent will do - you'll die. you take out of content my point about dashing, or even not read post clearly.
I understood you just fine. Also I've shown how to avoid that backfire you proposed as a pilot. As a blaster pilot the only thing you want to do when you're far away from your target, is get close and stay close. How exactly you do that (approach, orbit or manual piloting) is up to you. There is no reason to "wait to see what opponent will do". Also you don't particularly care (or shouldn't if the weapon system works as intended) how you move, your opponent moves or how you move in relation to each other. Not as long as it means he is still close. He can try to outmaneuver your guns tracking, but that will cost him either dps or tank even in a Minmatar ship.
The problem with your example (which I meant to demonstrate) is that there is a VERY different effect with interceptors compared to cruisers, let alone BS. I'll explain it again. If you have 2 interceptors starting a fight at 30 km, if both fly towards each other it takes about 3-4 seconds for them to be on top of each other, which is barely enough time to react considering the control delay that comes with EVE (1-2 seconds from a command to the ship actually reacting). This is not the case with cruisers or BS at that distance. If we take the 2 pilots and put them in a BS at that distance, they'll take at least 15 seconds to reach each other (including acceleration) assuming a speed of 1500 m/s each (which is already above average). That is plenty of time to avoid the negative overshooting effect you described. Unless the Gallente pilot is completely incompetent he'll end up being close to his target (surely under 10 km) and roughly matching speed and direction of his target.
Shmekla wrote:Creat Posudo wrote: If he decides to immediately try and keep range on me I'm screwed with just acceleration. I can't catch up, EVER. .
And again you failed to understand, that blaster boat must get speed faster than opponent. That mean in first seconds if your opponent traveled 5 km, you already covered 10. If you bet on speed that mean blaster boat need to go faster than minmatars, and way faster because blaster boats must catch target before dies. But speed is for minmatars.... so there is a little contradiction, isn't it?
Yes! Now you're getting it! That would be the idea. If you haven't gotten that from my last posts so far please go back and read them again (on the last 3 pages or so). It would be the proposition that Minmatar are still pretty fast, but most of all AGILE. Gallente will take the new crown for speed, but will actually get their already not-great agility nerfed. This would allow blasters to work since you can get into range. It would also, as I've stated many times, cause pilot skill to be the deciding factor in battles.
It is of course fine if you disagree, but please explain what part of my suggestion wouldn't work as intended (I'm sure I overlooked something somewhere). I've explained why yours wouldn't work for the example you mentioned above and what other problems I see with it (Gallente can only engage if already near blaster range). |
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 04:58:00 -
[896] - Quote
Ford Utama wrote:I'm just going to throw this out there, and I'm not sure how practical it would be. Bear with me.
What about introducing a series of "thruster drones" that would produce either a reverse stasis web like effect(increasing your ships velocity, and perhaps agility) specifically for the Gallente hull? Alternatively, you could convert the current light, medium, and heavy drones by adding an ability for the drones to attach to your Gallente hull, adding thrust. This would remove a portion of Gallente's DPS while in use, but would provide a speed boost to close the gap. Furthermore, in my eyes the drones could still be targeted while attached to your hull, and as such an enemy could counteract them, if they chose to go after the drones instead of your ship.
Keep in mind that you could justify that these drones to be used only in this way for Gallente, or CCP could make them for all races, *but* with a larger bonus to the effects of speed on the Gallente because of their drone background. You could also change that entirely, and allow drones to attach or interface with other races hulls, but to give them some other race independent bonus, like cap recharging rate for Amarr, increased Missile Velocity for Caldari, etc.
As for balance or overfit issues, CCP could introduce either a limit to how much one hull could be boosted, so that the effect would not be overpowered.
The idea here for me is that instead of using your drones for their typical role, you would have them attach and utilize their onboard microwarpdrive to provide additional thrust to the host ship. Obviously, this is just a thought, and as such I was throwing it out to see if more creative minds could find any way to make this work.
I fear this might be way too much (programming) work to be implemented for the winter expansion, but it's nothing short of brilliant if you ask me! There would most likely not even be a need to restrict this mechanic to Gallente or give them special bonuses, since the generally have the biggest drone bays, getting the biggest drones for their class and with that the most thrust. Most Gallente BS can field a full set of Heavies (except the poor Hype), [relevant] cruisers can usually do the same with mediums and frigs mostly have a least a couple as well (not sure there is anything needed for frigs though). Depending on how big the thrust is and assuming the enemy would also attach them to gain thrust as long as there is distance it would have to be carefully balanced but I think this might be the perfect way to turn the one advantage Gallente has into speed. Lights shouldn't provide a significant boost to BS, and only about 20% of their potential boost to cruisers. Similar for mediums and BS.
Basically, limit it to certain amount of thrust per drone attached, similar to afterburners/MWDs: Depending on a ships mass it would reduce speed boost if it gets to heavy. I can imagine that a flat speed addition in m/s could be preferable over a percentage (even though this is rarely - if ever - done in EVE), even more shifting the advantage towards Gallente.
Some examples I just pulled out of thin air: Let every drone give a speed boost of 10 m/s. This could already be balanced in such a way that mediums only give 8 m/s to BC, 2-3 m/s for BS. It would also only give 10 m/s if attached to a frig. A light would give only frigs 10 m/s, maybe destroyers as well. Let cruisers still be boosted by 3-4 m/s and BS effectively not at all (maybe 0.5 m/s). Just to get the idea, it can easily be scaled up or down of course. Also it can be turned into a % boost like ABs/MWDs and roughly tailored to the average ship speed of an intended class in a similar way.
It could also be a bonus that needs to achieve 5 drones of appropriate size to be effective. Maybe (from 1 to 5 drones) provide 1, 2, 4, 6, 20 m/s. That's for all of course, not per drone.
Yea, others also use drones but not to the same extent. If suggestions above are followed this should give Gallente a sufficient speed advantage as long as drones are attached to get in range. Then they can be released to inflict damage or stay attached to keep range. If they are released and need to be reattached, this should take a couple of seconds to do so switching can't be done instantly and becomes a tactical decision. It also can't be so long that nobody ever detaches them either of course.
The only real problem is that of all the Minmatar ships the fastest BS (typhoon, 130 m/s raw) also has the biggest drone bay (175) and bandwidth (125). Maybe a gallente-ship-specific bonus would be needed after all. Just a "negative role bonus" on that ship would also do, as this problem exists in no other ship class (at least not with the proposed 5-drone-scaling above).
Yes, I'm aware it would effectively reduce the speed of some ships who happen to have rather small drone bays (Maller) or boost those with relatively large ones for their class that are NOT Gallente (Harbinger). I find it hard to judge all those effects to be honest. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 05:45:00 -
[897] - Quote
Misanth wrote:Mariner6 wrote:Bummer, I was hoping to see a CCP response today. Even a couple of lines can help focus the discussion.
Things are starting to look a bit grim with the silence. Wonder what we are going to see. The idea of messing with rigs seems like a poor idea. It affects too many aspects of the game and in the end will only make the other platforms that much better over the hybrid boats, particularly if Amarr gets a speed bonus from changes to armor rigs and the shield tanked Minmatar boats don't get a sig radius increase from shield rigs, because they already enjoy a very low sig radius to start with. Messing with rigs just impacts so many other aspects of ship designs of all the races. The changes need to be Gallente boats specifically. Caldari long range rails I think is simpler to deal with directly to the rail gun stats.
I think the most succinct argument to date is that there is just no good reason to fly Gallente boats. Whether you are talking solo/small groups or in bigger fleets. They tend to be more expensive and every time you go into a fight, you are committed 100%. All the other races can fight aligned or kite out of damage and warp. Even fighting within single point range is viable and can be exited from with MWD. Gallente fight inside scram/web/neut range. The cost/benefit just isn't there. In the POP,POP, POP of fleet fights its often very frustrating for a Gallente pilot to try and get into range of primary as targets change. Right as you get there, primary goes pop and now new primary is far away again. Even with frigate tackler support most Hurricanes have such high tracking that if frigs try to tackle with a scram on, they die. But scram is what is need to slow the immense speed of these ships. It's because you try to use short-range weaponry in a medium range engagement. The boost need to be to rails, the solution is not to give blasters more range. I'm a t2 large blaster pilot myself, I use them on multiple characters regulary, I love them, they are ******* awsome and really powerful. If people stopped trying to use blasters in medium- to longrange envinronment, and if fails/rails actually worked, this would be a non-issue. Lasers are a medium range weaponry. Projectiles fight in falloff, they don't do their EFT damage, they usually do 40-60% of that in a regular fight. Blasters do their full damage IF they get in range. Rails on the other hand, are underwhelming. No alpha, poor damage, everything.
I dont know why everyone is ignoring the gorilla in the room.
1.) Rails have to be competive with in 150km not 200km.
2.) All Hybirds have to do alot more dmg to over come the Huge Kin/Therm rest patch.
3.) Blaster boats only have two possable fixs. Ether inc Falloff by alot or give them the fastest ships in the game. No one realy wants a ship were you cant hit the target or get to the target 80% of the time.
Or
4.) Rebalnce the Kin/Therm rest and spread it out over the other rest. And undo the Web/Scrable changes. And Hybirds are fixed.
Pluse the changes you already have plained. |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 07:48:00 -
[898] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Misanth wrote:Mariner6 wrote:Bummer, I was hoping to see a CCP response today. Even a couple of lines can help focus the discussion.
Things are starting to look a bit grim with the silence. Wonder what we are going to see. The idea of messing with rigs seems like a poor idea. It affects too many aspects of the game and in the end will only make the other platforms that much better over the hybrid boats, particularly if Amarr gets a speed bonus from changes to armor rigs and the shield tanked Minmatar boats don't get a sig radius increase from shield rigs, because they already enjoy a very low sig radius to start with. Messing with rigs just impacts so many other aspects of ship designs of all the races. The changes need to be Gallente boats specifically. Caldari long range rails I think is simpler to deal with directly to the rail gun stats.
I think the most succinct argument to date is that there is just no good reason to fly Gallente boats. Whether you are talking solo/small groups or in bigger fleets. They tend to be more expensive and every time you go into a fight, you are committed 100%. All the other races can fight aligned or kite out of damage and warp. Even fighting within single point range is viable and can be exited from with MWD. Gallente fight inside scram/web/neut range. The cost/benefit just isn't there. In the POP,POP, POP of fleet fights its often very frustrating for a Gallente pilot to try and get into range of primary as targets change. Right as you get there, primary goes pop and now new primary is far away again. Even with frigate tackler support most Hurricanes have such high tracking that if frigs try to tackle with a scram on, they die. But scram is what is need to slow the immense speed of these ships. It's because you try to use short-range weaponry in a medium range engagement. The boost need to be to rails, the solution is not to give blasters more range. I'm a t2 large blaster pilot myself, I use them on multiple characters regulary, I love them, they are ******* awsome and really powerful. If people stopped trying to use blasters in medium- to longrange envinronment, and if fails/rails actually worked, this would be a non-issue. Lasers are a medium range weaponry. Projectiles fight in falloff, they don't do their EFT damage, they usually do 40-60% of that in a regular fight. Blasters do their full damage IF they get in range. Rails on the other hand, are underwhelming. No alpha, poor damage, everything. I dont know why everyone is ignoring the gorilla in the room. 1.) Rails have to be competive with in 150km not 200km. 2.) All Hybirds have to do alot more dmg to over come the Huge Kin/Therm rest patch. 3.) Blaster boats only have two possable fixs. Ether inc Falloff by alot or give them the fastest ships in the game. No one realy wants a ship were you cant hit the target or get to the target 80% of the time. Or 4.) Rebalnce the Kin/Therm rest and spread it out over the other rest. And undo the Web/Scrable changes. And Hybirds are fixed. Pluse the changes you already have plained as thoughs are just mostly much need and long over do fitting fixes and all benift from the also much needed and long over do tech 2 ammo fixs.
Whatever they decide to do it will have to be a buff to the gun itself. If they buff the ships speed or drones most gallente ships will still prefer autocannons/ arty over blasters/rails because the buffs will transfer.
If they cannot find a way to buff blasters/rails without relying on ship/drone buffs too much nothing will change. At that point its a concept design problem and I say take blasters and rails back to the drawing board and redesign them from scratch.
|
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 10:12:00 -
[899] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:Well ITS NOT enough. Its good starting point for next tweaks. And Please CCP give this gig to the guy who was "playing / trying to play" Gallente. If not this revmap will be rubbish.
Take this very serious coz lots of ppl wants to play gallente. If you loose this time. game is over, but you know that..
We need better range on hybrids. Now you are giving us something but its not enough with this revmap Gallente will be still balls suckers.
How to Christ Sake Gallente could won a WAR ? Any WAR ...
Ships are slow and range is close so WTF ? You made lots of mistakes with others revmaps and now sorry to say but you must "drink this beer"
I wasnt playing some time coz Im pissed on you Im going back coz Winter Expansion as you said will be about hybrids and space stuff. If Hybrids going to suck I'll quit again sorry...
Take Care and Mucho Luck coz clock is ticking . tic . tic
Well, they are French. They are probably supposed to surrender immediately. "You either need less science fiction or more medication."
"Or less medication and more ammo!" |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 10:31:00 -
[900] - Quote
Breaking news!!! Another ridiculous idea from CCP against a gallentean ship. They removed Talos web bonus and removed the 25m3 dronebay and give to Talos a small tracking bonus !!! lol Who want to flight a new design tier 3 gallentean ship which cant reach his target but he have good tracking ??? I never understood logic of CCP. They realy want to fix the gallente ships ? |
|
Will DestroyYou
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 10:35:00 -
[901] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:They realy want to fix the gallente ships ?
No, they all fly mini... obviously...
|
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 11:09:00 -
[902] - Quote
Will DestroyYou wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Breaking news!!! Another ridiculous idea from CCP against a gallentean ship. They removed Talos web bonus and removed the 25m3 dronebay and they give a small tracking bonus for Talos!!! lol Who want to flight a new design tier 3 gallentean ship which cant reach his target but he have good tracking ??? I never understood logic of CCP. They realy want to fix the gallente ships ? No, they all fly mini... obviously...
Obviously. If a developer introduce for us the masterful example of the incompetence, that is the minnie's fault. Realy.
|
Deviana Sevidon
Jades Falcon Guards
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 11:40:00 -
[903] - Quote
Even the ingame fittint screen on Sisi acknowledges that the failure that is the Hybrid fix for blaster turrets.
(I choose the ships because they both have a damage bonus, the same number of turrets and drones)
Armageddon hull on Singularity: 7x Mega Pulse Laser ll: Turret DPS: 729 with Multifrequency Crystals 15km optimal 10km falloff Turret DPS: 668 with Scorch Crystals 45km optimal 10km falloff
Megathron hull on Singularity : 7 Neutron Blaster Cannon ll: Turret DPS 759 with Antimatter 4,5km optimal and 12,5km falloff Turret DPS 696 with Null 11,25km optimal and 15,62km falloff
In conclusion:
There is no point in hybrid turrets even after the patch. The Armageddon has almost the same DPS and 3x the range. So blasters are in desperate need of something more. Either drastically more DPS or a lot more range.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 13:47:00 -
[904] - Quote
Deviana Sevidon wrote:Even the ingame fittint screen on Sisi acknowledges that the failure that is the Hybrid fix for blaster turrets. (I choose the ships because they both have a damage bonus, the same number of turrets and drones) Armageddon hull on Singularity: 7x Mega Pulse Laser ll: Turret DPS: 729 with Multifrequency Crystals 15km optimal 10km falloff Turret DPS: 668 with Scorch Crystals 45km optimal 10km falloff Megathron hull on Singularity : 7 Neutron Blaster Cannon ll: Turret DPS 759 with Antimatter 4,5km optimal and 12,5km falloff Turret DPS 696 with Null 11,25km optimal and 15,62km falloff In conclusion: There is no point in hybrid turrets even after the patch. The Armageddon has almost the same DPS and 3x the range. So blasters are in desperate need of something more. Either drastically more DPS or a lot more range. And to compare Talos vs. Tornado: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=29776&find=unread
Compare Talos to Tornado is simple -actually sisi is good to figure how insufficient chances are for gallente while either by range or ammo changes other races like amarr or minmatar are getting boosted.
Before: There's no reason to fly something that can't catch prey apply decent dmg in falloff with crap tracking
After: There's no reason to fly something that still can't catch prey, still can't apply decent dmg in falloff without tracking issues. Now has more cap free to keep running AB or MWD but still useless since can't catch prey, but gives you the illusion you can do something while you're being melted has before. Nice for gank at gates station undocks and mackinaws. For the same price Tornado just does better in all fields, why fly the green crap?
Has for those "don't give range I don't want hybrids looking like autos".
First things first, I don't want your Autos or lasers to be better at blaster roles any more since they're not and were not supposed to be in the first place, so if they can't fix hybrids it's lasers and autos who are in need of the nerf hammer.
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 13:49:00 -
[905] - Quote
Deviana Sevidon wrote:Even the ingame fittint screen on Sisi acknowledges that the failure that is the Hybrid fix for blaster turrets. (I choose the ships because they both have a damage bonus, the same number of turrets and drones) Armageddon hull on Singularity: 7x Mega Pulse Laser ll: Turret DPS: 729 with Multifrequency Crystals 15km optimal 10km falloff Turret DPS: 668 with Scorch Crystals 45km optimal 10km falloff Megathron hull on Singularity : 7 Neutron Blaster Cannon ll: Turret DPS 759 with Antimatter 4,5km optimal and 12,5km falloff Turret DPS 696 with Null 11,25km optimal and 15,62km falloff In conclusion: There is no point in hybrid turrets even after the patch. The Armageddon has almost the same DPS and 3x the range. So blasters are in desperate need of something more. Either drastically more DPS or a lot more range. And to compare Talos vs. Tornado: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=29776&find=unread
Good point.
4,5 km LOL :) and lack of DPS its soooo huge L.O.L
WHO SAID SOMETHING ABOUT BLASTERS UBER DAMAGE ??? Where are you guys now ? Please "t2 Blaster Pilots" say something about yours uber tactics or even better show us yours Killboards :)
Blaster sucks and DEV want to give them tracking LOL. Welcome old/new CCP where ignorance is the key. ehh
Nothing gonna change Im sure ... |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 14:02:00 -
[906] - Quote
All I can assume is that most devs toons are either Amarr or Minmater and that subconciously they dont want to make Galle be on an equal footing. I found the youtube clip of a blaster fleet getting on top of and owning a Beam fleet so hilarious. it was like them rubbing the difference in and saying if you cant win with blasters you're just crap pilots. Hybrids suck now and they will after the changes. CCP dont seem to have the will, inclanation, insparation or ability to fix them. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 14:15:00 -
[907] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:All I can assume is that most devs toons are either Amarr or Minmater and that subconciously they dont want to make Galle be on an equal footing. I found the youtube clip of a blaster fleet getting on top of and owning a Beam fleet so hilarious. it was like them rubbing the difference in and saying if you cant win with blasters you're just crap pilots. Hybrids suck now and they will after the changes. CCP dont seem to have the will, inclanation, insparation or ability to fix them.
Well could be true as I remember this correctly some time ago on Alliance Tournament CCP Soundwave said that he likes to fly Matar so maybe it is the point. And he also said that he don't want to make any tweaks in ships. And now he dare to said in front of the cam that its "ALL ABOUT SPACESHIPS". He must be really unhappy...
Well he is mattar :) LOL - checked
There was reduction in CCP stuff why not CCP Soundwave :) ?
|
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 14:38:00 -
[908] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Whatever they decide to do it will have to be a buff to the gun itself. If they buff the ships speed or drones most gallente ships will still prefer autocannons/ arty over blasters/rails because the buffs will transfer.
If they cannot find a way to buff blasters/rails without relying on ship/drone buffs too much nothing will change. At that point its a concept design problem and I say take blasters and rails back to the drawing board and redesign them from scratch.
I know I've gotten pretty exited last night when I replied to the "drone attaching idea" (post #896), but the more I think about it, the less I like it unfortunately :(
One of the reasons is the one you just mentioned: ACs will even on those hulls still outperform blasters by a long shot, and that will open just another can of worms. Then there is the probably significant effort required to implement this, even if they don't physically attach to hulls but pull on the ship with tractor beams or something. It's still an entirely new game mechanic. Also in fact this is basically just a conditional speed buff to hulls, essentially giving speed based on drone bandwidth (and removing the drone damage while it's active). While this does give the greatest boost to Gallente, it's also pretty random as to which ship gets how much boost otherwise. It would be an option to create something like "drone attachment hard points" to more directly control this, but in the end this feels like a rather cumbersome approach. The effect would be quite similar if the speed of the hulls was just simply increased where needed by the exact amount that is deemed necessary or appropriate.
To bad, it seemed like a really cool idea at first. One more example of how something cool isn't necessarily a good idea... |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 14:58:00 -
[909] - Quote
I see one potential solver.
Nerf Matar and make gallente the fastest race in the game. If you want close range you must be the fastest, its the only option for this problem. Coz Devs makes lots of mistakes with matar. Matar ships are fast and agile with is the stupidest idea, you cant be agile and fast at the same time = inertia. Blaster can be OK (EVEN NOW !!) if you always are the fastest one Isn't this true ? Trying anything different will makes things worst..
I think the problem is not with blasters but with AC .. and fast matar ships
Imagine blasters on Matar boats. It can work ! |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:18:00 -
[910] - Quote
Charles Edisson wrote:All I can assume is that most devs toons are either Amarr or Minmater and that subconciously they dont want to make Galle be on an equal footing. I found the youtube clip of a blaster fleet getting on top of and owning a Beam fleet so hilarious. it was like them rubbing the difference in and saying if you cant win with blasters you're just crap pilots. Hybrids suck now and they will after the changes. CCP dont seem to have the will, inclanation, insparation or ability to fix them.
Yeah because everyone in null sec does just like that: "fly under 200clicks" and every single blaster in the constellation just magically pops and rip apart everything looking like rust or sex toys....we all know it so well.
That video made me smile the first time I saw it "wtf is this troll from CCP"
I'd like them to do some real videos of what's going on in high sec low sec and null sec, not sure they'd be able too admit how disproportional is the number of matar/amarr/caldari/gallente ships flown. Sad CCP Tallest is the once that can do something about but will probably not be able to: see the 180-¦ direction about web bonus for Talos with stuff about fleets and hit bigger stuff.
Everyone knows the only sub cap gallente ships useful in fleets are arazus/lachesis for the long point, at any other task gallente hulls/weapons are just pitiful.
Gangs? -yes they can succeed, when they're being rep by GUARDIANS, shooting stuff pinned by RAPIERS, Ecm by FALCONS, but even then if you fly gallente it's just the poor man's choice. Every single ship type in amarr or minmatar set up WILL be better for the same job.
|
|
Mariner6
EVE University Ivy League
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:26:00 -
[911] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Charles Edisson wrote:All I can assume is that most devs toons are either Amarr or Minmater and that subconciously they dont want to make Galle be on an equal footing. I found the youtube clip of a blaster fleet getting on top of and owning a Beam fleet so hilarious. it was like them rubbing the difference in and saying if you cant win with blasters you're just crap pilots. Hybrids suck now and they will after the changes. CCP dont seem to have the will, inclanation, insparation or ability to fix them. Yeah because everyone in null sec does just like that: "fly under 200clicks" and every single blaster in the constellation just magically pops and rip apart everything looking like rust or sex toys....we all know it so well. That video made me smile the first time I saw it "wtf is this troll from CCP" I'd like them to do some real videos of what's going on in high sec low sec and null sec, not sure they'd be able too admit how disproportional is the number of matar/amarr/caldari/gallente ships flown. Sad CCP Tallest is the once that can do something about but will probably not be able to: see the 180-¦ direction about web bonus for Talos with stuff about fleets and hit bigger stuff. Everyone knows the only sub cap gallente ships useful in fleets are arazus/lachesis for the long point, at any other task gallente hulls/weapons are just pitiful. Gangs? -yes they can succeed, when they're being rep by GUARDIANS, shooting stuff pinned by RAPIERS, Ecm by FALCONS, but even then if you fly gallente it's just the poor man's choice. Every single ship type in amarr or minmatar set up WILL be better for the same job. Not really the poor man's choice.... most of the hulls are also usually more expensive than their Minmatar counter part, which makes no sense since when you commit to a fight good chance your not coming out of it unlike the other ships that often fight outside of scram/web range. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:27:00 -
[912] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:I see one potential solver.
Nerf Matar and make gallente the fastest race in the game. If you want close range you must be the fastest, its the only option for this problem. Coz Devs makes lots of mistakes with matar. Matar ships are fast and agile with is the stupidest idea, you cant be agile and fast at the same time = inertia. Blaster can be OK (EVEN NOW !!) if you always are the fastest one Isn't this true ? Trying anything different will makes things worst..
I think the problem is not with blasters but with AC .. and fast matar ships
Imagine blasters on Matar boats. It can work !
This is the worst idea what i heard.
Make gallentean ship the fastest race in game ? Oh i see, do you want to catch some paper hull matar ships. Those matar ships have the worst hull in game. Thier advantages just their speeds when a blaster hit them from short distance they burning out instantly. Minnie hit and run tactics when a faster blaster ship using on their ships a web and scrambler ? Do you just want a "I WIN" button and creating a ship which faster than matarian ship, which have better firepower and better hull. LOL This would be the fine solution ? No thx no. Need smarter gallente ship and weapon system buff. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:41:00 -
[913] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:I see one potential solver.
Nerf Matar and make gallente the fastest race in the game. If you want close range you must be the fastest, its the only option for this problem. Coz Devs makes lots of mistakes with matar. Matar ships are fast and agile with is the stupidest idea, you cant be agile and fast at the same time = inertia. Blaster can be OK (EVEN NOW !!) if you always are the fastest one Isn't this true ? Trying anything different will makes things worst..
I think the problem is not with blasters but with AC .. and fast matar ships
Imagine blasters on Matar boats. It can work ! This is the worst idea what i heard. Make gallentean ship the fastest race in game ? Oh i see, do you want to catch some paper hull matar ships. Those matar ships have the worst hull in game. Thier advantages just their speeds when a blaster hit them from short distance they burning out instantly. Minnie hit and run tactics when a faster blaster ship using on your ship a web and scrambler ? You just want "I WIN" button and creating a ship which faster than matarian ship, which have better firepower and better hull. LOL This would be the fine solution ? No thx no. Need smarter gallente ship and weapon system buff.
No i dont want "I win" button I want all 4 races to be playable Im both Gallente and Matar pilot. Also do not forgot about Caldari ! they got only few playable ships. Matar is OP and thats the problem and must be nerfed. Ac balance was the worst.
Anyway we need to find idea how to fix it. Im throwing my raw ideas to be discus. Let make some brain storming :) |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:53:00 -
[914] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:I see one potential solver.
Nerf Matar and make gallente the fastest race in the game. If you want close range you must be the fastest, its the only option for this problem. Coz Devs makes lots of mistakes with matar. Matar ships are fast and agile with is the stupidest idea, you cant be agile and fast at the same time = inertia. Blaster can be OK (EVEN NOW !!) if you always are the fastest one Isn't this true ? Trying anything different will makes things worst..
I think the problem is not with blasters but with AC .. and fast matar ships
Imagine blasters on Matar boats. It can work ! This is the worst idea what i heard. Make gallentean ship the fastest race in game ? Oh i see, do you want to catch some paper hull matar ships. Those matar ships have the worst hull in game. Thier advantages just their speeds when a blaster hit them from short distance they burning out instantly. Minnie hit and run tactics when a faster blaster ship using on your ship a web and scrambler ? You just want "I WIN" button and creating a ship which faster than matarian ship, which have better firepower and better hull. LOL This would be the fine solution ? No thx no. Need smarter gallente ship and weapon system buff. No i dont want "I win" button I want all 4 races to be playable Im both Gallente and Matar pilot. Also do not forgot about Caldari ! they got only few playable ships. Matar is OP and thats the problem and must be nerfed. Ac balance was the worst. Anyway we need to find idea how to fix it. Im throwing my raw ideas to be discus. Let make some brain storming :)
Just check your idea. Do you want flying with all race, but what would be happen if you create a faster ship with better damage and hull against matar ships ? No one will fly with minie ships, because a deimos will be faster and kill easily a vagabond or anything else. The zealot ahac fleet will be change to uber damage deimos fleet or proteus fleet which have over 700 DPS with lol 250k EHP (wich has just 40k armor without slave sett and other bonuses) and faster than other one. Thx no.
Need to use other fine solution like scrambler range bonus/lvl for gallentean ships and they would be turning off their enemies mwd from farther range. (and this is logic for eve history too because their recon ships use racial scram bonus) |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 15:56:00 -
[915] - Quote
Wow, I was really looking forward to Gallente having a USEFUL bc. Honestly, with the Talos gone (yes, gone, w/o drones or web bonus there's no reason for it to exist) this Gallente "buff" isn't going to benefit anything larger than a frigate. Looks like my ship lineup will still just be frigs, vexor, proteus, and domi.
@CCP: DO SOMETHING USEFUL. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:06:00 -
[916] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:I see one potential solver.
Nerf Matar and make gallente the fastest race in the game. If you want close range you must be the fastest, its the only option for this problem. Coz Devs makes lots of mistakes with matar. Matar ships are fast and agile with is the stupidest idea, you cant be agile and fast at the same time = inertia. Blaster can be OK (EVEN NOW !!) if you always are the fastest one Isn't this true ? Trying anything different will makes things worst..
I think the problem is not with blasters but with AC .. and fast matar ships
Imagine blasters on Matar boats. It can work ! This is the worst idea what i heard. Make gallentean ship the fastest race in game ? Oh i see, do you want to catch some paper hull matar ships. Those matar ships have the worst hull in game. Thier advantages just their speeds when a blaster hit them from short distance they burning out instantly. Minnie hit and run tactics when a faster blaster ship using on your ship a web and scrambler ? You just want "I WIN" button and creating a ship which faster than matarian ship, which have better firepower and better hull. LOL This would be the fine solution ? No thx no. Need smarter gallente ship and weapon system buff. No i dont want "I win" button I want all 4 races to be playable Im both Gallente and Matar pilot. Also do not forgot about Caldari ! they got only few playable ships. Matar is OP and thats the problem and must be nerfed. Ac balance was the worst. Anyway we need to find idea how to fix it. Im throwing my raw ideas to be discus. Let make some brain storming :) Just check your idea. Do you want flying with all race, but what would be happen if you create a faster ship with better damage and hull against matar ships ? No one will fly with minie ships, because a deimos will be faster and kill easily a vagabond or anything else. The zealot ahac fleet will be change to uber damage deimos fleet or proteus fleet which have over 700 DPS with lol 250k EHP (wich has just 40k armor without slave sett and other bonuses) and faster than other one. Thx no. Need to use other fine solution like scrambler range bonus/lvl for gallentean ships and they would be turning off their enemies mwd from farther range. (and this is logic for eve history too because their recon ships use racial scram bonus)
Maybe its good idea not to makes gallente the fastest but switch stats between Blasters and Autocannons ? So matar will be 4,5 km range and gallente 10km - sounds good ? same with ammo. Matar is the fastest right ? So blaster range will be fine for them True ? |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:20:00 -
[917] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Make gallentean ship the fastest race in game ? Oh i see, do you want to catch some paper hull matar ships. Those matar ships have the worst hull in game. Thier advantages just their speeds when a blaster hit them from short distance they burning out instantly. Minnie hit and run tactics when a faster blaster ship using on their ships a web and scrambler ? Do you just want a "I WIN" button and creating a ship which faster than matarian ship, which have better firepower and better hull. LOL This would be the fine solution ? No thx no. Need smarter gallente ship and weapon system buff.
What paper hull are you talking about? -armor cane push 60k ehp decent dps with no effort no fleet bonus or implants...try harder.
Smarter gallente ship/weapon? -minmatar hulls and weapons, best at gallente job than gallente. So what's your next point? |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:35:00 -
[918] - Quote
If you don't want to make Gallente the fastest, make them the most agile by a good margin, allowing them to close range quickly and making maneuvers like the Crazy Ivan more practical. As mentioned above, it's silly for one race to be both fast and agile, both from a physics perspective and a gameplay perspective. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:37:00 -
[919] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Make gallentean ship the fastest race in game ? Oh i see, do you want to catch some paper hull matar ships. Those matar ships have the worst hull in game. Thier advantages just their speeds when a blaster hit them from short distance they burning out instantly. Minnie hit and run tactics when a faster blaster ship using on their ships a web and scrambler ? Do you just want a "I WIN" button and creating a ship which faster than matarian ship, which have better firepower and better hull. LOL This would be the fine solution ? No thx no. Need smarter gallente ship and weapon system buff. What paper hull are you talking about? -armor cane push 60k ehp decent dps with no effort no fleet bonus or implants...try harder. Smarter gallente ship/weapon? -minmatar hulls and weapons, best at gallente job than gallente. So what's your next point?
Oh i see you found the most useable minnie ship and want to compare a bad design brutix which have 62k EHP before winter gallente buff. That's tricky like when i want o cmpare with thanatos vs nodhoggur or nyx vs hell. Some ship better than other, some ship not in their category. Next one ? Oh wait what will be happen when a better damage ship like a mega will be faster than a tempest and hit him from short range ? Change gallentean ships to faster in game is a fail idea. When a deimos can catch with scrambler now a vaga can kill easily. What will be happen if gallentean ship will be faster than other one with their huge short range damage ?
You guys always want oto nerfing something. Before speednerf you couldn't catch a vaga. Interesting i fought with 3 vaga in same time with a rapier. But i know crying is better for some pilots than learning. :D |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:39:00 -
[920] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Make gallentean ship the fastest race in game ? Oh i see, do you want to catch some paper hull matar ships. Those matar ships have the worst hull in game. Thier advantages just their speeds when a blaster hit them from short distance they burning out instantly. Minnie hit and run tactics when a faster blaster ship using on their ships a web and scrambler ? Do you just want a "I WIN" button and creating a ship which faster than matarian ship, which have better firepower and better hull. LOL This would be the fine solution ? No thx no. Need smarter gallente ship and weapon system buff. What paper hull are you talking about? -armor cane push 60k ehp decent dps with no effort no fleet bonus or implants...try harder. Smarter gallente ship/weapon? -minmatar hulls and weapons, best at gallente job than gallente. So what's your next point?
Gallente have **** tanks also ALL of there tanking bonuses are for active tanking so i have no clue what tiger is talking bout. |
|
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:51:00 -
[921] - Quote
Dunmur wrote: Gallente have **** tanks also ALL of there tanking bonuses are for active tanking so i have no clue what tiger is talking bout.
Thats why was the minnie shipsallways the primary in fight, because they had the best tank and hull?? :D Active tanking? Who using active tanking today ? The pve-ers ? The solo pvpers ? Or small gangfare ? 90% of pilot using passive tanks, trimark rigs and plates. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
121
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 16:59:00 -
[922] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Oh i see you found the most useable minnie ship and want to compare a bad design brutix which have 62k EHP before winter gallente buff.
You mean 62K EHP with no weapon fitted right? -you can't fit 1600RT and fit a full rack of weapons+mwd web scram, at best you can fit some lower tiers weapon with the shortest dmg and range...
Super ubber rep bonus very usefull on top, what a nice ship it is indeed.
Yup
Quote:Oh wait what will be happen when a better damage ship like a mega will be faster than a tempest and hit him from short range ?
Huh? -you should know by now a nano pest 800mm can shoot nuclear warheads between 0 and - - -- - -- --> 100km Faster Megathron camping all day the gate or waiting at the undock to shoot stuff pinned by rapiers and hurricanes? Better dmg ship??? -you are kidding right?
lol....
Quote:Change gallentean ships to faster in game is a fail idea.
Go ahead share your bright ideas and explain how the shortest weapon system with no means to catch his targets is so awesome.
Quote:When a deimos can catch with scrambler now a vaga can kill easily. What will be happen if gallentean ship will be faster than other one with their huge short range damage ?
You know what's the problem of fitting the shortest range weapon system? -no you don't.
I'll pick your example, both webbed at max web range and disrupted, let's say 14km, your diemost is taking full dmg at his face while the vaga is getting is paint scratched, ho my goodness, indeed your example is perfect how the weapon system is balanced.
Being faster than the vaga would only help it on APPLYING the web, not the supposed uber dmg. Chances are in this case the fight is 50-50 depending on how fast the vaga started applying dmg and how fast the diemost pilot did to apply the web and is now at very slow motion geing in range to apply some dmg. Before he's in his optimal range chances are he's almost popped.
You're supposing both are going in straight line and the fact diemost would be slightly faster would do all the job, flash news it wouldn't. Vaga would still be the most agile and have the best acceleration, before the diemost pilot could completely neutralise this advantage the vaga pilot is shooting at it with no tracking or dmg application issues for a long while.
|
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:20:00 -
[923] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Oh i see you found the most useable minnie ship and want to compare a bad design brutix which have 62k EHP before winter gallente buff. You mean 62K EHP with no weapon fitted right? -you can't fit 1600RT and fit a full rack of weapons+mwd web scram, at best you can fit some lower tiers weapon with the shortest dmg and range... Super ubber rep bonus very usefull on top, what a nice ship it is indeed.
Right, maybe you need to learn fitting and using pg implant. this "without weapon racks" fitt have mwd,web,scram,cap booster too, crap electron blaster with 813 dps (overheat+drones) and 1600 plate. Oh wait 813 dps not enough for you, but after patch u can using ion guns over electrons. I think this damage not bad with smaller guns.
Second one, another fail.
Tempest have 820 dps with overheat and standard fitt, megathron have 1124 without overheat. So, what will be win in short range fight ? A mega melting easily a tempest in a short range fight.
3rd Share brightness ? Try to read what i wrote. Scram range/lvl bonus for the gallente ships. Thats better idea than a "I win" speed button just nerf something else because someone like crying.
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:39:00 -
[924] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Oh i see you found the most useable minnie ship and want to compare a bad design brutix which have 62k EHP before winter gallente buff. You mean 62K EHP with no weapon fitted right? -you can't fit 1600RT and fit a full rack of weapons+mwd web scram, at best you can fit some lower tiers weapon with the shortest dmg and range... Super ubber rep bonus very usefull on top, what a nice ship it is indeed. Right, maybe you need to learn fitting and using pg implant. this "without weapon racks" fitt have mwd,web,scram,cap booster too, crap electron blaster with 813 dps (overheat+drones) and 1600 plate. Oh wait 813 dps not enough for you, but after patch u can using ion guns over electrons. I think this damage not bad with smaller guns. Second one, another fail. Tempest have 820 dps with overheat and standard fitt, megathron have 1124 without overheat. So, what will be win in short range fight ? A mega melting easily a tempest in a short range fight. 3rd Share brightness ? Try to read what i wrote. Scram range/lvl bonus for the gallente ships. Thats better idea than a "I win" speed button just nerf something else because someone like crying. "You know what's the problem of fitting the shortest range weapon system? -no you don't." Do you know what i'm thinking ? You are a prophetess who know my knowledge. But vaga fitted with webs is so rare like a nano deimos. But do you know, how can beat a webabond. :D
For sure this guy dont want galente change.. ... Talking with him is like hitting head in wall ... |
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 17:53:00 -
[925] - Quote
Creat Posudol wrote: Yes! Now you're getting it! That would be the idea. If you haven't gotten that from my last posts so far please go back and read them again (on the last 3 pages or so). It would be the proposition that Minmatar are still pretty fast, but most of all AGILE. Gallente will take the new crown for speed, but will actually get their already not-great agility nerfed. This would allow blasters to work since you can get into range. It would also, as I've stated many times, cause pilot skill to be the deciding factor in battles.
It is of course fine if you disagree, but please explain what part of my suggestion wouldn't work as intended (I'm sure I overlooked something somewhere). I've explained why yours wouldn't work for the example you mentioned above and what other problems I see with it (Gallente can only engage if already near blaster range).
If you are talking about this " in first seconds if your opponent traveled 5 km, you already covered 10" so.. what this mean? At first seconds nobody has full speed, so how much you cover only depends on you ability to gain speed. and this is AGILITY. only after that when both ships gain full speeds, then speed matters, but not completely. imagine if you with sluggish but fast ship chasing agile but little slower. you goal is to kept him at you short optimal. At firs seconds of fight he will even increase distance because he will gain speed faster, after some time your speed will be higher and you will be approaching him. but this is after some time and all this time you will be doing ridiculous dmg and receiving much more. Notice this is only if target goes straight away from you. What if he will turn? You will lose speed again because can not turn that fast and again distance between you and him will increase. He will kite you till death.
Now opposite scenario: you are in slower but more agile ship. in firs seconds you will reduce distance because target can not gains speed as fast as you. if distance is to big and you failed to catch him before his speed becomes higher than you. You can turn fast and try to brake from disruptor range. Because you will finish maneuver faster and gains speed faster you can increase range. and try to escape. Agility let you react faster to movement vectors change and keep target in short optimal or escape. Of course blaster must get tracking boost that they can track targets flying so agile. Also maybe dps and range. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:21:00 -
[926] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:For sure this guy dont want galente change.. ... Talking with him is like hitting head in wall ...
Realy i dont want gallente change. What i wrote ?
"Need change, i want flight with most gallentean ship not just with arazu,thanatos but brutix,eos,deimos etc too ,but fastest gallentean ships in game is a fail."
I want, but i dont want stupid idea like yours. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
122
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:36:00 -
[927] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:For sure this guy dont want galente change.. ... Talking with him is like hitting head in wall ...
Very much this yes. |
Lee Vanden
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:36:00 -
[928] - Quote
I was just on SISI trying to fit out a Diemost with the new hybrid changes. I have advanced weapon upgrades 4 and by putting 2 Ancilliary Current Routers in the rig slots I was able to fit:
4 Neutron and 1 Ion blaster in the highs MWD, scram and web in the mids DC, EANM, Explosive Hardener, 1600mm RT plate and 2 Mag Stabs in the lows
Considering this ship is supposed to be the ulitmate short range HAC. it costs more than the Megathron, and it's about to be completely outgunned by the new Talos, and it's still too slow to get into range, it needs some serious love.
The utility high should be converted to a turret point It needs a CPU boost and a massive PG boost It needs an extra midslot It needs a speed boost allowing it to reach 2000m/s with the MWD on
As standard it should be able to fit:
6 Neutron blasters in the highs MWD, scram, web, and cap injector in the mids DC, EANM, Explosive Hardener, 1600mm RT plate and 2 Mag Stabs in the lows
This would leave the 2 rig slots free to add extra tank, gank or speed depending on the pilots preference. People will say this is overpowered, but the Diemos is supposed to be overpowering if it manages to get into range to use it's weapons, just read the description:
"Sharing more tactical elements with smaller vessels than with its size-class counterparts, the Deimos represents the final word in up-close-and-personal cruiser combat. Venture too close to this one, and swift death is your only guarantee. " |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
122
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:44:00 -
[929] - Quote
Lee Vanden wrote:"Sharing more tactical elements with smaller vessels than with its size-class counterparts, the Deimos represents the final word in up-close-and-personal cruiser combat. Venture too close to this one, and swift death is your only guarantee. "
Diemost - it worth his description
|
Kumq uat
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
50
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:44:00 -
[930] - Quote
Lee Vanden wrote:I was just on SISI trying to fit out a Diemost with the new hybrid changes. I have advanced weapon upgrades 4 and by putting 2 Ancilliary Current Routers in the rig slots I was able to fit:
4 Neutron and 1 Ion blaster in the highs MWD, scram and web in the mids DC, EANM, Explosive Hardener, 1600mm RT plate and 2 Mag Stabs in the lows
Considering this ship is supposed to be the ulitmate short range HAC. it costs more than the Megathron, and it's about to be completely outgunned by the new Talos, and it's still too slow to get into range, it needs some serious love.
The utility high should be converted to a turret point It needs a CPU boost and a massive PG boost It needs an extra midslot It needs a speed boost allowing it to reach 2000m/s with the MWD on
As standard it should be able to fit:
6 Neutron blasters in the highs MWD, scram, web, and cap injector in the mids DC, EANM, Explosive Hardener, 1600mm RT plate and 2 Mag Stabs in the lows
This would leave the 2 rig slots free to add extra tank, gank or speed depending on the pilots preference. People will say this is overpowered, but the Diemos is supposed to be overpowering if it manages to get into range to use it's weapons, just read the description:
"Sharing more tactical elements with smaller vessels than with its size-class counterparts, the Deimos represents the final word in up-close-and-personal cruiser combat. Venture too close to this one, and swift death is your only guarantee. "
I agree with what you are saying but you really should train AWU 5. Best level 5 skill I ever trained. |
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 18:45:00 -
[931] - Quote
Lee Vanden wrote:I was just on SISI trying to fit out a Diemost with the new hybrid changes. I have advanced weapon upgrades 4 and by putting 2 Ancilliary Current Routers in the rig slots I was able to fit:
4 Neutron and 1 Ion blaster in the highs MWD, scram and web in the mids DC, EANM, Explosive Hardener, 1600mm RT plate and 2 Mag Stabs in the lows
Considering this ship is supposed to be the ulitmate short range HAC. it costs more than the Megathron, and it's about to be completely outgunned by the new Talos, and it's still too slow to get into range, it needs some serious love.
The utility high should be converted to a turret point It needs a CPU boost and a massive PG boost It needs an extra midslot It needs a speed boost allowing it to reach 2000m/s with the MWD on
As standard it should be able to fit:
6 Neutron blasters in the highs MWD, scram, web, and cap injector in the mids DC, EANM, Explosive Hardener, 1600mm RT plate and 2 Mag Stabs in the lows
This would leave the 2 rig slots free to add extra tank, gank or speed depending on the pilots preference. People will say this is overpowered, but the Diemos is supposed to be overpowering if it manages to get into range to use it's weapons, just read the description:
"Sharing more tactical elements with smaller vessels than with its size-class counterparts, the Deimos represents the final word in up-close-and-personal cruiser combat. Venture too close to this one, and swift death is your only guarantee. "
Ouch :(
Im afraid that we will see good gal re balancing like "pigs see stars" ... And you know what is the worst ? The worst is that CCP will send email to all eve players past and recent with "WE JUST RE INVENTED GALLENTE - BACK TO GAME" ....
crap ...
|
Hot Tubes
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 19:06:00 -
[932] - Quote
This will be written with bullet points as there's several things to cover. And this is assuming you don't go down the path of making Minnie the optimal race (zero falloff) and gallente the falloff race, which is a good theory, as if minnie are fast enough to control range then make them ******* use it to constantly keep optimal or they lose all dps. And if gallente are slow as **** surely they need to be able to hit at a variety of ranges (with reduction in dps) more than ******* minnie. Anyway....
First: Bring other turrets down a bit to be not stupid OP.
# Scorch ammo needs range cut by 33-50%. Abaddons with no optimal range boneruses shouldn't be able to have 45km optimal with scorch and 10km falloff.
# All crystals should take 10 seconds to switch/reload. **** roleplay reasons, this is game balance reasoning.
# The bonus to falloff given by tracking enhancers should be substantially reduced from the current (T2 is 30% bonus. I don't know a decent value but let's just say cut by 50%). The current level of falloff reached with autocannons is ******* ridiculous.
# Base tracking on autocannons should AT MOST be 50% of the equivalent blaster. They usually fight at long ranges, meaning that while they move faster their relative speed to the target is lower and so tracking isn't as necessary. Plus all those tracking enhancers which are practically mandatory on minnie ships will boost tracking a little anyway. Blasters should be the best tracking of all turrets. Too many minnie pilot can keep range and pick off frigs with awesome tracking and then race up beside a target and brawl the **** out of it due to having good enough tracking to get right up beside them.
# INCREASE fitting requirements of projectiles to more closely match those of hybrids and lasers. An option people often ask for is to make it easier to fit the top tier of hybrids but, using blasters as an example, this completely makes elctrons and ions useless if neutrons can always be fit AND have prop mod AND have massive tank. There is good reason for the current trade off, and projectile weapons currently don't require this trade.
Hybrid/gallente buff
# Increase base top speed of gallente ships to be the highest of all. They should, with prop module, be able to scream in a straight line towards something and catch it. Keep agility as it is now. With good piloting they can still be avoided by minnie ships. Like in a bull fight, you don't run in a straight line away from the ******* bull, you run perpendicular to it as it can't turn as fast.
# Reduce the speed reduction incurred by using trimarks and armour plates.
# Reduce the capacitor requirement of firing hybrids. Reduce reload time to 5 seconds (to facilitate using Null on approach then when/if you snag someone a change to a close range ammo doesn't **** you over).
# For small blasters, increase base optimal range. It's slightly nuts to have an optimal of 500m roughly when you're piloting an interceptor which will refuse to orbit any closer than 1000m+ unless you practically stop the damn ship.
# Tracking boost to all blasters. Ballpark figure of 20%
# 5-10% dps boost, probably erring towards 5% due to the freak of nature known as the Vindicator. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
1885
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 20:06:00 -
[933] - Quote
Deviana Sevidon wrote:Even the ingame fittint screen on Sisi acknowledges that the failure that is the Hybrid fix for blaster turrets. (I choose the ships because they both have a damage bonus, the same number of turrets and drones) Armageddon hull on Singularity: 7x Mega Pulse Laser ll: Turret DPS: 729 with Multifrequency Crystals 15km optimal 10km falloff Turret DPS: 668 with Scorch Crystals 45km optimal 10km falloff Megathron hull on Singularity : 7 Neutron Blaster Cannon ll: Turret DPS 759 with Antimatter 4,5km optimal and 12,5km falloff Turret DPS 696 with Null 11,25km optimal and 15,62km falloff In conclusion: There is no point in hybrid turrets even after the patch. The Armageddon has almost the same DPS and 3x the range. So blasters are in desperate need of something more. Either drastically more DPS or a lot more range. And to compare Talos vs. Tornado: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=29776&find=unread Which is the reason I won't be going back to blasters after this patch. It's simply pointless to do so, when lasers are so good.
Before anyone asks, no I'm not advocating a nerf to lasers, but blasters should be melt your face good at it's very small range so need more of a boost.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
123
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 22:49:00 -
[934] - Quote
Had doubts about this hybrid rebalance, after testing I'm sure.
What you guys are just doing is not worthy the time spent, just rename it "projectiles buff" or "Gallente: RIP".
Either you guys are ganking the forums and trolling us in SISI to come out with totally different changes on TQ, or all these threads posts and feedback is written in some language you can't clearly understand.
Has it stands right now, you should call the next expansion "Eve Online: In rust we trust"
.... |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Devil's Warrior Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 23:40:00 -
[935] - Quote
Hot Tubes wrote:This will be written with bullet points as there's several things to cover. And this is assuming you don't go down the path of making Minnie the optimal race (zero falloff) and gallente the falloff race, which is a good theory, as if minnie are fast enough to control range then make them ******* use it to constantly keep optimal or they lose all dps. And if gallente are slow as **** surely they need to be able to hit at a variety of ranges (with reduction in dps) more than ******* minnie. Anyway....
First: Bring other turrets down a bit to be not stupid OP.
# Scorch ammo needs range cut by 33-50%. Abaddons with no optimal range boneruses shouldn't be able to have 45km optimal with scorch and 10km falloff.
# All crystals should take 10 seconds to switch/reload. **** roleplay reasons, this is game balance reasoning.
# The bonus to falloff given by tracking enhancers should be substantially reduced from the current (T2 is 30% bonus. I don't know a decent value but let's just say cut by 50%). The current level of falloff reached with autocannons is ******* ridiculous.
# Base tracking on autocannons should AT MOST be 50% of the equivalent blaster. They usually fight at long ranges, meaning that while they move faster their relative speed to the target is lower and so tracking isn't as necessary. Plus all those tracking enhancers which are practically mandatory on minnie ships will boost tracking a little anyway. Blasters should be the best tracking of all turrets. Too many minnie pilot can keep range and pick off frigs with awesome tracking and then race up beside a target and brawl the **** out of it due to having good enough tracking to get right up beside them.
# INCREASE fitting requirements of projectiles to more closely match those of hybrids and lasers. An option people often ask for is to make it easier to fit the top tier of hybrids but, using blasters as an example, this completely makes elctrons and ions useless if neutrons can always be fit AND have prop mod AND have massive tank. There is good reason for the current trade off, and projectile weapons currently don't require this trade.
Hybrid/gallente buff
# Increase base top speed of gallente ships to be the highest of all. They should, with prop module, be able to scream in a straight line towards something and catch it. Keep agility as it is now. With good piloting they can still be avoided by minnie ships. Like in a bull fight, you don't run in a straight line away from the ******* bull, you run perpendicular to it as it can't turn as fast.
# Reduce the speed reduction incurred by using trimarks and armour plates.
# Reduce the capacitor requirement of firing hybrids. Reduce reload time to 5 seconds (to facilitate using Null on approach then when/if you snag someone a change to a close range ammo doesn't **** you over).
# For small blasters, increase base optimal range. It's slightly nuts to have an optimal of 500m roughly when you're piloting an interceptor which will refuse to orbit any closer than 1000m+ unless you practically stop the damn ship.
# Tracking boost to all blasters. Ballpark figure of 20%
# 5-10% dps boost, probably erring towards 5% due to the freak of nature known as the Vindicator.
Exactly my thoughts and what I have been trying to explain in this thread. You sir know exactly what needs to be done.
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 00:12:00 -
[936] - Quote
Hot Tubes wrote:This will be written with bullet points as there's several things to cover. And this is assuming you don't go down the path of making Minnie the optimal race (zero falloff) and gallente the falloff race, which is a good theory, as if minnie are fast enough to control range then make them ******* use it to constantly keep optimal or they lose all dps. And if gallente are slow as **** surely they need to be able to hit at a variety of ranges (with reduction in dps) more than ******* minnie. Anyway....
First: Bring other turrets down a bit to be not stupid OP.
# Scorch ammo needs range cut by 33-50%. Abaddons with no optimal range boneruses shouldn't be able to have 45km optimal with scorch and 10km falloff.
# All crystals should take 10 seconds to switch/reload. **** roleplay reasons, this is game balance reasoning.
# The bonus to falloff given by tracking enhancers should be substantially reduced from the current (T2 is 30% bonus. I don't know a decent value but let's just say cut by 50%). The current level of falloff reached with autocannons is ******* ridiculous.
# Base tracking on autocannons should AT MOST be 50% of the equivalent blaster. They usually fight at long ranges, meaning that while they move faster their relative speed to the target is lower and so tracking isn't as necessary. Plus all those tracking enhancers which are practically mandatory on minnie ships will boost tracking a little anyway. Blasters should be the best tracking of all turrets. Too many minnie pilot can keep range and pick off frigs with awesome tracking and then race up beside a target and brawl the **** out of it due to having good enough tracking to get right up beside them.
# INCREASE fitting requirements of projectiles to more closely match those of hybrids and lasers. An option people often ask for is to make it easier to fit the top tier of hybrids but, using blasters as an example, this completely makes elctrons and ions useless if neutrons can always be fit AND have prop mod AND have massive tank. There is good reason for the current trade off, and projectile weapons currently don't require this trade.
Hybrid/gallente buff
# Increase base top speed of gallente ships to be the highest of all. They should, with prop module, be able to scream in a straight line towards something and catch it. Keep agility as it is now. With good piloting they can still be avoided by minnie ships. Like in a bull fight, you don't run in a straight line away from the ******* bull, you run perpendicular to it as it can't turn as fast.
# Reduce the speed reduction incurred by using trimarks and armour plates.
# Reduce the capacitor requirement of firing hybrids. Reduce reload time to 5 seconds (to facilitate using Null on approach then when/if you snag someone a change to a close range ammo doesn't **** you over).
# For small blasters, increase base optimal range. It's slightly nuts to have an optimal of 500m roughly when you're piloting an interceptor which will refuse to orbit any closer than 1000m+ unless you practically stop the damn ship.
# Tracking boost to all blasters. Ballpark figure of 20%
# 5-10% dps boost, probably erring towards 5% due to the freak of nature known as the Vindicator.
Its very good Idea but remember that CCP "logic" is different :). And also those guys have theirs biz in game (I mean DEV`s who play game as we playing) ! But for yours idea thumbs UP !
|
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
21
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 00:26:00 -
[937] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:
For sure this guy dont want galente change.. ... Talking with him is like hitting head in wall ...
cause he has as high brain capacity as the wall, dumby noob, no wonder why everybody hates him
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
126
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 00:27:00 -
[938] - Quote
Quote:# Base tracking on autocannons should AT MOST be 50% of the equivalent blaster. They usually fight at long ranges, meaning that while they move faster their relative speed to the target is lower and so tracking isn't as necessary. Plus all those tracking enhancers which are practically mandatory on minnie ships will boost tracking a little anyway. Blasters should be the best tracking of all turrets. Too many minnie pilot can keep range and pick off frigs with awesome tracking and then race up beside a target and brawl the **** out of it due to having good enough tracking to get right up beside them.
Tornado's aren't supposed to hit cruisers right?-specially cruisers with 190 sign radius and 1200m/s right?
False, not only the Tornado can hit said cruiser with no tracking issues but can do it at over 70km....
Downgrade the guns and 100AB tornado is something possible.
EDIT: You guys are just doing the next Cynabal with better speed and bigger dmg -has it stands cane/drakes fleets will be decimated by those. Great game breaking tool. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 00:28:00 -
[939] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Had doubts about this hybrid rebalance, after testing I'm sure.
What you guys are just doing is not worthy the time spent, just rename it "projectiles buff" or "Gallente: RIP".
Either you guys are ganking the forums and trolling us in SISI to come out with totally different changes on TQ, or all these threads posts and feedback is written in some language you can't clearly understand.
Has it stands right now, you should call the next expansion "Eve Online: In rust we trust"
.... winmatar online |
Cailais
Rekall Incorporated
100
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 01:29:00 -
[940] - Quote
Essentially there aren't enough parameters (or design 'space') for the numbers of weapon types in EVE. When we think of what the parameters are in any given fight it basically boils down to:
- Range - Tracking (or accuracy) - Damage
if you were to start EVE afresh you would have turrets that excelled in damage, but had limited range, turrets with great range but limited damage and so on and so forth until you had used up all the pros and cons of using a given weapon system.
With 6 turret types + missiles EVEs 'spectrum' of weapon capabilities has been exhausted (and thats before we even consider drones).
Whats needed is a bigger spectrum. This might be achieved by having certain ammunition types apply 'de-buffs' to a target (in addition to vanilla HP damage) - "EW Lite" as it were. Or you relook at where the holes are in a ships defences (lasers are good vs shield tanks, projectiles are good vs armour, etc etc).
C. |
|
Creat Posudol
Destined for Greatness Inc.
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 03:16:00 -
[941] - Quote
Hot Tubes wrote:This will be written with bullet points as there's several things to cover. And this is assuming you don't go down the path of making Minnie the optimal race (zero falloff) and gallente the falloff race, which is a good theory, as if minnie are fast enough to control range then make them ******* use it to constantly keep optimal or they lose all dps. And if gallente are slow as **** surely they need to be able to hit at a variety of ranges (with reduction in dps) more than ******* minnie. Anyway....
[...]
Hybrid/gallente buff
# Increase base top speed of gallente ships to be the highest of all. They should, with prop module, be able to scream in a straight line towards something and catch it. Keep agility as it is now. With good piloting they can still be avoided by minnie ships. Like in a bull fight, you don't run in a straight line away from the ******* bull, you run perpendicular to it as it can't turn as fast.
# Reduce the speed reduction incurred by using trimarks and armour plates.
# Reduce the capacitor requirement of firing hybrids. Reduce reload time to 5 seconds (to facilitate using Null on approach then when/if you snag someone a change to a close range ammo doesn't **** you over).
# For small blasters, increase base optimal range. It's slightly nuts to have an optimal of 500m roughly when you're piloting an interceptor which will refuse to orbit any closer than 1000m+ unless you practically stop the damn ship.
# Tracking boost to all blasters. Ballpark figure of 20%
# 5-10% dps boost, probably erring towards 5% due to the freak of nature known as the Vindicator.
THIS! This this AND THIS!
Shortened quote slightly just to not clutter the thread too much (has been quoted often enough already), I pretty much agree with everything he said! |
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 07:12:00 -
[942] - Quote
I would like to see the following change to all hybrid ammo:
- Reduce all hybrid ammo mass by 50% (this most likely will require the m3 capacity of hybrid turrets to be reduced)
- Reduce reload and ammo change down to 1 second.
- Increase base damage by 15% rounded up.
- Change hybrid ammo damage ratio, optimal range and capacitor need to the following which also include the +15% damage increase already factored in:
Antimatter 44 Kin 11 Thr -45% Optimal Range and Capacitor Need Plutonium 36 Kin 15 Thr -30% Optimal Range and Capacitor Need Uranium 28 Kin 18 Thr -15% Optimal Range and Capacitor Need Thorium 21 Kin 21 Thr +00% Optimal Range and Capacitor Need Lead 17 Kin 22 Thr +15% Optimal Range and Capacitor Need Iridium 10 Kin 23 Thr +30% Optimal Range and Capacitor Need Tungsten 6 Kin 22 Thr +45% Optimal Range and Capacitor Need Iron 2 Kin 21 Thr +60% Optimal Range and Capacitor Need
The ammo mass decrease is to mainly allow more room for cap boosters, which a vast majority of Gallente ships need in combat. The reload time is so as combat situations and tactics change, the ammo can match it's pace and also to give a slight boost in DPS during longer fights. Also a general overall boost in base damage to make committing to a fight with blasters by getting in scramble, web and neut range worth it. Because hybrids will be able to swap ammo fast like Amarr and it has a steady slope in damage, it functions like a shot gun. You can apply steady dps between the optimal of antimatter and iron; the closer you get, the more pellets tear into you. Yes I know this is a slight comparison rip off to someone elses idea about shotgun hybrids, but the word fits well here too.
The change in capacitor reflects what the ship will be needed for tanking and tackling. Yes there will be a bit more room to fit some more cap boosters, but this will also lend well to ships that do not have the luxury of such fitting room. The idea is simple really. The closer you are the more likely you are also using capacitor for tackle and possibly an active tank. Thus closer range ammo frees up a bit more capacitor to be used for such. The further out, up to long range fights, you will most likely not burning up capacitor for tackling and a personal repairer, so there is no need to free up as much. The close range ammo also does a substantial amount more damage, but is mostly kinetic, which is a higher shield resistant on Gallente's natural enemy, Caldari. So it balances out a bit. Now if they are sitting at range, your longer range ammo does mostly thermal damage, Caldari shields much weaker resistant when comparing only thermal vs kinetic. This also applies to Minmitar ships who like to keep range. So less base damage, but better damage type.
Overall it is little boosts here and there for the ammo and how it is used. There of course may need to be more changes to Gallente hulls and maybe even other race ships hulls and such. So in no way am I advocating these numbers is EXACTLY where they should be and nothing else is touched. I am interested in how the blaster tracking boost is working out, but sadly I have not had a chance to do extensive test.
So players and CCP, thoughts? |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 08:21:00 -
[943] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Oh i see you found the most useable minnie ship and want to compare a bad design brutix which have 62k EHP before winter gallente buff. You mean 62K EHP with no weapon fitted right? -you can't fit 1600RT and fit a full rack of weapons+mwd web scram, at best you can fit some lower tiers weapon with the shortest dmg and range... Super ubber rep bonus very usefull on top, what a nice ship it is indeed. Right, maybe you need to learn fitting and using pg implant. this "without weapon racks" fitt have mwd,web,scram,cap booster too, crap electron blaster with 813 dps (overheat+drones) and 1600 plate. Oh wait 813 dps not enough for you, but after patch u can using ion guns over electrons. I think this damage not bad with smaller guns. Second one, another fail. Tempest have 820 dps with overheat and standard fitt, megathron have 1124 without overheat. So, what will be win in short range fight ? A mega melting easily a tempest in a short range fight. 3rd Share brightness ? Try to read what i wrote. Scram range/lvl bonus for the gallente ships. Thats better idea than a "I win" speed button just nerf something else because someone like crying. "You know what's the problem of fitting the shortest range weapon system? -no you don't." Do you know what i'm thinking ? You are a prophetess who know my knowledge. But vaga fitted with webs is so rare like a nano deimos. But do you know, how can beat a webabond. :D
Not to burst your bubble but most blaster ships do just fine right now IF they land on top of there targets. But that is a small % of fights. Were talking about the other 70-80% of the time your sol and your gona die if you try to close on something from range.
|
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 08:21:00 -
[944] - Quote
Hot Tubes wrote: # Increase base top speed of gallente ships to be the highest of all. They should, with prop module, be able to scream in a straight line towards something and catch it. Keep agility as it is now. With good piloting they can still be avoided by minnie ships. Like in a bull fight, you don't run in a straight line away from the ******* bull, you run perpendicular to it as it can't turn as fast. .
You sir showed very good analogy:) and what happens to bull in bullfighting? Bull DIES. And why ? Because he can not reach further than his nose and is outmaneuvered. The same with blaster boats: short optimal and pour agility - deadly combination.
I do not want to intervene with other races territory like speed or range. But let it be that blaster boat fully controls close range up to ~20km. That they had superior tracking and movement ability in this area. In this case minmatar would know that he has only 3-4 km of safe zone: if closer he can not escape in time, if further he will lose point.
Now it is easy mode for everybody except blaster boats.
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 08:28:00 -
[945] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:For sure this guy dont want galente change.. ... Talking with him is like hitting head in wall ... Realy i dont want gallente change. What i wrote ? "Need change, i want flight with most gallentean ship not just with arazu,thanatos but brutix,eos,deimos etc too ,but fastest gallentean ships in game is a fail." I want, but i dont want stupid idea like yours.
If you want fight you got only two options realy.
1.) Blaster Boats get fastest speed
or
2.) Blasters get much more fall off.
Every thing alse is just pissing in the wind baby
If you dont want to realy help blaster ships become better then just swing the Nerf Hammer on Projectials.
Edit: Other options is to hardwire Ship bounses to blaster boats like 20% web range per level and stuff like this. But hell after test server I dont think they want to do that ether.
But no matter what you do to make blaster ships work you have to fix the range problem. |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 08:32:00 -
[946] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:For sure this guy dont want galente change.. ... Talking with him is like hitting head in wall ... Realy i dont want gallente change. What i wrote ? "Need change, i want flight with most gallentean ship not just with arazu,thanatos but brutix,eos,deimos etc too ,but fastest gallentean ships in game is a fail." I want, but i dont want stupid idea like yours. If you want fight you got only two options realy. 1.) Blaster Boats get fastest speed or 2.) Blasters get much more fall off. Every thing alse is just pissing in the wind baby If you dont want to realy help blaster ships become better then just swing the Nerf Hammer on Projectials. Edit: Other options is to hardwire Ship bounses to blaster boats like 20% web range per level and stuff like this. But hell after test server I dont think they want to do that ether.
couldnt agree more
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 08:38:00 -
[947] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:For sure this guy dont want galente change.. ... Talking with him is like hitting head in wall ... Realy i dont want gallente change. What i wrote ? "Need change, i want flight with most gallentean ship not just with arazu,thanatos but brutix,eos,deimos etc too ,but fastest gallentean ships in game is a fail." I want, but i dont want stupid idea like yours. If you want fight you got only two options realy. 1.) Blaster Boats get fastest speed or 2.) Blasters get much more fall off. Every thing alse is just pissing in the wind baby If you dont want to realy help blaster ships become better then just swing the Nerf Hammer on Projectials. Edit: Other options is to hardwire Ship bounses to blaster boats like 20% web range per level and stuff like this. But hell after test server I dont think they want to do that ether. couldnt agree more
Ya and alot of them are pissing and crying about the amount of dps a Mega can do if you land it on top of a ship. Hell ever look at a torp/autocannon Typhoon and that way out speeds the Mega and is normaly cheaper too with better range to boot.
Typhoon is the cheapest hardest hiting Tech 1 BS in game but can we get some love for blaster ships that are suppost to at least be the hardest hiting ? |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 08:41:00 -
[948] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Dunmur wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:For sure this guy dont want galente change.. ... Talking with him is like hitting head in wall ... Realy i dont want gallente change. What i wrote ? "Need change, i want flight with most gallentean ship not just with arazu,thanatos but brutix,eos,deimos etc too ,but fastest gallentean ships in game is a fail." I want, but i dont want stupid idea like yours. If you want fight you got only two options realy. 1.) Blaster Boats get fastest speed or 2.) Blasters get much more fall off. Every thing alse is just pissing in the wind baby If you dont want to realy help blaster ships become better then just swing the Nerf Hammer on Projectials. Edit: Other options is to hardwire Ship bounses to blaster boats like 20% web range per level and stuff like this. But hell after test server I dont think they want to do that ether. couldnt agree more Ya and alot of them are pissing and crying about the amount of dps a Mega can do if you land it on top of a ship. Hell ever look at a torp/autocannon Typhoon and that way out speeds the Mega and is normaly cheaper too with better range to boot. Typhoon is the cheapest hardest hiting Tech 1 BS in game but can we get some love for blaster ships that are suppost to at least be the hardest hiting ?
I think alot of it is quite a few minmatar pilots not wanting to lose the huge advantage they currently have . |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 09:55:00 -
[949] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:I think alot of it is quite a few minmatar pilots not wanting to lose the huge advantage they currently have .
Realy? Many pilots want to blaster to i win button. Just see their ideas +20-30% damage with new tracking,with new pg balance wich has enable better guns, with fastest gallentean ships, with + drones and drone damages simultaneously. LOL They do not take into consideration what is the reality. + Drones ? CCP wont create more lag, when they want to decreasing the drone numbers in game. Armor rig penalty removing ? When CCP decreased the speeds because their game engine cant handling fast speeds. Realy nice ideas, but this players using their brains ? When CCP remove rig penalties all ship will be faster, faster ships will be more faster than slower ships. This armor rig idea help for gallentean ship when a faster ships with trimark rigs will be more agile and faster than blaster ships ? Smart idea.
Others want fastest ship with frightening damage in game while they want other ships nerfing. LOL
Crying about minmatars, but i dont know they why didn't cry when speednerf came and no one flew with matarian ships when everyone flew with amarrs ? All right nerf matar and no one will flight with them again, because amarrian ship will be killing them in short range and from afar. Plus idea give beside the nerf to gallentean the fastest ships. All right check it out what will happen, when minnies can't fight against amarrian and they can't fight against gallentean, because they will be slower they lost their ability the hit and run tactics, but in short range fight a megathron damage over + 30% than a tempest. But we may compare it the deimost against vagabond too. What is the matar advantages against other races ? Their speeds and which ship has faloff BONUSES because they should fight from afar. But when they lost their speed and range advantages, they will be crap to using them. This fastest ship idea put another race to the hell again. You just create an another problem.
No way. Finaly when the amarrian and matar ships fine, you just want to nerf matar, because you want powerfull, better race than over all (I win button) and create ships of race to the unuseable again.
That's why i said, cleverer changes are needed. Better web range or scrambler ranges for gallentean ships a little range bonus for guns. Better scram or web ranges help to them catch from faster ship. They would be using their mwd when enemies can't. Thats help for blaster ships move to short range.Decelarating enemies from farther range while blaster ship can using his MWD. That's enough advantages to help decreasing their range against faster ships and moving to blaster range what melting the enemy ship fast. Plus a little fire range buff should be help against farther ships which want to fight over scam range and trying to dictate the distance. Or other acceptable buff, but dont put other race again where are the gallentean race now. A didn't tell it, not need hybrid and gallentean ship changes, that's must, because gallentean race almost unuseable. But need wiser choices than stupid ideas. if this idea would come true, the gallentean and amarrian would be overpowered and minnie race would be crap again. So you would create a similar situation as now. Which better 3 playable race ? Or same situation as now, with two playable and one unuseable race ? Just thinking about it. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 10:06:00 -
[950] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Dunmur wrote:I think alot of it is quite a few minmatar pilots not wanting to lose the huge advantage they currently have . Realy? Many pilots want to blaster to i win button. Just see their ideas +20-30% damage with new tracking,with new pg balance wich has enable better guns, with fastest gallentean ships, with + drones and drone damages simultaneously. LOL They do not take into consideration what is the reality. + Drones ? CCP wont create more lag, when they want to decreasing the drone numbers in game. Armor rig penalty removing ? When CCP decreased the speeds because their game engine cant handling fast speeds. Realy nice ideas, but this players using their brains ? When CCP remove rig penalties all ship will be faster, faster ships will be more faster than slower ships. This armor rig idea help for gallentean ship when a faster ships with trimark rigs will be more agile and faster than blaster ships ? Smart idea. Others want fastest ship with frightening damage in game while they want other ships nerfing. LOL Crying about minmatars, but i dont know they why didn't cry when speednerf came and no one flew with matarian ships when everyone flew with amarrs ? All right nerf matar and no one will flight with them again, because amarrian ship will be killing them in short range and from afar. Plus idea give beside the nerf to gallentean the fastest ships. All right check it out what will happen, when minnies can't fight against amarrian and they can't fight against gallentean, because they will be slower they lost their ability the hit and run tactics, but in short range fight a megathron damage over + 30% than a tempest. But we may compare it the deimost against vagabond too. What is the matar advantages against other races ? Their speeds and which ship has faloff BONUSES because they should fight from afar. But when they lost their speed and range advantages, they will be crap to using them. This fastest ship idea idea put another race to hell again. You just create an another problem. No way. Finaly when the amarrian and matar ships fine, you just want to nerf matar, because you want powerfull, better race than over all (I win button) and create ships of race to the unuseable again. That's why i said, cleverer changes are needed. Better web range or scrambler ranges for gallentean ships a little range bonus for guns. Better scram or web ranges help to them catch from faster ship. They would be using their mwd when enemies can't. Thats help for blaster ships move to short range.Decelarating enemies from farther range while blaster ship can using his MWD. That's enough advantages to help decreasing their range against faster ships and moving to blaster range what melting the enemy ship fast. Plus a little fire range buff should be help against farther ships which want to fight over scam range and trying to dictate the distance. Or other acceptable buff, but dont put other race again where are the gallentean race now. A didn't tell it, not need hybrid and gallentean ship changes, that's must, because gallentean race almost unuseable. But need wiser choices than stupid ideas. if this idea would come true, the gallentean and amarrian would be overpowered and minnie race would be crap again. So you would create a similar situation as now. Which better 3 playable race ? Or same situation as now, with two playable and one unuseable race ? Just thinking about it.
We asked for them but they dont what to hardwire EW bounses to every blaster ship to make them work. I think thats why there not doing it.
So that dont leave much left now do's it?
And in all fairness I would real dislike seeing every fail/rail caldire ship get hardwired with Jamming bounses. See why thats not fair now. |
|
Shmekla
LDK Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 10:06:00 -
[951] - Quote
Agreed, other solution than agility could be longer veb , scram ranges. Let give blaster boats bonuses for web and scram range. Like fully bonused and overheated scram/veb could reach up to 20km . Also small tuning to tracking, range and dmg. The point is to control close range, not needed huge buffs for speed, or optimal.
|
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 10:12:00 -
[952] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Dunmur wrote:I think alot of it is quite a few minmatar pilots not wanting to lose the huge advantage they currently have . Realy? Many pilots want to blaster to i win button. Just see their ideas +20-30% damage with new tracking,with new pg balance wich has enable better guns, with fastest gallentean ships, with + drones and drone damages simultaneously. LOL They do not take into consideration what is the reality. + Drones ? CCP wont create more lag, when they want to decreasing the drone numbers in game. Armor rig penalty removing ? When CCP decreased the speeds because their game engine cant handling fast speeds. Realy nice ideas, but this players using their brains ? When CCP remove rig penalties all ship will be faster, faster ships will be more faster than slower ships. This armor rig idea help for gallentean ship when a faster ships with trimark rigs will be more agile and faster than blaster ships ? Smart idea. Others want fastest ship with frightening damage in game while they want other ships nerfing. LOL Crying about minmatars, but i dont know they why didn't cry when speednerf came and no one flew with matarian ships when everyone flew with amarrs ? All right nerf matar and no one will flight with them again, because amarrian ship will be killing them in short range and from afar. Plus idea give beside the nerf to gallentean the fastest ships. All right check it out what will happen, when minnies can't fight against amarrian and they can't fight against gallentean, because they will be slower they lost their ability the hit and run tactics, but in short range fight a megathron damage over + 30% than a tempest. But we may compare it the deimost against vagabond too. What is the matar advantages against other races ? Their speeds and which ship has faloff BONUSES because they should fight from afar. But when they lost their speed and range advantages, they will be crap to using them. This fastest ship idea put another race to the hell again. You just create an another problem. No way. Finaly when the amarrian and matar ships fine, you just want to nerf matar, because you want powerfull, better race than over all (I win button) and create ships of race to the unuseable again. That's why i said, cleverer changes are needed. Better web range or scrambler ranges for gallentean ships a little range bonus for guns. Better scram or web ranges help to them catch from faster ship. They would be using their mwd when enemies can't. Thats help for blaster ships move to short range.Decelarating enemies from farther range while blaster ship can using his MWD. That's enough advantages to help decreasing their range against faster ships and moving to blaster range what melting the enemy ship fast. Plus a little fire range buff should be help against farther ships which want to fight over scam range and trying to dictate the distance. Or other acceptable buff, but dont put other race again where are the gallentean race now. A didn't tell it, not need hybrid and gallentean ship changes, that's must, because gallentean race almost unuseable. But need wiser choices than stupid ideas. if this idea would come true, the gallentean and amarrian would be overpowered and minnie race would be crap again. So you would create a similar situation as now. Which better 3 playable race ? Or same situation as now, with two playable and one unuseable race ? Just thinking about it.
and once again im going to repeat myself the buff MUST be to the gun itself otherwise autos will still rule even on gallente ships.
So im going to ask you how would you buff BLASTERS? |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 10:13:00 -
[953] - Quote
Shmekla wrote:Agreed, other solution than agility could be longer veb , scram ranges. Let give blaster boats bonuses for web and scram range. Like fully bonused and overheated scram/veb could reach up to 20km . Also small tuning to tracking, range and dmg. The point is to control close range, not needed huge buffs for speed, or optimal.
No no no what your two are talking about is hardwireing EW bounses to every blastship to make them work.
So next do we hardwire Jamming to make fail/rail Caldire ship to make them useable? |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 10:38:00 -
[954] - Quote
Now I know alot of people hate this ideal but realy it looks to be the best fix for blasters that dont bring down the nerf hammer on any other race or make gallente boats op.
And that fix is simply to inc the falloff of blasters to match the range of auto's and pulses.
What you get is everyone hiting everyone alse and everyone geting a even shoot.
Auto Cannons will still be capless and be able to pick dmg type.
Blasters will still suck down cap and only do Kin/Therm.
Pulses will still be good becouse there always fighting in there optimal with fast ammo changes for range and there dmg is good and backed up with better def's then blasterboats.
I know it's kind of plain but it works with out braking things.
|
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 10:48:00 -
[955] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Now I know alot of people hate this ideal but realy it looks to be the best fix for blasters that dont bring down the nerf hammer on any other race or make gallente boats op.
And that fix is simply to inc the falloff of blasters to match the range of auto's and pulses.
What you get is everyone hiting everyone alse and everyone geting a even shoot.
Auto Cannons will still be capless and be able to pick dmg type.
Blasters will still suck down cap and only do Kin/Therm.
Pulses will still be good becouse there always fighting in there optimal with fast ammo changes for range and there dmg is good and backed up with better def's then blasterboats.
I know it's kind of plain but it works with out braking things.
THIS is starting to sound like the only true solution. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 11:17:00 -
[956] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Now I know alot of people hate this ideal but realy it looks to be the best fix for blasters that dont bring down the nerf hammer on any other race or make gallente boats op.
And that fix is simply to inc the falloff of blasters to match the range of auto's and pulses.
What you get is everyone hiting everyone alse and everyone geting a even shoot.
Auto Cannons will still be capless and be able to pick dmg type.
Blasters will still suck down cap and only do Kin/Therm.
Pulses will still be good becouse there always fighting in there optimal with fast ammo changes for range and there dmg is good and backed up with better def's then blasterboats.
I know it's kind of plain but it works with out braking things.
THIS is starting to sound like the only true solution.
Well there are other solutions but there op solutions.
1.) Hardwire EW to all blaster boats OP 2.) Swap speed and agl of Gallente and Winmatar ships. The servers mite just go up in flames from this as its both a buff and nerf together so OP 3.) Inc blaster falloff to match auto's and pulses. Bland but not OP
Edit: I would put 4.) Inc blaster dmg. But that only buffs station games and gatecamping and the things blasters are already good for. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
126
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 11:35:00 -
[957] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Oh i see you found the most useable minnie ship and want to compare a bad design brutix which have 62k EHP before winter gallente buff. You mean 62K EHP with no weapon fitted right? -you can't fit 1600RT and fit a full rack of weapons+mwd web scram, at best you can fit some lower tiers weapon with the shortest dmg and range... Super ubber rep bonus very usefull on top, what a nice ship it is indeed. Right, maybe you need to learn fitting and using pg implant. this "without weapon racks" fitt have mwd,web,scram,cap booster too, crap electron blaster with 813 dps (overheat+drones) and 1600 plate. Oh wait 813 dps not enough for you, but after patch u can using ion guns over electrons. I think this damage not bad with smaller guns. Second one, another fail. Tempest have 820 dps with overheat and standard fitt, megathron have 1124 without overheat. So, what will be win in short range fight ? A mega melting easily a tempest in a short range fight. 3rd Share brightness ? Try to read what i wrote. Scram range/lvl bonus for the gallente ships. Thats better idea than a "I win" speed button just nerf something else because someone like crying. "You know what's the problem of fitting the shortest range weapon system? -no you don't." Do you know what i'm thinking ? You are a prophetess who know my knowledge. But vaga fitted with webs is so rare like a nano deimos. But do you know, how can beat a webabond. :D Not to burst your bubble but most blaster ships do just fine right now IF they land on top of there targets. But that is a small % of fights. Were talking about the other 70-80% of the time your sol and your gona die if you try to close on something from range.
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 11:51:00 -
[958] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Not to burst your bubble but most blaster ships do just fine right now IF they land on top of there targets. But that is a small % of fights. Were talking about the other 70-80% of the time your sol and your gona die if you try to close on something from range. I like your "IF", because it's the whole problem. From what I can say right now: Tank : Talos vs Tornado: Tornado -generous mid slots has usual makes it almost unbreakable by a single Talos Speed: Tornado hands UP DPS : do I really need to say 800mm or 1400mm Tornado hands up? So, the tactic when you fly Gallente is to bring 10 probers in the system praying one of them gets some static point and hope you land just on top of them --> There's no reason to fly it vs Tornado with actuall SISI build
I aggre with you 150%. This ship is no better then any other blaster ship is right now. Even after this hybird a.k.a. fitting fixes go though the Talos is going to be no better then any other blaster ship. Good for station games ect.
Go look at my post on the Talos. I straight up told them it's Pre-Nerfed like all Hybirds ships are and plz give use a fun useable drone ship. And even gave a ruff out line of one ideal. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 11:53:00 -
[959] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Now I know alot of people hate this ideal but realy it looks to be the best fix for blasters that dont bring down the nerf hammer on any other race or make gallente boats op.
And that fix is simply to inc the falloff of blasters to match the range of auto's and pulses.
What you get is everyone hiting everyone alse and everyone geting a even shoot.
Auto Cannons will still be capless and be able to pick dmg type.
Blasters will still suck down cap and only do Kin/Therm.
Pulses will still be good becouse there always fighting in there optimal with fast ammo changes for range and there dmg is good and backed up with better def's then blasterboats.
I know it's kind of plain but it works with out braking things.
THIS is starting to sound like the only true solution.
Read back what i wrote before. Need a little range buff for gallentean ships too, not too much but they needed. CCP changes start was fine but not enough. I think the speed and agility buff could good thinking, but need a littlebit better changes over 5-10m/s but dont create the fastest ship in game. The little tracking and fitting buff is fine, but i think thats idea need a littlebit change. Need more CPU because less CPU for guns decreasing the Weapon Upgrades CPU bonuses too. Deimos need more PG. Need rethinking the almost all gallentean ships. I told, change their bonuses and give to them scram range bonuses/lvl maximum to 20km with the best faction scrambler. (or test what is the best range which is useable but not overpowered)
A mega have 4.5 optimal + 13 falloff with neutrons. Need a little buff 25% to optimal is very short buff, thats changed to optimal to 5.725m,but i think thats acceptable. (null 11km would be change 13.75km) Dont forget, a 800mm guns optimal is 3km with short range ammo, and 6km with barrage. (without falloff bonuses) This is why i never understand the crying peaoples who tell us, "i dont want projectile from my blaster"
So, the falloff change need shorter range as AC. Maybe 50% acceptable for falloff too.
Antimatter 13km falloff would be change to 19.5km, and null ammo fallof would be change from 16km to 24km with this changes. Lower falloff than AC:
Null vs Barrage: 24 vs 32 (falloff) but longer optimal: Null vs Barrage 13km vs 6km (optimal)
13+24=37km vs 6+32=38km at optimal+1x falloff
I know at 2x falloff the range is changing significantly but dont forget blaster have better damage and over 1x falloff range the damage decreasing the significantly too.
Let's see with short range ammo. Longer optimal: Antimatter vs EMP: 5.725km vs 3km (optimal) Shorter falloff: Antimatter vs EMP: 19.5km vs 24km (falloff)
A think this changes with a little better speed changes and with scrambler ranges would be enough to balancing the blaster ships.
Rails: I told before. 10% damage wont be help for rails, at least need +10% ROF too, because they have the worst alpha. So if they have littlebit better DPS than other guns wont be unbalancing the game.
Gallentean Commandships: CCP created the scramblers after speed nerf, their recon have scrambler range lvl/bonus, but other race have scrambler gang bonus warfare command ships. This is logical ? I dont think so. Gallentean commandships is unuseable, they have maybe just one useable gang module. Change the matari CS scram bonuses to web+targetpainter bonus and add the scram bonus to the gallentean commandships. This is just the first step which needed to make useable the gallente command ships. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
128
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 11:53:00 -
[960] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Now I know alot of people hate this ideal but realy it looks to be the best fix for blasters that dont bring down the nerf hammer on any other race or make gallente boats op.
And that fix is simply to inc the falloff of blasters to match the range of auto's and pulses.
What you get is everyone hiting everyone alse and everyone geting a even shoot.
Auto Cannons will still be capless and be able to pick dmg type.
Blasters will still suck down cap and only do Kin/Therm.
Pulses will still be good becouse there always fighting in there optimal with fast ammo changes for range and there dmg is good and backed up with better def's then blasterboats.
I know it's kind of plain but it works with out braking things.
Well actually it's the only reasonable option. Why?
WTF those whiners have to say when they cross amarr stuff and caldari stuff? -they have range and dmg, adapt or die. So why should Gallente be stuck in such crap distance? -because the majority of minmatar players are so horribly traumatised and got their but exploded by an ancient version of blaster boats?? stupid rabbits are stupid
|
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:05:00 -
[961] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Dunmur wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Now I know alot of people hate this ideal but realy it looks to be the best fix for blasters that dont bring down the nerf hammer on any other race or make gallente boats op.
And that fix is simply to inc the falloff of blasters to match the range of auto's and pulses.
What you get is everyone hiting everyone alse and everyone geting a even shoot.
Auto Cannons will still be capless and be able to pick dmg type.
Blasters will still suck down cap and only do Kin/Therm.
Pulses will still be good becouse there always fighting in there optimal with fast ammo changes for range and there dmg is good and backed up with better def's then blasterboats.
I know it's kind of plain but it works with out braking things.
THIS is starting to sound like the only true solution. Read back what i wrote before. Need a little range buff for gallentean ships too, not too much but they needed. CCP changes start was fine but not enough. I think the speed and agility buff was good thinking, but need a littlebit better changes over 5-10m/s speed, but dont need create those gallentean ships to fastest in the game. The little tracking and fitting buff is fine, but i think thats idea need a littlebit change. Need more CPU because less CPU for guns decreasing the Weapon Upgrades CPU bonuses too. Deimos need more PG. Need rethinking the almost all gallentean ships. I told, change their bonuses and give to them scram range bonuses/lvl maximum to 20km with the best faction scrambler. (or test what is the best range which is useable but not overpowered) A mega have 4.5 optimal + 13 falloff with neutrons. Need a little buff 25% to optimal is very short buff, thats changed to optimal to 5.725m,but i think thats acceptable. (null 11km would be change 13.75km) Dont forget, a 800mm guns optimal is 3km with short range ammo, and 6km with barrage. This is why i never understand the crying peaoples who tell us, "i dont want projectile from my blaster" So, the falloff change need shorter range as AC. Maybe 50% acceptable for falloff too. Antimatter 13km falloff would be change to 19.5km, and null ammo fallof would be change from 16km to 24km with this changes. Lower falloff than AC: Null vs Barrage: 24 vs 32 (falloff) (ships without falloff bonuses) but longer optimal: Null vs Barrage 13km vs 6km (optimal) 13+24=37km vs 6+32=38km at optimal+1x falloff I know at 2x falloff the range is changing significantly but dont forget blaster have better damage and over 1x falloff range the damage decreasing the significantly too. Let's see with short range ammo. Longer optimal: Antimatter vs EMP: 5.725km vs 3km (optimal) Shorter falloff: Antimatter vs EMP: 19.5km vs 24km (falloff) A think this changes with a little better speed changes and with scrambler ranges would be enough to balancing the blaster ships. Rails: I told before. 10% damage wont be help for rails, at least need +10% ROF too, because they have the worst alpha. So if they have littlebit better DPS than other guns wont be unbalancing the game. Gallentean Commandships: CCP created the scramblers after speed nerf, their recon have scrambler range lvl/bonus, but other race have scrambler gang bonus warfare command ships. This is logical ? I dont think so. Gallentean commandships is unuseable, they have maybe just one useable gang module. Change the matari CS scram bonuses to web+targetpainter bonus and add the scram bonus to the gallentean commandships. This is just the first step which needed to make useable the gallente command ships.
Well thoughs changes would probly work but There OP.
You do know that "Need rethinking the almost all gallentean ships. I told, change their bonuses and give to them scram range bonuses/lvl maximum to 20km with the best faction scrambler" is hardwireing EW bounses to all blaster ships to make them work.
I mean realy what are we going to do for Caldire then Hardwire Jamming EW bounses to all there Hybird ships as well?
We are here to find ways to fix the weapon system not add EW to all Hybird ships.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
130
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:17:00 -
[962] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Dunmur wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Now I know alot of people hate this ideal but realy it looks to be the best fix for blasters that dont bring down the nerf hammer on any other race or make gallente boats op.
And that fix is simply to inc the falloff of blasters to match the range of auto's and pulses.
What you get is everyone hiting everyone alse and everyone geting a even shoot.
Auto Cannons will still be capless and be able to pick dmg type.
Blasters will still suck down cap and only do Kin/Therm.
Pulses will still be good becouse there always fighting in there optimal with fast ammo changes for range and there dmg is good and backed up with better def's then blasterboats.
I know it's kind of plain but it works with out braking things.
THIS is starting to sound like the only true solution. Read back what i wrote before. Need a little range buff for gallentean ships too, not too much but they needed. CCP changes start was fine but not enough. I think the speed and agility buff was good thinking, but need a littlebit better changes over 5-10m/s speed, but dont need create those gallentean ships to fastest in the game. The little tracking and fitting buff is fine, but i think thats idea need a littlebit change. Need more CPU because less CPU for guns decreasing the Weapon Upgrades CPU bonuses too. Deimos need more PG. Need rethinking the almost all gallentean ships. I told, change their bonuses and give to them scram range bonuses/lvl maximum to 20km with the best faction scrambler. (or test what is the best range which is useable but not overpowered) A mega have 4.5 optimal + 13 falloff with neutrons. Need a little buff 25% to optimal is very short buff, thats changed to optimal to 5.725m,but i think thats acceptable. (null 11km would be change 13.75km) Dont forget, a 800mm guns optimal is 3km with short range ammo, and 6km with barrage. This is why i never understand the crying peaoples who tell us, "i dont want projectile from my blaster" So, the falloff change need shorter range as AC. Maybe 50% acceptable for falloff too. Antimatter 13km falloff would be change to 19.5km, and null ammo fallof would be change from 16km to 24km with this changes. Lower falloff than AC: Null vs Barrage: 24 vs 32 (falloff) (ships without falloff bonuses) but longer optimal: Null vs Barrage 13km vs 6km (optimal) 13+24=37km vs 6+32=38km at optimal+1x falloff I know at 2x falloff the range is changing significantly but dont forget blaster have better damage and over 1x falloff range the damage decreasing the significantly too. Let's see with short range ammo. Longer optimal: Antimatter vs EMP: 5.725km vs 3km (optimal) Shorter falloff: Antimatter vs EMP: 19.5km vs 24km (falloff) A think this changes with a little better speed changes and with scrambler ranges would be enough to balancing the blaster ships. Rails: I told before. 10% damage wont be help for rails, at least need +10% ROF too, because they have the worst alpha. So if they have littlebit better DPS than other guns wont be unbalancing the game. Gallentean Commandships: CCP created the scramblers after speed nerf, their recon have scrambler range lvl/bonus, but other race have scrambler gang bonus warfare command ships. This is logical ? I dont think so. Gallentean commandships is unuseable, they have maybe just one useable gang module. Change the matari CS scram bonuses to web+targetpainter bonus and add the scram bonus to the gallentean commandships. This is just the first step which needed to make useable the gallente command ships. Well thoughs changes would probly work but There OP. You do know that "Need rethinking the almost all gallentean ships. I told, change their bonuses and give to them scram range bonuses/lvl maximum to 20km with the best faction scrambler" is hardwireing EW bounses to all blaster ships to make them work. I mean realy what are we going to do for Caldire then Hardwire Jamming EW bounses to all there Hybird ships as well? We are here to find ways to fix the weapon system not add EW to all Hybird ships.
And what would be the point of training/flying ships needing Hardwires to "function" when everything else doesn't? And what is the point of training some ship/ weapons not having the range, the speed or dmg when everything else does? |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:24:00 -
[963] - Quote
As Im reading all ideas. More and more I think that ccp do not change anything. Just little tweak up to give something to angry masses.. For me as im looking at this problem there is too much politics in it, coz ccp isnt doing anything Logic with hybrids and talos etc.. Something strange is happening I never saw something like that in any game, that someone so hard dont want to fix it. Its really strange. But problem can be in ccp internal communication or someone (ccp soundwave maybe) dont want to fix gallente for some reasons.
anyway i see only two options: make gallente the fastest Or switch stats between blasters and autocanons (so yes nerf hammer sorta) ew tweeks dont change anything. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:27:00 -
[964] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Edit: I would put 4.) Inc blaster dmg. But that only buffs station games and gatecamping and the things blasters are already good for.
4 could be done if: A) it would be a huge boost (30%+) and B) they nerfed down range even further, and C) made gallente ships more mobile.
blasters themselves should have near zero ability to project damage. that should be the ship's work.
also, the things that blasters are "already good for" atm are using a vindicator to run incursions.
station games are really quite "lol" if you think about it, and that's really more an issue of docking/undocking mechanics. fix that well, and station games are gone.
edit: also, frigates should be exempt to these changes. frigate-level blaster ships are already quite good. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:38:00 -
[965] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Edit: I would put 4.) Inc blaster dmg. But that only buffs station games and gatecamping and the things blasters are already good for. 4 could be done if: A) it would be a huge boost (30%+) and B) they nerfed down range even further, and C) made gallente ships more mobile. blasters themselves should have near zero ability to project damage. that should be the ship's work. also, the things that blasters are "already good for" atm are using a vindicator to run incursions. station games are really quite "lol" if you think about it, and that's really more an issue of docking/undocking mechanics. fix that well, and station games are gone. edit: also, frigates should be exempt to these changes. frigate-level blaster ships are already quite good.
Well if you nerf range to much more you mite at well just load up on smartbombs and cap injectors. That why you cant even be jammed when your in range. Just saying someone had to say it.
O and if made gallente ships more mobile it probly still would not work with even shorter range and fighting web/scrable range already to put dps down. I dont realy see it working.
web/scrable range right around 10km and out with overheating witch happends alot in pvp so realy on a normal day looking at 14km web/scrable range or the guy is new to EVE in that case easy kill in any ship.
Longest ranged blaster Neurtron Blaster Cannon tech 2. Navy Antimatter 4.5 optimal and 13 fall off. When fighting other ships your going to bounce between 12km-16km. Bouncing into and out of web/scrable range.
So lets say are wtfpwn blaster boat do's 1000 dps. At 12km were down about 25% to 750 dps and at 16km your lossing around 40% mybe alittle more or little less so lets just use 40% 600 dps. And yes I know that do's not look so bad but lets rewind before we even got into web/scrable range becouse back then were doing no to verly little dmg and still geting melted by auto's and pulses the hole time and just forget it if your one of thoughs guys that think your going to start out with null and change close up.
How ever if you happen to warp in on top of someone this is your time to shine. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:45:00 -
[966] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Grimpak wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Edit: I would put 4.) Inc blaster dmg. But that only buffs station games and gatecamping and the things blasters are already good for. 4 could be done if: A) it would be a huge boost (30%+) and B) they nerfed down range even further, and C) made gallente ships more mobile. blasters themselves should have near zero ability to project damage. that should be the ship's work. also, the things that blasters are "already good for" atm are using a vindicator to run incursions. station games are really quite "lol" if you think about it, and that's really more an issue of docking/undocking mechanics. fix that well, and station games are gone. edit: also, frigates should be exempt to these changes. frigate-level blaster ships are already quite good. Well if you nerf range to much more you mite at well just load up on smartbombs and cap injectors. That why you cant even be jammed when your in range. Just saying someone had to say it. O and if made gallente ships more mobile it probly still would not work with even shorter range and fighting web/scrable range already to put dps down. I dont realy see it working.
either that or on the next 5 years people will cry for a blaster nerf instead AC nerf.
in all honesty, in my near 8-years of game I have always seen blaster ships as ships that should do extremely high damage at point blank ranges, which means that they are ships that need to commit to the target to kill it, unlike matari ships that kite them, amarr ships that outtank them or caldari ships that outrange them.
also the range nerf shouldn't be that hard too. L blasters shouldn't be able to even scratch paint at 15km< range, and inside scram range (10km) they should totally pulverize anything.
leave damage projection to the ships. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:47:00 -
[967] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Grimpak wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Edit: I would put 4.) Inc blaster dmg. But that only buffs station games and gatecamping and the things blasters are already good for. 4 could be done if: A) it would be a huge boost (30%+) and B) they nerfed down range even further, and C) made gallente ships more mobile. blasters themselves should have near zero ability to project damage. that should be the ship's work. also, the things that blasters are "already good for" atm are using a vindicator to run incursions. station games are really quite "lol" if you think about it, and that's really more an issue of docking/undocking mechanics. fix that well, and station games are gone. edit: also, frigates should be exempt to these changes. frigate-level blaster ships are already quite good. Well if you nerf range to much more you mite at well just load up on smartbombs and cap injectors. That why you cant even be jammed when your in range. Just saying someone had to say it. O and if made gallente ships more mobile it probly still would not work with even shorter range and fighting web/scrable range already to put dps down. I dont realy see it working.
Once again any buff to the ship will be all but pointless as it will transfer to other gun types for example a faster brutix with a scram/web bonus would still be better with autocannons.
They need to buff the gun NOT the ship |
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:51:00 -
[968] - Quote
And the new wave of trolls. We get problems either about speed or range and there are other people they want range even more nerfed. Would you be happy if we do: - Small: optimal 500m - Medium: optimal 1000m - Large: optimal 2000m I think is what all that you, Minmatar players, want. Hopefully, it's easy to ignore chars... |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:53:00 -
[969] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:And the new wave of trolls. We get problems either about speed or range and there are other people they want range even more nerfed. Would you be happy if we do: - Small: optimal 500m - Medium: optimal 1000m - Large: optimal 2000m I think is what all that you, Minmatar players, want. Hopefully, it's easy to ignore chars...
only if you get to pull out no less than 2 to 4 times the damage than pulses and/or AC's, and they actually have a chance to catch the target.
then you can think about nerfing ranges, or alternatively, boost their optimals to the 4km/6km base range for M/L ranges and nerf their falloff hard.
it's the only thing I can accept as a counterbalance so that people whining about projectiles don't wine about blasters too. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 12:56:00 -
[970] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Phoenix Torp wrote:And the new wave of trolls. We get problems either about speed or range and there are other people they want range even more nerfed. Would you be happy if we do: - Small: optimal 500m - Medium: optimal 1000m - Large: optimal 2000m I think is what all that you, Minmatar players, want. Hopefully, it's easy to ignore chars... only if you get to pull out no less than 2 to 4 times the damage than pulses and/or AC's.
even then they would only be good in a very limited situation not much of a buff to the usefulness |
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:00:00 -
[971] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Grimpak wrote:Phoenix Torp wrote:And the new wave of trolls. We get problems either about speed or range and there are other people they want range even more nerfed. Would you be happy if we do: - Small: optimal 500m - Medium: optimal 1000m - Large: optimal 2000m I think is what all that you, Minmatar players, want. Hopefully, it's easy to ignore chars... only if you get to pull out no less than 2 to 4 times the damage than pulses and/or AC's. even then they would only be good in a very limited situation
better than now or where increasing range would only make them a ****-poor version of ACs or pulses.
no really, you think blasters do more damage than either of these, when in every situation the pulses and AC's do comparable damage (5-10% less tops) at 3x the range or even more or are mobile enough to apply the damage. increasing the range of blasters would still make AC's better at being blasters and pulses doing nearly the same damage at much more useful ranges. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:02:00 -
[972] - Quote
Drop hybrids (and drones, btw of the lag). These niggers won't allow the philosophy of hybrids is changed to more versatility (minmatar) or more range (amarr). And the current philosophy of a fat-slow cow with the shortest range weapon it's stupid, even if you make his damage 100x powerful than now. |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:06:00 -
[973] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Dunmur wrote:Grimpak wrote:Phoenix Torp wrote:And the new wave of trolls. We get problems either about speed or range and there are other people they want range even more nerfed. Would you be happy if we do: - Small: optimal 500m - Medium: optimal 1000m - Large: optimal 2000m I think is what all that you, Minmatar players, want. Hopefully, it's easy to ignore chars... only if you get to pull out no less than 2 to 4 times the damage than pulses and/or AC's. even then they would only be good in a very limited situation better than now or where increasing range would only make them a ****-poor version of ACs or pulses. no really, you think blasters do more damage than either of these, when in every situation the pulses and AC's do comparable damage (5-10% less tops) at 3x the range or even more or are mobile enough to apply the damage. increasing the range of blasters would still make AC's better at being blasters and pulses doing nearly the same damage at much more useful ranges.
with those changes you are limiting there range for more damage which is compounding the issue which is they have no utility. They are good for 1 maybe 2 combat situations and thx to the lack of range cannot adapt to changes in the battle.
Welcome to the main reason nobody uses blasters.
|
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:11:00 -
[974] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:
with those changes you are limiting there range for more damage which is compounding the issue which is they have no utility. They are good for 1 maybe 2 combat situations and thx to the lack of range cannot adapt to changes in the battle.
Welcome to the main reason nobody uses blasters.
Don't feed the troll... Or at least don't quote it XD |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
120
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:25:00 -
[975] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Dunmur wrote:
with those changes you are limiting there range for more damage which is compounding the issue which is they have no utility. They are good for 1 maybe 2 combat situations and thx to the lack of range cannot adapt to changes in the battle.
Welcome to the main reason nobody uses blasters.
Don't feed the troll... Or at least don't quote it XD
sorry to burst your bubble troll, but this is not trolling. go back to the old forums and try to dig up the posts I made about this very issue.
Dunmur wrote:with those changes you are limiting there range for more damage which is compounding the issue which is they have no utility. They are good for 1 maybe 2 combat situations and thx to the lack of range cannot adapt to changes in the battle.
Welcome to the main reason nobody uses blasters.
I don't mind blasters having **** poor ranges, the need to commit to a target and I don't even mind the trinity being mandatory on them, if they get the ability to to get in that range and rain doom and firestorm on them. that's how blasters were envisioned in the first place, point-blank cataclysmic-level high-damage weapons. constant boosts on the other competing weapons and HP buffs while the blasters remained nearly equal was what killed them in the first place.
adaptability on the battlefield is also a bit overrated too, unless you think on balancing them for solo, which is very silly in the first place.
but hey, if you want to run down that target at 50km while getting damage, that's fine. I'll just retreat after I blow this guy to bits/let my support make him easier to get to. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
132
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 13:53:00 -
[976] - Quote
Grim has a very good experience with blasters or gallente ships and should not be trolled for he's ideas that I agree are extreme but can work, the single issue on he's ideas is that somehow matar must be nerfed in some way just like some other ideas.
If you give blasters 50-50 optimal/falloff then they profit from TE's at less extent than pulse or autos but become then something more useful, actual speed boost might be enough but you'll see matar rivers of tears because blasters do more dmg between 0 and 15km, OMG seriously...
If you give blasters the all optimal and 0 falloff for about 15km for larger gun type you still need fast ships = matar rivers of tears
if you keep the ships has they are, you'll save the forums from oceans of tears and childish rage quits but all you'll do is strap duc tape on 2 broken legs, you still can't run, you still can't catch stuff you still can't apply all dmg boosts you can ever give them unless in some specific situations -witch seems to stick to blaster ships like bugs.
You're (CCP) desperately trying to turn a 300ft truck concrete loaded tuned with some duc tape and turn it in to a 500 miles indy car, it's just impossible. |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:01:00 -
[977] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Grim has a very good experience with blasters or gallente ships and should not be trolled for he's ideas that I agree are extreme but can work, the single issue on he's ideas is that somehow matar must be nerfed in some way just like some other ideas.
If you give blasters 50-50 optimal/falloff then they profit from TE's at less extent than pulse or autos but become then something more useful, actual speed boost might be enough but you'll see matar rivers of tears because blasters do more dmg between 0 and 15km, OMG seriously...
If you give blasters the all optimal and 0 falloff for about 15km for larger gun type you still need fast ships = matar rivers of tears
if you keep the ships has they are, you'll save the forums from oceans of tears and childish rage quits but all you'll do is strap duc tape on 2 broken legs, you still can't run, you still can't catch stuff you still can't apply all dmg boosts you can ever give them unless in some specific situations -witch seems to stick to blaster ships like bugs.
You're (CCP) desperately trying to turn a 300ft truck concrete loaded tuned with some duc tape and turn it in to a 500 miles indy car, it's just impossible.
thats why I say boost range instead of speed or damage. Minmatar stay the fastest but gallente will have some much needed utility.
I think its quite clear the old vision of super short range face melters of doom just doesnt work with the way ccp nerfed speed so gallente need a fundamental change. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club C0VEN
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:29:00 -
[978] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Grim has a very good experience with blasters or gallente ships and should not be trolled for he's ideas that I agree are extreme but can work, the single issue on he's ideas is that somehow matar must be nerfed in some way just like some other ideas.
If you give blasters 50-50 optimal/falloff then they profit from TE's at less extent than pulse or autos but become then something more useful, actual speed boost might be enough but you'll see matar rivers of tears because blasters do more dmg between 0 and 15km, OMG seriously...
If you give blasters the all optimal and 0 falloff for about 15km for larger gun type you still need fast ships = matar rivers of tears
if you keep the ships has they are, you'll save the forums from oceans of tears and childish rage quits but all you'll do is strap duc tape on 2 broken legs, you still can't run, you still can't catch stuff you still can't apply all dmg boosts you can ever give them unless in some specific situations -witch seems to stick to blaster ships like bugs.
You're (CCP) desperately trying to turn a 300ft truck concrete loaded tuned with some duc tape and turn it in to a 500 miles indy car, it's just impossible. thats why I say boost range instead of speed or damage. Minmatar stay the fastest but gallente will have some much needed utility. I think its quite clear the old vision of super short range face melters of doom just doesnt work with the way ccp nerfed speed so gallente need a fundamental change.
But guys listen !!! CCP Wont do this !!! Imagine faces of mini guys at CCP HQ... Be serious this is not going to happen :( yet another protest is needed Or something like that. Like someone said "if you like this game stop play in it. Coz nothing going to change" sad but true.
We need more info from ccp side, but im afraid that they will stay with recent tweeks that they done and thats all what we can get. We also will see info soon, that ccp "fixed" hybrids and you may now back to game. Im 100% sure of it. |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:32:00 -
[979] - Quote
I donGÇÖt use rails, but hereGÇÖs my two isk on the blaster issue:
Blasters will never be good for fleets, but they're already pretty good for solo and small gang work, *as long as you have a good warp-in*. The tracking buff will certainly help applying damage at close range, but it doesnGÇÖt help with getting into range. Neither do the minor speed and agility buffs; letGÇÖs not kid ourselves. A major change in the hulls is necessary. Right now, Minmatar has a huge advantage in both speed and agility, which just doesnGÇÖt work.
Option 1: Make Gallente the fastest; Minmatar stays the most agile. Effect: Gallente as juggernauts with good straight-line speed but low acceleration. Minmatar as sprinters that can outmaneuver other races.
Option 2: Gallente most agile by far, Minmatar fastest. Effect: Gallente can close range quickly, Minmatar can still outrun them over time.
The obvious problem with Option 1 is that blaster boats would always be able to get into range, and with their superior dps and tank they could just overpower Minmatar ships. Option 2 therefore makes more sense: Gallente has the speed advantage early in the fight and can pull off Crazy Ivans more easily but isnGÇÖt always guaranteed to get into range. It makes sense logically too. Turn radius should be determined by speed and structural integrity (i.e. how fast can you turn without ripping your ship in half). Minmatar ships, with high top speeds and hulls held together by duct tape, should not be able to outmaneuver Gallente ships, which have medium speed and the best hulls in the game.
tl;dr: Gallente should be the most agile race by a decent margin. |
Alpheias
Euphoria Released HYDRA RELOADED
139
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:41:00 -
[980] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Phoenix Torp wrote:Dunmur wrote:
with those changes you are limiting there range for more damage which is compounding the issue which is they have no utility. They are good for 1 maybe 2 combat situations and thx to the lack of range cannot adapt to changes in the battle.
Welcome to the main reason nobody uses blasters.
Don't feed the troll... Or at least don't quote it XD sorry to burst your bubble troll, but this is not trolling. go back to the old forums and try to dig up the posts I made about this very issue.
Agreed.
But, Hybrids is the child Projectiles never wanted.
I'd kill kittens and puppies and bunnies I'd maim toddlers and teens and then more |
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
122
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 14:44:00 -
[981] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Grim has a very good experience with blasters or gallente ships and should not be trolled for he's ideas that I agree are extreme but can work, the single issue on he's ideas is that somehow matar must be nerfed in some way just like some other ideas.
only thing I can debate on matar nerfing is the falloff bonuses on the ships that have it.
ok yes, the TE overboost is a discussable issue. In hindsight it was something that should've been worked out while looking at the ships that have a falloff bonus.
TE's wouldn't be as maligned as they are atm if the falloff bonuses from those ships went from 10 to 5, I'm sure of it. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 15:28:00 -
[982] - Quote
Who needs blasters?
From another thread and for those who haven't seen it already, OC it's the current SISI build and it's not officially announced it's the one going live on TQ, but have fun watching it. |
Imawuss
United Atheist League
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 18:56:00 -
[983] - Quote
Foum ate my post. So smaller version after the hybrid "buff" we have:
Blaster negatives: Use Cap fixed damage type (just happens to be the 2 highest average resist on T2 ships..) 10 second reload time (makes switching ammor types extremly disadvantagous) Poor Range (outranged by an averge of 2x-4x by other weapons)
Postitives: Higher DPS (on average +17% vs pulse/ +27% vs AC's, after fitting/skills averages to be about +20%)
So lets say you do 800 DPS you oppent does 640 using AC's or Pulse, this mean you are outranged. Lets say it take you 10 seconds to get into your damage range. By that time you have taken 6,400 damage. With your higher DPS it will take another 40 seconds of non-stop firing in your range to make up that difference. 40 Seconds!!!! just to be back on par again....
Conclusion:
unless major changes happen to hybrids Please just refund all hybrid SP's, poeple that liked to be useless in lge fleets and be blown up in nice looking ships can then re-apply back into hybrids, all others can join the masses like they should have done from the begining and get into lasers or projectiles. (also all hybrids are still outperformed in all areas in pve) |
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 20:20:00 -
[984] - Quote
Bottom line is the other weapon platforms needs lots of nerf here and there to make room for hybrids. Maybe even nerf to the ships themselves. I'm not talking about major nerfs, but several smaller nerfs here and there. If you don't then any reasonable buff to hybrids will cause tons of toes being stepped on. |
Collin Dow
Free People of Earth Red Dwarf Racketeering Division
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 21:01:00 -
[985] - Quote
I get less hopeful as time rolls on. The Gallente shall rise again! |
Wolfuzz
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 21:19:00 -
[986] - Quote
Gallente have very slow armor tanked ships + extremaly low range blasters = selfown of the race. Compare that to the minmatar, they have very fast shield tanked ships + autocannons with crazy falloffs, so it's 2:0 for minmatar. Increase range of the blasters so it's similar to projectiles and / or increase speed of the gallente ships, any other so called "balancing" or "boost" simply won't work, and blaster ships will stay as they are now, quite rare in the space. |
Gustav Knuttsen
Billionaires Club C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 22:39:00 -
[987] - Quote
Gosh ... CCP is doing what they can to make ppl unhappy they are extremely good in it.
You know what is funny ? Gallente started to be a symbol of CCP politics how to ruin game and how bunch of amateurs developers dont know how to fix the game. Im not Gallente pilot I cant fly these ships but Im starting to really likes this race. Its a symbol of fight with Tyranny and incompetence "Gallente Spring" or "Jita Occupancy". (only one true democracy in eve !)
Anyway. Speed up Gallente or/and Give Blaster better range or rebalance others (nerf hammer option). Anything but not this will be ****** and just cosmetics.
And New Talon ship is so LOL. Look at Oracle :) But why Rusty Tornado is the best ? We dont know ... But maybe coz most devs toons are Mini :) ?
|
Phoenix Torp
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 22:59:00 -
[988] - Quote
Mini toons are the best because they don't need a lot of support for weapons modules. Tempest can "waste" 3 slots in Gyroestabilizer and even with that win whatever. And can kite his enemy since is faster. Gallente would need Tracking Enhancer, Trackin Computer... and then, to be competitive with the rest of races DPS, should fit the Magnetic Stabilizer. It's either the master failing philosophy of Gallente or the master overpowered philosopy of Minmatar what makes this. And Amarr is the middle-term with large optimals and cap issues, that needs his pilots to have "a bit" of intelligence and strategy. Right now, would appreciate more a Gallente pirate than another one. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 23:36:00 -
[989] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Who needs blasters?From another thread and for those who haven't seen it already, OC it's the current SISI build and it's not officially announced it's the one going live on TQ, but have fun watching it.
Winmatar in action got to love it |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 01:16:00 -
[990] - Quote
I've read a ton of these posts so far. Here's my abreviated summary.
I think almost everyone agrees that the problem with blaster-ships is the mixing of the shortest-range weapon with the slowest (armor-tanked) hulls.
Some people are saying Blaster's fall-off sould be increased. This would probably work to even-things-out, but I don't like this idea (neither do most other people). If we increase Blaster's fall-off, they simply become another Autocannon. This fix would probably work just fine, but totaly takes-away any originaltiy Blasters have. No thanks...
There have been some really good fixes proposed, but all of them involve actually buffing the Blaster hulls themselves. Some of those ideas:
Increase web/scram range of blaster-ships. This would allow them to pin-down targets before they have a chance to kite/escape.
Increase blaster-ships' agility dramatically. This would allow them to accelerate quickly and hopefully get into-range before their target can accelerate and begin to kite.
Increase blaster-ships' speed to be the fastest ships. This way they can "bull-rush" into range and hopefully make-up for all the damage they took getting-into range.
My personal favorite idea is to give a MWD boost bonus to Hybrid ships. This would allow them to temporarily "sprint" into (or out-of) range at the expence of cap.
All of these last 4 proposals seem to be viable fixes to Blaster ships without totally breaking the game. The problem?
There seems to be some concern that applying these fixes to the hulls themselves will cause some other problems. If you bonus hybrid ships with speed, agility, tackle-range, etc. what would stop these ships from fitting ACs, or Lasers and being OP because they have this "extra" built-in bonus. This is a fair concern, I think. So what do we do?
Apply the bonus to the GUNS themselves! So if you fit Blasters on a ship, you get X amount of speed-boost (or agility, or tackle-range, or MWD boost, etc.) per terret.
There are people that will cry "No fair! Why do Hybrids get an extra boost?!" *boo hoo hoo* It's simple. As others have already pointed-out over and over, the other guns already HAVE built-in boosts.
AC's have selectable damage-type, no cap-use, and VERY easy fitting requirements.
Lasers have instantly swapable ammo, and use no amunition, and... well... Scorch.
What do Hybrids have? Nothing yet... Time to change that. |
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 01:32:00 -
[991] - Quote
Important message to everyone who wants to construct text-wall advice for CCP:
1. Railguns, they too are hybrids.
2. Blasters should get more out of Null, not a huge baseline range increase. We do not need autocannons 2.0.
3. Hull issues are seperate issues. Gallente AND Caldari have hybrid ships, so if one of your suggestions is "web bonus on every gallente ship," you're obviously not adressing the issue. |
Wolfuzz
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 01:55:00 -
[992] - Quote
I see alot of posts that says "we don't need / want another autocannons" Why not ? What is so wrong in two kinds of weapons, that are very similar to each others (projectiles and lasers are similar already) I don't really get the idea that races should differ so much.. When germans made a tank, brits made a tank as well (or the opposite I don't wanna offend no brits :D) Some ideas simply work - like combination of range and speed of the ship, and others don't - like combination of close range and slow ship, let's just stick to those ideas that work in real combat. And about those changes propositions by CCP Tallest, You can decrese PG and CPU needs by 99%, increase tracking by 999% and blaster ship still gone be totaly owned by minmatar one, simply gone be kited, orbited or out ranged to death. Another issue with hybrid turrets is their ammo, only 2 types of dmg, that makes them sux in most of the pve and pvp cases.
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
43
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 03:21:00 -
[993] - Quote
Wolfuzz wrote:I see alot of posts that says "we don't need / want another autocannons" Why not ? What is so wrong in two kinds of weapons, that are very similar to each others (projectiles and lasers are similar already) I don't really get the idea that races should differ so much
First off, projectiles and lasers are not all that similar. As to why we don't want to duplicate autos directly, it's obvious. You then just have autocannons that require cap and only have one damage profile. What's the point in even having blasters at that point?
They should either defend the blaster niche and help them overcome some of their short-comings with T2 ammo (just like barrage and scorch do for projectiles and lasers) or they should drop the weapon system all together.
Wolfuzz wrote: And about those changes propositions by CCP Tallest, You can decrese PG and CPU needs by 99%, increase tracking by 999% and blaster ship still gone be totaly owned by minmatar one, simply gone be kited, orbited or out ranged to death. Another issue with hybrid turrets is their ammo, only 2 types of dmg, that makes them sux in most of the pve and pvp cases.
Yep, ship issues are part of the problem. A big part at that. But that isn't alleviated by cloning projectiles either. Then you get a less agile ship with the same weapon system. Bunk. As far as damage types, i'm ok with kin/therm. I don't see anything wrong with being stuck to that profile, so long as there are some advantages too.
The way I see it they would do best by cutting cap usage again, buffing Null to provide some decent range and prevent gallente ships from being whittled to death at point range, and then going ship by ship among all the hybrid platforms and giving them some much-needed accelleration to catch faster and more agile ships when they try to maneuver. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 05:15:00 -
[994] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Important message to everyone who wants to construct text-wall advice for CCP:
1. Railguns, they too are hybrids.
2. Blasters should get more out of Null, not a huge baseline range increase. CCP will not re-invent the autocannon.
3. Hull issues are seperate issues. Gallente AND Caldari have hybrid ships, so if one of your suggestions is "web bonus on every gallente ship," you're obviously not adressing the issue.
That's why I thought it would be a good idea to apply bonuses to the guns directly. That way, you actually make the guns better without making them copies of existing guns. This waym you're not bufing hulls that would STILL be better-off using ACs or Lasers or...
If you made Rails give a boost to MWD speed bonus, I think it would make them somewhat viable in PVP (combined with thier up-coming dmg buff). Rails aren't a problem on thier own. Again it's the hulls that use them that are limited. If a Rail Brutix was fast-enough, it could quite-possibly win a kiting battle with an AC Cane. Med. Rails have enough optimal to out-damage AC's within long-point range. The ship just has to be fast-enough to do-it.
PS don't reduce railgun range. It's one of the things that still makes them usefull in PVE. Obviously by increasing dmg, you compensate for that, but then thier dmg profile starts to look a LOT like ACs and T2 Pulses w/Scorch. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
44
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 05:32:00 -
[995] - Quote
That post makes it pretty clear you know nothing about rails. |
Nyla Skin
Pew Pew Corp Behold.
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 05:55:00 -
[996] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Tiger's Spirit wrote:Oh wait what will be happen when a better damage ship like a mega will be faster than a tempest and hit him from short range ? Huh? -you should know by now a nano pest 800mm can shoot nuclear warheads between 0 and - - -- - -- --> 100km Faster Megathron camping all day the gate or waiting at the undock to shoot stuff pinned by rapiers and hurricanes? Better dmg ship??? -you are kidding right? lol....
Especially that Gallente ships RELY on other races ships to even get them the few targets they can theoretically have.. Anyone ever try having an all-gallente fleet? It's hilarious. :D |
Dunmur
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 09:52:00 -
[997] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Important message to everyone who wants to construct text-wall advice for CCP:
1. Railguns, they too are hybrids.
2. Blasters should get more out of Null, not a huge baseline range increase. CCP will not re-invent the autocannon.
3. Hull issues are seperate issues. Gallente AND Caldari have hybrid ships, so if one of your suggestions is "web bonus on every gallente ship," you're obviously not adressing the issue. That's why I thought it would be a good idea to apply bonuses to the guns directly. That way, you actually make the guns better without making them copies of existing guns. This waym you're not bufing hulls that would STILL be better-off using ACs or Lasers or... If you made Rails give a boost to MWD speed bonus, I think it would make them somewhat viable in PVP (combined with thier up-coming dmg buff). Rails aren't a problem on thier own. Again it's the hulls that use them that are limited. If a Rail Brutix was fast-enough, it could quite-possibly win a kiting battle with an AC Cane. Med. Rails have enough optimal to out-damage AC's within long-point range. The ship just has to be fast-enough to do-it. PS don't reduce railgun range. It's one of the things that still makes them usefull in PVE. Obviously by increasing dmg, you compensate for that, but then thier dmg profile starts to look a LOT like ACs and T2 Pulses w/Scorch.
LOL a rail brutix beating a ac cane now ive seen it all.
Wait is that a pig flying over there... |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 14:23:00 -
[998] - Quote
Imawuss wrote:Foum ate my post. So smaller version after the hybrid "buff" we have:
Blaster negatives: Use Cap fixed damage type (just happens to be the 2 highest average resist on T2 ships..) 10 second reload time (makes switching ammor types extremly disadvantagous) Poor Range (outranged by an averge of 2x-4x by other weapons) The first and second points are shared with lasers, the third with every weapon system but lasers and also works against the ones that could potentially exploit your second point in the first place, so that leaves the last one which is kinda ok since:
Quote:Postitives: Higher DPS (on average +17% vs pulse/ +27% vs AC's, after fitting/skills averages to be about +20%) Really, blasters are supposed to be the in-you-face weapon of choice and there is nothing wrong with that premise. What you really are complaining about is the inability of some, not all, of the ships using blasters to get into that position. Stop making it out as if there is something wrong with blasters themselves, especially after this buff. |
David Xavier
The Scope Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 14:44:00 -
[999] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote:Imawuss wrote:Foum ate my post. So smaller version after the hybrid "buff" we have:
Blaster negatives: Use Cap fixed damage type (just happens to be the 2 highest average resist on T2 ships..) 10 second reload time (makes switching ammor types extremly disadvantagous) Poor Range (outranged by an averge of 2x-4x by other weapons) The first and second points are shared with lasers, the third with every weapon system but lasers and also works against the ones that could potentially exploit your second point in the first place, so that leaves the last one which is kinda ok since: Quote:Postitives: Higher DPS (on average +17% vs pulse/ +27% vs AC's, after fitting/skills averages to be about +20%) Really, blasters are supposed to be the in-you-face weapon of choice and there is nothing wrong with that premise. What you really are complaining about is the inability of some, not all, of the ships using blasters to get into that position. Stop making it out as if there is something wrong with blasters themselves, especially after this buff.
Oh wait blasters have the disadvantages of every other weapon system combined but it is OK since it does 20% more damage at point blank range ? Do you comprehend what you write ?
Yes the Vindicator the only ship capable to use blasters with some degree of efficiency... because a pirate faction battleship is semi-usable due to it's insane buffer let's dismiss the problems of the hybrid weapon systems.
There is one thing more disturbing than the cookie-cutter Projectile and Laser fanboys trying to push Hybrids even deeper into uselessness, is the lack of Dev response of what THEY think can be done. |
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 15:52:00 -
[1000] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: ............
"Hail boost is too much"
Look, if you will only boost Hail -25%, we get, by the example of small guns. 900m +3.6 km. 14.2dps (without skills, 200mm guns) Comparable to the void, small blaster (without skills, neutron blaster): 1.35km +1.25 km 18.5dps What do we see? auto-cannon, with these cartridges is superior to two blaster for distance work. And 4.3dps inferior. What choices you make, or auto-blaster cannon? : Trolface:
"Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible .. Keep posting specific ehamples"
Brutix is GÇïGÇïterrible of, Eos is terrible of, is terrible of Asterate, Kronos is terrible of. these ships, there are common problems: 1) They are slow flying. 2) They are forced to enter the ultra-short-range and distance. (Which can not do it) 3) All of them, a bonus to the active tank armor. Which requires lots of capacitor. (Batteries take up much space and they can take a little.) 4) Mean Guns Brutiks and Eos have a range of work (blasters) ~ 7km. Asterate a little more. 5) Due to the active tank, they have very low health, which increases the risk of being killed with the first volley artilerii. 6) They consume a lot of guns being done, (after the update is less, but more than vseravno artileriya and missiles). 7) Entering into an ultra-close range, they immediately fall into a vampire and Neutralizer. And the instantaneous capacitor lose and die.
So, we have a strange situation. We sighted the gun consume capacitor, we have an active tank capacitor and consumes a lot .... we have to influence podvergatsya vampire and neutralizer. Quickly lose the capacitor and die .... If you want to keep active tank in ultra-short distance, then you need to, perhaps, to give these ships immune to vampire and a neutralizer. Or do chtonibud, otherwise the ship will remain useless junk. (With the Kronos situation is better, there is a bonus on the network, but it has all the same, the active tank and a short working distance. What makes it virtually useless due to the fact that, neutralizer is used throughout)
Please, CCP, revise these ships. |
|
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 15:56:00 -
[1001] - Quote
BooooooBeeeeeer wrote:CCP Tallest wrote: ............
"Hail boost is too much" Look, if you will only boost Hail -25%, we get, by the example of small guns. 900m +3.6 km. 14.2dps (without skills, 200mm guns) Comparable to the void, small blaster (without skills, neutron blaster): 1.35km +1.25 km 18.5dps What do we see? auto-cannon, with these cartridges is superior to two blaster for distance work. And 4.3dps inferior. What choices you make, or auto-blaster cannon? : Trolface: "Eagle is terrible, Deimos is terrible, Rokh is terrible, Proteus is terrible .. Keep posting specific ehamples" Brutix is GÇïGÇïterrible of, Eos is terrible of, is terrible of Asterate, Kronos is terrible of. these ships, there are common problems: 1) They are slow flying. 2) They are forced to enter the ultra-short-range and distance. (Which can not do it) 3) All of them, a bonus to the active tank armor. Which requires lots of capacitor. (Batteries take up much space and they can take a little.) 4) Mean Guns Brutiks and Eos have a range of work (blasters) ~ 7km. Asterate a little more. 5) Due to the active tank, they have very low health, which increases the risk of being killed with the first volley artilerii. 6) They consume a lot of guns being done, (after the update is less, but more than all the same artileriya and missiles). 7) Entering into an ultra-close range, they immediately fall into a vampire and Neutralizer. And the instantaneous capacitor lose and die. So, we have a strange situation. We sighted the gun consume capacitor, we have an active tank capacitor and consumes a lot .... we have to influence podvergatsya vampire and neutralizer. Quickly lose the capacitor and die .... If you want to keep active tank in ultra-short distance, then you need to, perhaps, to give these ships immune to vampire and a neutralizer. Or do chtonibud, otherwise the ship will remain useless junk. (With the Kronos situation is better, there is a bonus on the network, but it has all the same, the active tank and a short working distance. What makes it virtually useless due to the fact that, neutralizer is used throughout) Please, CCP, revise these ships.
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 16:23:00 -
[1002] - Quote
Can we stop with the red-herring arguments that obviously don't make sense?
The Kronos, like every marauder, has an active tank bonus. Like every other marauder the primary reason it's awful for pvp is going to be it's signal strength. It is a horrible example for pvp balancing or tank bonuses for those, rather obvious, reasons.
Think a little more before you post at length so we don't sound like idiots clamouring for fotm. |
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 16:57:00 -
[1003] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Can we stop with the red-herring arguments that obviously don't make sense?
The Kronos, like every marauder, has an active tank bonus. Like every other marauder the primary reason it's awful for pvp is going to be it's signal strength. It is a horrible example for pvp balancing or tank bonuses for those, rather obvious, reasons.
Think a little more before you post at length so we don't sound like idiots clamouring for fotm. Maybe before you look for the idiot in the other, should pay attention to yourself?
Of all the post, you could see was a small remark about Kronos, lol.
It was about 4 ships, which are practically not used. And Kronos, but not the worst of them.
Remarque, especially for you, for a "smart", Kronos, has a range of a neutron blaster, ~ 17km with antimatter. Vargur & Paladin 35 km. Oh, and if it's Marauder, then only PVE? LOL.
Fanats of the Amarr and Matar, just amused by how little timid chicken, afraid of any emerging competition. |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 16:58:00 -
[1004] - Quote
David Xavier wrote:Oh wait blasters have the disadvantages of every other weapon system combined but it is OK since it does 20% more damage at point blank range ? Do you comprehend what you write ? They don't, but yes, that is the trade-off.
Lasers have the range advantage and can instantly swap ammo, but eats cap and can't really track that well. Projectiles don't do a lot of damage, but can pick their damage type and don't use cap. Blasters don't have a lot of range, but will out-damage everything else. Rockets/HAMs/torps still suck, but they have a few hulls that work really well with them. This is what diversity and balance looks like. |
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 17:00:00 -
[1005] - Quote
|
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 17:01:00 -
[1006] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:That post makes it pretty clear you know nothing about rails.
Except for, practically every time I log-in to EVE, I do 1-3 lvl4 missions with a Rail-fit Hyperion. I've used rails more than ANY other weapon in the game. 3+ years running missions in Gallente space with Gallente ships... Yeah, I don't know anything about rails.
Your rail fix idea isn't bad, you just haven't thought about the consequenses. By decreasing rail-range and increasing damage dramatically, they will be too-much like T2 pulses with Scorch and ACs. If rails had the same damage profile as ACs why in the hell would I use them instead of ACs? With ACs, I can select dmg-type, and they use no cap. Both are huge plusses for PVE and PVP.
The reason I use rails now is because of thier range and thier HUGE versatility when used in-conjunction with Scripted Tracking Computers. Take that away, and everyone will just fit ACs instead. What rails need is a moderate damage increase, and slightly lower fitting requirements. (It seems CCP got this part just-right.)
This way I can fit a full-set of 425s on my Hype with a prop-mod, without needing an ACR. ACs and T2 Pulses will do slightly more damage up-close, but out-past 40km, it will be no-contest. So, the AC-fit ships have to burn-around getting close to do good damage while the Rail-fit ships save time by doing medium damage to far-off targets without having to burn-around from rat to rat.
As for PVP, with a slight damage boost and fit to a faster ship, Medium/Small Rails could deffinately be viable as a kiting gun. I just threw together a couple of fits on EFT. A Brutix with T2 250s and a Cane with T2 425 ACs. The Brutix out-damages the Cane anywhere past 15km (yes even with Barrage). The Cane is about 200m/s faster than the Brutix though. Conclusion? The Rail-Brutix could possibly kite an AC-Cane, if it had enough speed/agility. (Especially with the up-coming dmg buff and fitting req. reductions. How do we buff Brutix speed without making it OP when using ACs or other weapons. Give hybrid guns a bonus that boosts your ship's speed when fitted. (I know it sounds "strange" but it would work.)
Unfortunately you weren't considerate enough to explain to me my supposed lack-of Rail knowledge. I was forced to write a very long post to defend my position without even knowing specifically which part-of it I was defending. In the future try to offer CONSTRUCTIVE advice to "Idiots" like me.
You're "I'm so smart, I don't even need to explain myself to anyone. I will instead make a general, demeaning, discrediting, statements without any basis or support." reply is not helpful.
Please. Try again. |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 17:14:00 -
[1007] - Quote
Another idea:
Every hybrid platform gets +30% to all overload bonuses (role bonus, like ceptors' scram/web cap bonus). That gives a bit more speed, damage, web/scram range, and rep amount for 1 or 2 minutes, at the risk of burning out your mods. It would benefit Gallente the most, but Caldari wouldn't be left out.
Yes, it involves a big change to the hulls, but I think everyone pretty much agrees that that's necessary. Of course, it would also boost ac damage if you chose to put them on a hybrid ship, but since it would be easier to get into blaster range there'd be more incentive to fit hybrids over projectiles. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 17:15:00 -
[1008] - Quote
BooooooBeeeeeer wrote: Maybe before you look for the idiot in the other, should pay attention to yourself?
Of all the post, you could see was a small remark about Kronos, lol.
It was about 4 ships, which are practically not used. And Kronos, but not the worst of them.
Remarque, especially for you, for a "smart", Kronos, has a range of a neutron blaster, ~ 17km with antimatter. Vargur & Paladin 35 km. Oh, and if it's Marauder, then only PVE? LOL.
Fanats of the Amarr and Matar, just amused by how little timid chicken, afraid of any emerging competition.
I was pointing out your assertion that Kronos ACTIVE TANKING bonus was somehow a uniquely gallente problem. It is not.
Yes, a blaster kronos will have poor range. Perhaps if we stop pretending railguns don't exist we can have those buffed too?
You can read my posts, i'm very much in the camp of hybrid buffs, getting gallente and caldari hybrid ships up to par, and nerfing minmatar/amarr if it comes to that. What I will not promote or abide, however, are stupid assertions such "baww our marauder has an active tank bonus."
Check the "I must always use blasters and i'm a victim," complex at the door so we can keep making useful suggestions.
Sydney Nelson wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:That post makes it pretty clear you know nothing about rails. Except for, practically every time I log-in to EVE, I do 1-3 lvl4 missions with a Rail-fit Hyperion. I've used rails more than ANY other weapon in the game. 3+ years running missions in Gallente space with Gallente ships... Yeah, I don't know anything about rails.
That actually re-enforces my point. The fact you mission in a hype is laughable.
Sydney Nelson wrote: Your rail fix idea isn't bad, you just haven't thought about the consequenses. By decreasing rail-range and increasing damage dramatically, they will be too-much like T2 pulses with Scorch and ACs. If rails had the same damage profile as ACs why in the hell would I use them instead of ACs? With ACs, I can select dmg-type, and they use no cap. Both are huge plusses for PVE and PVP.
Did I say "dramatically redue their range?" Nope, sure didn't. I said "dramatically increase dps." What I would have suggested, in more detail, is that railguns long-range ammo be less than tach range, but further than artillery. I would also suggest their dps and alpha occupy a middle-ground between the two and their tracking be the best over-all.
Extreme range, ala railguns is a thing of the past. Warping in at a 100km is already far too close for rail sniping and on-grid probing ensures that even if you do manage to get out to 150 or 200km you'll be warped onto. If you think that range is a virtue in pve, you must be easily impressed. Rails would be far better off applying more dps at half their current effective range with better tracking and yes, it would need to be greater than proj dps (not alpha damage) aswell to overcome the twin limitations of cap use and static damage profile. |
Wolfuzz
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 17:24:00 -
[1009] - Quote
Here are my propositions to fix problems with blasters, and slow armor tanked ships.
1. Change armor tanking system, so plates, and armor rigs nerfs something else than mass of the ships (speed and agility) maybe signature radius nerf, same as with shield tank ?
OR rebuild blaster ships to be shield tanked (give them more med slots, take some low slots, and fix their bonuses).
2. Increase range of the blasters, while nerfing their dmg a bit in the same time.
3. Give gallente ammo that do different types of dmg, not just kin / th.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:22:00 -
[1010] - Quote
Guys guys guys, stop shooting each other, you know very well why Kronos is so bad: hybrids, point black
If only, we could buy on market Adestrias for 100isk believe me I'd buy gtc's plex their grandma or whatever just to fill my hangar for a couple years of stock.
They know very well why they gave that ship those bonus, and we know very well why we will never have ships with half of "True Blasta boat" Adestria is.
All I hope is to see more Caldari and Gallente boats/hybrids on that fracking top 20, then I'll stop posting because I'll be too busy having fun blowing stuff or at work. |
|
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:24:00 -
[1011] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:[quote=BooooooBeeeeeer] I was pointing out your assertion that Kronos ACTIVE TANKING bonus was somehow a uniquely gallente problem. It is not.
Yes, a blaster kronos will have poor range. Perhaps if we stop pretending railguns don't exist we can have those buffed too?
.
Ok, I realized maybe I was too harsh. I'm sorry. I just wanted to say that in pvp, the Kronos, with its active tank the same problem. That of Brutix, Eos, Asterate, he comes close, and loses his cap. But God bless him, he was not too bad.
Brutix, Eos, Asterate - that's who, all horrible. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:33:00 -
[1012] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote: Stuff Stuff LOL a rail brutix beating a ac cane now ive seen it all. Wait is that a pig flying over there...
Slow down. Engage your mind. Think about what people post before making a conclusion.
Why is it so LOL?
Go ahead, answer the question...
A Rail-Brutix could never kite an AC Cane because the AC Cane is so much faster, and more agile, that it makes it impossible for the Brutix to maintain range.
There's the problem. Ok, so how do you fix it?
Change rails? That would probably work, but the rails themselves aren't the REAL problem. The real problem is that the ship you're fitting them to isn't fast enough or agile enough to kite much of anything.
So what's the REAL solution? Make rails viable by making the ships that fit them fast-enough or agile-enough to kite.
Does that make sense?
This is purely hypothetical of-course but... If each medium hybrid turret gave a 4.25% boost to speed, then a Rail-Brutix would have enough speed to kite an AC Cane, and a Blaster-Brutix would have enough speed to get into-range before it's too late (sometimes).
An unusual fix? Yes. Viable? Looks like it to me. We're just brain-storming and discussing here, and I think this is worth discussing. |
Zhephell
Capts Deranged Cavaliers Quixotic Hegemony
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:53:00 -
[1013] - Quote
Well, I think that blasters havenGÇÖt damage handicaps, but players suffer with them because minmatar ships are faster and have a better distance to fire, or because they need cap use and in short ranges many times they use neutralizers, ore vampires. But now the Tornado bc will be another problem, yesterday I read that they have change new bc t3 bonus now caldari, and gallente bc t3 are worst, amarr t3 bc have other bonus, it is better doing dps but have les range so it ll be easier to shot it, but they have change tornado 7.5% falloff bonus to 10% , so it ll have more than 60 km of falloff with ACs and it is the faster of the 3 bcs with only 1 mwd it ll be able to have 1700 m/s with a really good capacitor (probably it ll need only to use one slot to be stable with the mwd active GÇ£no using boostersGÇ¥) So blaster ships (bs, bc, cruisers) can-¦t do nothing.
To see more info about new bc t3 bonus see this page:
http://forum.eveuniversity.org/viewtopic.php?t=48897&p=430661
I hope that the reason is that it is in testing phase, because I think that a tornados plague (as actually drake plagues) would be the end for many blaster ships, no matter how much better blasters ll be with this balance. I think that it is ironic that in one hand ccp is trying to improve blasters, and one reason is because ACs are more over because minmatar ships have more range and speed and blasters have many difficulties, and in the other hand they are doing an AC ship that canGÇÖt be killed by many ships because it is easier to fit, is really fast (to catch it only mwd frigates can approach) and can fire at 70 km with ACs. The only way to destroy a tornado is a surprise attack or using long range weapons, (pulsars probably not include)
T3 bc are supposed to be as BS but with the handicap of HP , but if the 80% of all ships canGÇÖt hit you, it isn-¦t a handicap. I could understand this, if it was a slow bc, but it is at the same time the faster bc and probably the easier to fit.
This is a question for ccp: It is this ship a measure to increase the use of rails? If you have the intention to incite players to use more rails because artillery has remove beams and rails of battles, and ships as rokh aren-¦t use.
You must know that no matter you improve their damage or their fittings they won-¦t be used, because rails are sniper guns and with combat proves if you are at 200km firing they ll probe you and warp to your ship to put their Blasters, ACs, or pulses in your ass. (as you can see now I have more information about snipers problems ^ ^ ) And as result nobody wants to be over 150 km so artillery that is worst that beams and rails at long distances is more used because it is more powerful at shot ranges that beams and much more that rails, and can chouse damage.
And if the tornado is a measure to use more rokhs in battles or other rails ships, you have to know that it is wrong. The only ships that would be more used are artillery ships.
Ccp members, if you are really interested to see more rails ships in battles you have only 3 solutions:
1st: put a new bs and bc ,or bigger combat ships module who prevent that your ship can be probed, (if only bs and bc can use it, raiders can-¦t have any problem to assault industrial ships, cruisers, or escort ships used in low sec, and at the same time ships that don-¦t use sniper range weapons , won-¦t use it because they would use one slot that has no sense if you are near your enemy.) Doing this, warp range can be the same, and snipers will have more sense , (only if everyone in sniper squads use this module xD ) but it is only an organization problem. ( I think that-¦s the better solution.)
2nd increase minimum warp distance to 200km at least.
3rd Change rails and beams concept as artillery (alpha strike)
If you aren-¦t convince with this options, it would be better to abandon the idea of stimulate rails use, it will be a waste of time for you, because artillery will be always better at 100 km that beams, and beams always better that rails.
|
Reten Kip
Everset Dropbears
20
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:59:00 -
[1014] - Quote
Provided the problem of getting into range is addressed, the Kronos can be an absolute beast in PvP (with the proper support to address its signal strength issues). 4 Neutron blasters with the power of 8 and three neuts with a web bonus. It's BBQ time. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:11:00 -
[1015] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote: Slow down. Engage your mind. Think about what people post before making a conclusion.
I think the greater imperative here is understanding the weapons, ships, and game mechanics involved here before we come up with ideas that are dead-on-arrival.
Sydney Nelson wrote: A Rail-Brutix could never kite an AC Cane because the AC Cane is so much faster, and more agile, that it makes it impossible for the Brutix to maintain range.
There's the problem. Ok, so how do you fix it?
Change rails? That would probably work, but the rails themselves aren't the REAL problem. The real problem is that the ship you're fitting them to isn't fast enough or agile enough to kite much of anything.
So what's the REAL solution? Make rails viable by making the ships that fit them fast-enough or agile-enough to kite.
Does that make sense?
No, it does not make sense. First of all, the Brutix is a tier1 bc and the hurrican tier2. We may not like the tier system as it stands, but we cannot assume it's going to be gone just because we want it to go. Tier2 battlecruisers are going to anhillate t1 in almost every case except well-skilled cyclones with proper implants/pill.
Furthermore, on the case that rails are't the "REAL problem." I'm trying EVER SO HARD to be civil here, but this is absolute nonsense. Nobody with the first clue about med/large rails and their pvp applications thinks that the rail niche exists. It just doesn't. The weapon system as it stands is worse off than blasters and i've already mentioned why that is. Their range is much too long to utilize and when it can be utilized it is one on-grid warp from disaster. Coupled with the fact their dps is enemic and their tracking is abyssmal inside their giant range bubble and you have a failed weapon.
Making every rail ship insanely fast (able to out-run their class equivalents in minmatar while armor tanking? You're taking pre-nano-nerf speed) would do nothing but distort ship balance overall. You wouldn't be able to solo since you'd be well out of point range. You wouldn't be able to operate in logi range of a standard gang. Rail ships would still be a joke and fitting blasters (assuming they too get reasonable buffs) to them would probably be overpowered since they'd be easily capable of catching anything with their immense speed.
The solution I'm proposing, mitigating rail range and adding a reasonable amount of dps, allows rails to have a viable niche. They could apply high-tracking effective dps at moderate range (relative to other long-range weapons, so don't compare to AC's or Pulses) and their drawbacks (cap and kin/therm only dmg) would be less of an issue because they'd provide more effective dps than projectiles and track better than beams.
Hull and Ammo solutions should also come into the mix IMO, but none of that fine-tuning can be done when you can't settle on a general niche for the weapon system and the ships themselves. Ultra-long-range no longer works and it hasn't worked for quite a long time. Shorter range and better tracking/dps at that moderate range is really the only solution.
Sydney Nelson wrote: This is purely hypothetical of-course but... If each medium hybrid turret gave a 4.25% boost to speed, then a Rail-Brutix would have enough speed to kite an AC Cane, and a Blaster-Brutix would have enough speed to get into-range before it's too late (sometimes).
An unusual fix? Yes. Viable? Looks like it to me. We're just brain-storming and discussing here, and I think this is worth discussing.
What is to prevent minmatar ships, with higher base speed/agi from fitting hybrids then? Again I think the Brutix v Cane analog is silly, but i've been over that. Once more, I have to say, you're trying to treat symptoms rather than look at the disease itself.
It is a discussion worth having, but there are such things as bad proposals and we'd do well to consider more than just 'how can I beat a CANE?!' when we are talking about the overall problems with hybrids. There are deep-rooted problems with both blasters and espcially rails. If we cannot address those points, we're not going to lend them any feedback worth having.
Reten Kip wrote:Provided the problem of getting into range is addressed, the Kronos can be an absolute beast in PvP (with the proper support to address its signal strength issues). 4 Neutron blasters with the power of 8 and three neuts with a web bonus. It's BBQ time.
I guess you pvp in honourable 1v1 situations then. A few light ecm drones will perma-jam any marauder and one ECCM module will not help you prevent that. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
59
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:16:00 -
[1016] - Quote
BooooooBeeeeeer wrote:damn. double post, sorry
Proteus is realy terrible ? Hm 734dps with 40k armor (260k EHP without implants and bonuses) with all resistance almost 80% or more, almost 19km scrambler range with DB scrambler. With slave + gang bonuses proteus have 66.527 armor (469k EHP!!!) I dont think so this is terrible from a cruiser. After patch you should use better guns over electrons, so you would be make better damage too.
Eos,Astarte,Deimos etc is crap i know, but proteus much better than some other gallentean ships, i think. |
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:30:00 -
[1017] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:BooooooBeeeeeer wrote:damn. double post, sorry Proteus is realy terrible ?.
It's not I said:) That said CCP Tallest. But, let them do it even better, is it going bad? |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:39:00 -
[1018] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote: That actually re-enforces my point. The fact you mission in a hype is laughable.
I'm sorry; I wasn't clear-enough in my post. What I meant to say was, that I used the Hype for the MAJORITYof my PVE time. The Mach and Nightmare are clearly head and shoulders above any Rail-platform.
Telling you how-much experience I have flying those two ships would be completely irrelevent because THEY DON'T USE RAILS. Instead of trying to discredit me and indirectly insulting my inteligence by implying that I'm not smart-enough to choose the proper L4 mission ship, you SHOULD have taken the true point of my statement.
Who would be BETTER qualified to coment on the merits/demerits of Rails than someone who spent VAST ammounts of time using them?
As for me being dumb for using the Hype as a L4 boat, that's complete nonsence as well. There are only 3 hybrid gun-boats that out-perform the Hype in L4 missions. They are the Navy Mega, Kronos, and Vindicator (even though it seems like an aweful waste of its web bonus), all-of-which are WAY more expensive. Once you have enough ISK for those ships, you have enough for a Mach or Nightmare. If you dissagree, this is not the thread to argue about-it. I would be happy to debate with you the useability of the Hype here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=26745
Anyways.... I think we need to figure-out exactly what problem we're trying to solve here. It seems to me you're trying to make ALL Rails (including large) viable in PVP. That's not going to happen until the probing mechanics that made Sniping a thing of the past are fixed. Large Rails don't need to be turned-into ACs. You said it yourself, what would be the point of using Hybrids if ACs are there with the same role?
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
First off, projectiles and lasers are not all that similar. As to why we don't want to duplicate autos directly, it's obvious. You then just have autocannons that require cap and only have one damage profile. What's the point in even having blasters at that point?
They should either defend the blaster niche and help them overcome some of their short-comings with T2 ammo (just like barrage and scorch do for projectiles and lasers) or they should drop the weapon system all together.
Yep, ship issues are part of the problem. A big part at that. But that isn't alleviated by cloning projectiles either. Then you get a less agile ship with the same weapon system. Bunk. As far as damage types, i'm ok with kin/therm. I don't see anything wrong with being stuck to that profile, so long as there are some advantages too.
You're trying to duplicate ACs by decreasing Rail range, and increasing thier dmg. What you're proposing wouldn't fix Rails for PVP, but it WOULD break them for PVE.
Maybe you don't mission much, maybe you do, I don't know. Rail-range IS a virtue in PVE, I know because I'm "dumb" and missioned in a Rail Gun-boat for a long-time. There are a high percentage of L4 missions where the rats are at 65+km. Being able to do good dps at 65km helps quite a bit actually. If you can start to apply good dps as you get into range, your target will be halfway-gone by the time a shorter-range weapon would even start to do good dps. This saves time, it's also a good tactic to minimize incoming dps.
If you take-away rails' range, then they are useless compared to ACs. If you boost thier DPS to compensate, then they would be better than ACs. We don't want to clone ACs with Blasters OR Rails! Rails would work GREAT for PVP if you make the ships that use them faster. Simple. Would they be easily countered by Arty? Probably, but that's the POINT. Rock, Paper, Scissors remember? Large rails can't be fixed, because the're not broken. It's the probing mechanics that have made them useless. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:41:00 -
[1019] - Quote
Sorry, duplicate :( |
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:14:00 -
[1020] - Quote
i been playing on test server these last days with the new changes,and in my opinion i cant say that the hybrid balance will make hybrid weapons more desirable. its really hard to play with them.blaster ships need speed to reach target wich they dont have,rails tracking is not as good as its supposed to be,or the range. i like the changes in pg,cpu,and cap consumtion,really help fitting the gallente ships. |
|
David Xavier
The Scope Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:23:00 -
[1021] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote:
Maybe you don't mission much, maybe you do, I don't know. Rail-range IS a virtue in PVE, I know because I'm "dumb" and missioned in a Rail Gun-boat for a long-time. There are a high percentage of L4 missions where the rats are at 65+km. Being able to do good dps at 65km helps quite a bit actually. If you can start to apply good dps as you get into range, your target will be halfway-gone by the time a shorter-range weapon would even start to do good dps. This saves time, it's also a good tactic to minimize incoming dps.
If you take-away rails' range, then they are useless compared to ACs. If you boost thier DPS to compensate, then they would be better than ACs. We don't want to clone ACs with Blasters OR Rails! Rails would work GREAT for PVP if you make the ships that use them faster. Simple. Would they be easily countered by Arty? Maybe, but that's the POINT. Rock, Paper, Scissors, remember? Large rails can't be fixed, because the're not broken. It's the probing mechanics that have made them useless.
The problem with your example Sydney is that using railguns is not a virtue, you use them for missions because you have no other choice if you want to have some range!
Railguns have to complement blasters just like how short and long range weapon systems of other races do, meaning they have to be useful and be able to project reliable damage from the range where blasters become useless.
In my opinion railgun "speciality" would be their extensive engagement envelope from ~28km to 100km, the current damage considering the +10% buff is about right, but improved tracking is needed. I don't suffer from insanity.. I enjoy it ! |
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:28:00 -
[1022] - Quote
i just had a fight with tornado a few minutes ago while i was flying talos
theres just no way hybrids are gonna be desirable,i mean gallente ships are slow,and hybrids have short range,so yeah.unless ccp does something drastic with em i cant see how people gonna want to use those lol |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:33:00 -
[1023] - Quote
indicast wrote:i just had a fight with tornado a few minutes ago while i was flying talos
theres just no way hybrids are gonna be desirable,i mean gallente ships are slow,and hybrids have short range,so yeah.unless ccp does something drastic with em i cant see how people gonna want to use those lol
thats the point ! and CCP give us some feedback from your side. Hybrids are not working !!!! STILL |
Motriek
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 21:06:00 -
[1024] - Quote
For lulz, I worked up a Catalyst fit, which doesn't quite fit right now, but I think will fit after. Am I right in understanding that this thing will get an additional 33% boost to dps after the release, when the dessy ROF penalty is reduced?
I'm getting 514dps now with heat, and I believe that will go to 678 dps afterwards. zomg.
[Catalyst, Test] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters [empty med slot]
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
[empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
Hobgoblin II x1
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 21:20:00 -
[1025] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote:I'm sorry; I wasn't clear-enough in my post. What I meant to say was, that I used the Hype for the MAJORITYof my PVE time. The Mach and Nightmare are clearly head and shoulders above any Rail-platform. Telling you how-much experience I have flying those two ships would be completely irrelevent because THEY DON'T USE RAILS. Instead of trying to discredit me and indirectly insulting my inteligence by implying that I'm not smart-enough to choose the proper L4 mission ship, you SHOULD have taken the true point of my statement. Who would be BETTER qualified to coment on the merits/demerits of Rails than someone who spent VAST ammounts of time using them? As for me being dumb for using the Hype as a L4 boat, that's complete nonsence as well. There are only 3 hybrid gun-boats that out-perform the Hype in L4 missions. They are the Navy Mega, Kronos, and Vindicator (even though it seems like an aweful waste of its web bonus), all-of-which are WAY more expensive. Once you have enough ISK for those ships, you have enough for a Mach or Nightmare. If you dissagree, this is not the thread to argue about-it. I would be happy to debate with you the useability of the Hype here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=26745
I'm not going to continue debating your poor decision to use a hype for pve. A dominix or mega both cost less and do the job better.
Sydney Nelson wrote: Anyways.... I think we need to figure-out exactly what problem we're trying to solve here. It seems to me you're trying to make ALL Rails (including large) viable in PVP. That's not going to happen until the probing mechanics that made Sniping a thing of the past are fixed. Large Rails don't need to be turned-into ACs. You said it yourself, what would be the point of using Hybrids if ACs are there with the same role?
It seems to me I was crystal clear. Take your ADHD medication and read exactly what I typed. I specifically mentioned tuning rails based on OTHER LONG-RANGE WEAPONS. Autocannons are not long-range. If you want to equate a high-dps railgun that hits between artillery and beam range as an auto-cannon you're free to do so, but it's makes you sound like you failed to read (again).
Sydney Nelson wrote: You're trying to duplicate ACs by decreasing Rail range, and increasing thier dmg. What you're proposing wouldn't fix Rails for PVP, but it WOULD break them for PVE.
Maybe you don't mission much, maybe you do, I don't know. Rail-range IS a virtue in PVE, I know because I'm "dumb" and missioned in a Rail Gun-boat for a long-time. There are a high percentage of L4 missions where the rats are at 65+km. Being able to do good dps at 65km helps quite a bit actually. If you can start to apply good dps as you get into range, your target will be halfway-gone by the time a shorter-range weapon would even start to do good dps. This saves time, it's also a good tactic to minimize incoming dps.
If you take-away rails' range, then they are useless compared to ACs. If you boost thier DPS to compensate, then they would be better than ACs. We don't want to clone ACs with Blasters OR Rails! Rails would work GREAT for PVP if you make the ships that use them faster. Simple. Would they be easily countered by Arty? Probably, but that's the POINT. Rock, Paper, Scissors remember? Large rails can't be fixed, because the're not broken. It's the probing mechanics that have made them useless.
You've got to be joking. Seriously, go read what I posted. Rails hitting between artilery and beam range would give them PLENTY of range for pve (is 75-100km not enough for your pve ships?!) and would have ZERO adverse effects on your prescious hyperion. I have a rail ship to pve with, btw, it's a kronos. I don't use it because it's sub-par compared to a mach, but if the hybrid buff isn't a diaster then it might see more use.
I can't tell if you just don't know there are other ammunition options than Anti-matter, or your too stubborn to consider the fact that I mentioned AMMO CHANGES would also be needed in conjunction with the hypothetical changed I proposed. Either way, it's clear you've spent no time reading and considering what i've posted so far. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
59
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 21:30:00 -
[1026] - Quote
Motriek wrote:For lulz, I worked up a Catalyst fit, which doesn't quite fit right now, but I think will fit after. Am I right in understanding that this thing will get an additional 33% boost to dps after the release, when the dessy ROF penalty is reduced?
I'm getting 514dps now with heat, and I believe that will go to 678 dps afterwards. zomg.
[Catalyst, Test] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters [empty med slot]
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
[empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
Hobgoblin II x1
Too much DPS for a destro. A coercer will be shot to 22km optimal+3.3km falloff with scorch over 4-500 dps. I think this is OP for this ship class.
I know because i flew many times with them in FW. I killed easily ceptors without disruptor because 1 mid slot. (coercer need 1 mid+)
The Thrasher will be OP too. They can instapopping now a frig.
A fully fitted t1 cruiser class has this damage now with 3 gyro (rupture with 4x t2 220mm guns and two t2 HAM+5drone) 600DPS without overheat. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 22:19:00 -
[1027] - Quote
Motriek wrote:For lulz, I worked up a Catalyst fit, which doesn't quite fit right now, but I think will fit after. Am I right in understanding that this thing will get an additional 33% boost to dps after the release, when the dessy ROF penalty is reduced?
I'm getting 514dps now with heat, and I believe that will go to 678 dps afterwards. zomg.
[Catalyst, Test] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters [empty med slot]
Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S Light Neutron Blaster II, Void S
[empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
Hobgoblin II x1
It doesn't even come close to fitting, on either TQ or Sisi - and even if it did it would be about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.
The highest damage, not totally useless setup you can get involves Light Ion II's which, with current Sisi build, at least has a DCU II and tops out at 471 [gun] dps before overheating... but at 2.1km.
Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 22:25:00 -
[1028] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:No, it does not make sense. First of all, the Brutix is a tier1 bc and the hurrican tier2. We may not like the tier system as it stands, but we cannot assume it's going to be gone just because we want it to go. Tier2 battlecruisers are going to anhillate t1 in almost every case except well-skilled cyclones with proper implants/pill. This has nothing to do with tiers! I'm comparing the Brutix to the Cane because thier both gun-boats! Should I compare a Myrmidon and a Cane? The Myrmidon is a Drone boat. There is no point in making that comparison because we're trying to compare guns.
Furthermore, on the case that rails are't the "REAL problem." I'm trying EVER SO HARD to be civil here, but this is absolute nonsense. Nobody with the first clue about med/large rails and their pvp applications thinks that the rail niche exists. It just doesn't. The weapon system as it stands is worse off than blasters and i've already mentioned why that is. Their range is much too long to utilize and when it can be utilized it is one on-grid warp from disaster. Coupled with the fact their dps is enemic and their tracking is abyssmal inside their giant range bubble and you have a failed weapon. Making every rail ship insanely fast (able to out-run their class equivalents in minmatar while armor tanking? You're taking pre-nano-nerf speed) would do nothing but distort ship balance overall. You wouldn't be able to solo since you'd be well out of point range. You wouldn't be able to operate in logi range of a standard gang. Rail ships would still be a joke and fitting blasters (assuming they too get reasonable buffs) to them would probably be overpowered since they'd be easily capable of catching anything with their immense speed. I don't think you've actually LOOKED at an EFT graph lately. Do you actually know the optimal range of a medium rail-gun?? A 250mm Rail with anitmatter and L5 skills is 22km.
What's the range of a long point? T2 disruptor with L5 skills is 24km.
That is within long point-range. I think you're REALLY stuck-on large rails. The real problem with those is the probing mechanics, not the guns themselves.
The dmg of Rails isn't enemic, and it's going to get better after the buff this winter.
I'm not talking about a HUGE speed increase, I'm talking about 30% ish. If you passive armor-tank, Minmatar will still be faster. If you shield tank (works well on a Brutix), or active armor tank (have to use smaller guns), speed will be pretty-much even. If you fit minimal tank (dmg control, maybe an EANM), nanos, speed rigs, etc. then, and only then will you be faster than a Nano-Cane. I think it's a good balance.http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e9/sydneyACE/EVE/RailBrutixvsACCane.jpgNow you tell me, if that Brutix were 30% faster (50m/s speed advantage), that it wouldn't have a REALLY good chance of taking that Cane out.The solution I'm proposing, mitigating rail range and adding a reasonable amount of dps, allows rails to have a viable niche. They could apply high-tracking effective dps at moderate range (relative to other long-range weapons, so don't compare to AC's or Pulses) and their drawbacks (cap and kin/therm only dmg) would be less of an issue because they'd provide more effective dps than projectiles and track better than beams. Hull and Ammo solutions should also come into the mix IMO, but none of that fine-tuning can be done when you can't settle on a general niche for the weapon system and the ships themselves. Ultra-long-range no longer works and it hasn't worked for quite a long time. Shorter range and better tracking/dps at that moderate range is really the only solution. Sydney Nelson wrote: This is purely hypothetical of-course but... If each medium hybrid turret gave a 4.25% boost to speed, then a Rail-Brutix would have enough speed to kite an AC Cane, and a Blaster-Brutix would have enough speed to get into-range before it's too late (sometimes).
An unusual fix? Yes. Viable? Looks like it to me. We're just brain-storming and discussing here, and I think this is worth discussing.
What is to prevent minmatar ships, with higher base speed/agi from fitting hybrids then? Minmatar ships don't have a bonus for Hybrid dmg, optimal, rof, fall-off, etc. I would have thought that would be rather obvious. A Minmatar ship could fit them if they wanted, but they would do less dmg, range, etc. than a hybrid-bonused ship. There's nothing wrong with an un-bonused ship fitting different guns, Myrmidons do it all the time and fit ACs.
Again I think the Brutix v Cane analog is silly, but i've been over that. Once more, I have to say, you're trying to treat symptoms rather than look at the disease itself. It is a discussion worth having, but there are such things as bad proposals and we'd do well to consider more than just 'how can I beat a CANE?!' when we are talking about the overall problems with hybrids. There are deep-rooted problems with both blasters and espcially rails. If we cannot address those points, we're not going to lend them any feedback worth having. I'm addressing exactly those points by giving the bonuses to the guns themselves and not the ships. Again, I'm just using Brutix/Cane because the're both gun-boats, one uses hybrids, the other uses projectiles. It's a pretty logical comparison by my account. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 22:29:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Never. Stop. Posting. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 22:38:00 -
[1030] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote: I don't think you've actually LOOKED at an EFT graph lately. Do you actually know the optimal range of a medium rail-gun?? A 250mm Rail with anitmatter and L5 skills is 22km.
We were talking about your fail-hype, and I certainly hope you done fit med. raild on it too. You really should try reading better.
Sydney Nelson wrote: Minmatar ships don't have a bonus for Hybrid dmg, optimal, rof, fall-off, etc. I would have thought that would be rather obvious. A Minmatar ship could fit them if they wanted, but they would do less dmg, range, etc. than a hybrid-bonused ship. There's nothing wrong with an un-bonused ship fitting different guns, Myrmidons do it all the time and fit ACs.
So your argument is, it'll **** up the game, but the game's already ****** up so who cares? Brilliant.
Sydney Nelson wrote: I'm addressing exactly those points by giving the bonuses to the guns themselves and not the ships. Again, I'm just using Brutix/Cane because the're both gun-boats, one uses hybrids, the other uses projectiles. It's a pretty logical comparison by my account.
You're trying to cure the disease with band-aids and vap-o-rub. Not only have you begun and stuck to a poor premise, but you refuse to read and understand my arguments. I can't be sure why this is, but you need to start from square one, clean up your fallacious assumptions, or stop posting. |
|
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 23:05:00 -
[1031] - Quote
solution is simple,and its in the name of the thread "Hybrid weapon and Tech II ammo balancing"
its not balanced on tranquility,and its not balanced on test server.period.
ccp,keep on working |
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 23:26:00 -
[1032] - Quote
I make auto-quote sent to all that people who say that blasters have high damage. I don't see where is that high damage...
Phoenix Torp wrote:Mini toons are the best because they don't need a lot of support for weapons modules. Tempest can "waste" 3 slots in Gyroestabilizer and even with that win whatever. And can kite his enemy since is faster. Gallente would need Tracking Enhancer, Trackin Computer... and then, to be competitive with the rest of races DPS, should fit the Magnetic Stabilizer. It's either the master failing philosophy of Gallente or the master overpowered philosopy of Minmatar what makes this. And Amarr is the middle-term with large optimals and cap issues, that needs his pilots to have "a bit" of intelligence and strategy. Right now, would appreciate more a succesfull Gallente pirate than another one.
http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 23:31:00 -
[1033] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:I make auto-quote sent to all that people who say that blasters have high damage. I don't see where is that high damage... Phoenix Torp wrote:Mini toons are the best because they don't need a lot of support for weapons modules. Tempest can "waste" 3 slots in Gyroestabilizer and even with that win whatever. And can kite his enemy since is faster. Gallente would need Tracking Enhancer, Trackin Computer... and then, to be competitive with the rest of races DPS, should fit the Magnetic Stabilizer. It's either the master failing philosophy of Gallente or the master overpowered philosopy of Minmatar what makes this. And Amarr is the middle-term with large optimals and cap issues, that needs his pilots to have "a bit" of intelligence and strategy. Right now, would appreciate more a succesfull Gallente pirate than another one.
eft shows one thing,real gameplay shows how much hybrids suck.
+1 |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 23:45:00 -
[1034] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
I'm not going to continue debating your poor decision to use a hype for pve. A dominix or mega both cost less and do the job better.
You're wrong, a Mega isn't better than a Hype. That's a myth, go to the thread and you will see what I mean. The Domi is a drone-boat. It's great, but it's not a gun-boat. I'm talking about gun-boats. The problem is people don't fit thier Hypes correctly. Just go to the thread, you can debate it there. You also seem to think I don't recognize that there are better mission-ships out-there. I know there are, and I use them.
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:
It seems to me I was crystal clear. Take your ADHD medication and read exactly what I typed. I specifically mentioned tuning rails based on OTHER LONG-RANGE WEAPONS. Autocannons are not long-range. If you want to equate a high-dps railgun that hits between artillery and beam range as an auto-cannon you're free to do so, but it's makes you sound like you failed to read (again).
I read you post thouroughly. Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I didn't read it. Also the insults about me being ADHD are completely un-called for. It can be very difficult to understand exactly what people are trying to comunicate when dealing strictly in textual form. I try to be pretty clear when I post, but that doesn't mean people understand easily, I think you might be missunderstanding what I'm trying to say. I will try to rephrase:
I'm pretty-sure I understand your proposal just-fine
What you're proposing is just moving the "hybrid ammo dmg/range scale" down a few notches for rails.
So basically Uranium would have the same dmg profile as Anti currently does. Lead would have the same dmg profile as Uranium currently does. Tungsten same as Lead currently, etc... etc...
Anti would have lower range and higher damage than normal. Basically by doing this, you're forcing people to use higher-range ammo for the same effect as they used to get with Anti. The only thing that changes, is you would have more selection of ammos for shorter-range/higher-damage. So I could load Anti and have AC/Pulse damage profile (minus a little tracking), or load Uranium and have current Rail (with Anti) damage.
Once again, as I said before this isn't a bad fix, but you will still end-up with a dmg profile that treads all-over ACs and T2 Pulses when pilots choose to load Anti. (Which they will.)
I'm pretty-sure this would make rails OP for medium-range use, and still not-work for use at long-point range and beyond. Fit enough Tracking Enhancers/Computers, or Webs, and you will have a weapon that does more dmg than ACs and Pulses, and tracks well-enough to hit stuff without a super-high angular. For engagements at long-point range however, a faster ship would STILL be-able to burn in-close and out-damage you before you could pop them or burn away and completely dissengage. Rails are a kiting weapon, in-order to kite effectively, you have to be as-fast-as or faster than your opponent. Rails cannot be viable on a slow ship without a dedicated tackler to help them. If you have a dedicated tackler, it makes more sense to use Blasters most of the time. This is why nobody uses Rails. Giving them higher-damage potential at close-range is nice and-all but will probably cause some issues with them being OP.
Don't take-it personal that we're dissagreeing. Just because something seems like a good idea to you doesn't mean everyone else will agree right-away. Maybe having other points-of-view from other "dumb@sses" like me will help you to refine your idea. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 00:47:00 -
[1035] - Quote
Wow! Slow Down! I can barely keep-up. Take your time when you post about how dumb I am. You are making grave errors in you comprehension of my posts.
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote: I don't think you've actually LOOKED at an EFT graph lately. Do you actually know the optimal range of a medium rail-gun?? A 250mm Rail with anitmatter and L5 skills is 22km.
We were talking about your fail-hype, and I certainly hope you done fit med. raild on it too. You really should try reading better. Why would I post a graph and stats for Battlecruisers and Medium guns if I was talking about a Hype?!
I've said it before, a few times, I will say-it again. You can't fix large rails becaus the're not broken. Probing mechanics have made sniping obsolete.
I wouldn't fit a Hype for PVP with large rails. I don't fit-it with Mediums either, I can't seem to find anywhere in ANY of my posts where I said anything of the kind.
You specifically stated "Nobody with the first clue about med/large rails and their pvp applications thinks that the rail niche exists." See where you said "med" there? I posted that part about optimals and the graph for you, because you seem to think Med Rails are worthless in thier current-form. They have a VERY good dmg profile, the just lack the speedy-ships needed to dictate range properly.
As for my "fail-hype" I don't recal posting a Hype-fit anywhere on this thread. You can drop the bagging-on-the-Hype thing. It's not really related to this thread. If you feel like expaining to me how worthless the Hype is, link a new thread, or post-it in the thread I offered.Sydney Nelson wrote: Minmatar ships don't have a bonus for Hybrid dmg, optimal, rof, fall-off, etc. I would have thought that would be rather obvious. A Minmatar ship could fit them if they wanted, but they would do less dmg, range, etc. than a hybrid-bonused ship. There's nothing wrong with an un-bonused ship fitting different guns, Myrmidons do it all the time and fit ACs.
So your argument is, it'll **** up the game, but the game's already ****** up so who cares? Brilliant. That's not my argument at-all. Like I said, you need to slow-down and quit jumping to conclusions.
My argument is that, If a Minmatar ship fit Hybrids, it would get a speed-buff at the EXPENCE of not having the same damage, range, rof, fall-off, etc. It would be like how Myrmidons sometimes fit ACs. It's not really better, it's just different. When a Myrmidon pilot fits ACs on his ship, he is getting more cap-time and selectable dmg-type at the expence of range. It's a trade-off get-it?
A Minmatar ship could fit Hybrids and get his WTFPWNMOBILE speed advantage back, but he would be wasting all of his ship-bonuses, and the Hybrids wouldn't work to thier full-potential because his ship has no bonuses for THEM.Sydney Nelson wrote: I'm addressing exactly those points by giving the bonuses to the guns themselves and not the ships. Again, I'm just using Brutix/Cane because the're both gun-boats, one uses hybrids, the other uses projectiles. It's a pretty logical comparison by my account.
You're trying to cure the disease with band-aids and vap-o-rub. Not only have you begun and stuck to a poor premise, but you refuse to read and understand my arguments. I can't be sure why this is, but you need to start from square one, clean up your fallacious assumptions, or stop posting.
The premise isn't poor. Read through this thread, you will see people saying over and over and OVER again, that Hybrid ships need more speed or more agility. Just because it seems unusual to put a speed boost on a gun doesn't automatically make-it a "band-aid". The term "band-aid" is used to describe a temporary or incomplete fix. If this was done right, I would be neither.
I pretty-sure I understand your arguments fine. Your automatically assuming that everyone will just agree with-you, and if they don't agree then, they must not understand. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 01:08:00 -
[1036] - Quote
David Xavier wrote: The problem with your example Sydney is that using railguns is not a virtue, you use them for missions because you have no other choice if you want to have some range!
Railguns have to complement blasters just like how short and long range weapon systems of other races do, meaning they have to be useful and be able to project reliable damage from the range where blasters become useless.
In my opinion railgun "speciality" would be their extensive engagement envelope from ~28km to 100km, the current damage considering the +10% buff is about right, but improved tracking is needed.
Thankyou for explaining yourself clearly without attempting to sound smart by trying to insult me.
I understand EXACTLY what you're saying.
However; Saying Rails need to pick-up right where Blasters leave-off is an opinion, and not a fact. I see nothing wrong with having a small gap between the two.
Having said that: The gap that exists now is much smaller than you think, maybe even non-existant.
Let's get this out of the way right off the bat. Large rails aren't supposed to be-able to hit cruiser-sized ships orbiting up-close. (Artys DEFINATELY can't. Beams are the only-ones who might have a chance.) Mediums aren't supposed to do the same to frigs, etc. Agreed?
As for Large Rails hitting BS sized targets, and Mediums hitting Cruiser-sized etc. orbiting up-close... They already can. A large blaster can hit well out-to 15+km. A large rail has little trouble hitting things down-to 15km. The KEY to fitting Rails (for PVE primarily), is fitting at least 1 scripted Tracking Computer. By swapping the scripts, you can use large rails succefully from 15km - 75+km.
Not trying to be rude, I appreciate your position. The 10% buff is well-needed, I wouldn't mind some extra tracking either, but if you use TCs effectively you don't need-it. |
Motriek
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 01:53:00 -
[1037] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:It doesn't even come close to fitting, on either TQ or Sisi - and even if it did it would be about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.
The highest damage, not totally useless setup you can get involves Light Ion II's which, with current Sisi build, at least has a DCU II and tops out at 471 [gun] dps before overheating... but at 2.1km.
I'm pretty sure it will be close, but I don't have a point fitted on my test fit. The dev blog is currently quoting -1 CPU per turret, and -12% (rounded) PG.
If you incorporate the sisi changes to destroyers that remove the 25% ROF penalty, you should come up with the same overheated void numbers as mine. |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 01:57:00 -
[1038] - Quote
someone should lock this turd of a thread. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 05:45:00 -
[1039] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote:Dunmur wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote: Stuff Stuff LOL a rail brutix beating a ac cane now ive seen it all. Wait is that a pig flying over there... Slow down. Engage your mind. Think about what people post before making a conclusion. Why is it so LOL? Go ahead, answer the question... A Rail-Brutix could never kite an AC Cane because the AC Cane is so much faster, and more agile, that it makes it impossible for the Brutix to maintain range. There's the problem. Ok, so how do you fix it? Change rails? That would probably work, but the rails themselves aren't the REAL problem. The real problem is that the ship you're fitting them to isn't fast enough or agile enough to kite much of anything. So what's the REAL solution? Make rails viable by making the ships that fit them fast-enough or agile-enough to kite. Does that make sense? This is purely hypothetical of-course but... If each medium hybrid turret gave a 4.25% boost to speed, then a Rail-Brutix would have enough speed to kite an AC Cane, and a Blaster-Brutix would have enough speed to get into-range before it's too late (sometimes). An unusual fix? Yes. Viable? Looks like it to me. We're just brain-storming and discussing here, and I think this is worth discussing.
Just wondering if you also know that if your that fast and agile-enough to kite with rails you can also finaly catch and pin someone with blasters too right?
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 05:58:00 -
[1040] - Quote
David Xavier wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote:
Maybe you don't mission much, maybe you do, I don't know. Rail-range IS a virtue in PVE, I know because I'm "dumb" and missioned in a Rail Gun-boat for a long-time. There are a high percentage of L4 missions where the rats are at 65+km. Being able to do good dps at 65km helps quite a bit actually. If you can start to apply good dps as you get into range, your target will be halfway-gone by the time a shorter-range weapon would even start to do good dps. This saves time, it's also a good tactic to minimize incoming dps.
If you take-away rails' range, then they are useless compared to ACs. If you boost thier DPS to compensate, then they would be better than ACs. We don't want to clone ACs with Blasters OR Rails! Rails would work GREAT for PVP if you make the ships that use them faster. Simple. Would they be easily countered by Arty? Maybe, but that's the POINT. Rock, Paper, Scissors, remember? Large rails can't be fixed, because the're not broken. It's the probing mechanics that have made them useless.
The problem with your example Sydney is that using railguns is not a virtue, you use them for missions because you have no other choice if you want to have some range! Railguns have to complement blasters just like how short and long range weapon systems of other races do, meaning they have to be useful and be able to project reliable damage from the range where blasters become useless. In my opinion railgun "speciality" would be their extensive engagement envelope from ~28km to 100km, the current damage considering the +10% buff is about right, but improved tracking is needed.
I agree with what your saying now think of the new Tech 2 Javilin there not only removing the -25% tracking bounses but there replacing it with a +25% tracking bounses. Now if they do that rails just mite beable to pick up were blasters leave off. But I dont think a tracking boost for rails at this point is in order just right now till it gets in game and we can see how they do from a 20km to 100km. Ya I realy dont feel blasters even with null realy dont kick in till at least 20km but thats just how I feel about that.
As a totaly unrrelated side note under the same guidelines Beams would have to have there tracking nerfted into the ground with the range and dmg one gets on Tech 2 Pulses at least. But that is the only hole in your line of thinking that I see. |
|
Dunmur
Tempered Logic KRYSIS.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 06:03:00 -
[1041] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote:Dunmur wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote: Stuff Stuff LOL a rail brutix beating a ac cane now ive seen it all. Wait is that a pig flying over there... Slow down. Engage your mind. Think about what people post before making a conclusion. Why is it so LOL? Go ahead, answer the question... A Rail-Brutix could never kite an AC Cane because the AC Cane is so much faster, and more agile, that it makes it impossible for the Brutix to maintain range. There's the problem. Ok, so how do you fix it? Change rails? That would probably work, but the rails themselves aren't the REAL problem. The real problem is that the ship you're fitting them to isn't fast enough or agile enough to kite much of anything. So what's the REAL solution? Make rails viable by making the ships that fit them fast-enough or agile-enough to kite. Does that make sense? This is purely hypothetical of-course but... If each medium hybrid turret gave a 4.25% boost to speed, then a Rail-Brutix would have enough speed to kite an AC Cane, and a Blaster-Brutix would have enough speed to get into-range before it's too late (sometimes). An unusual fix? Yes. Viable? Looks like it to me. We're just brain-storming and discussing here, and I think this is worth discussing. Just wondering if you also know that if your that fast and agile-enough to kite with rails you can also finaly catch and pin someone with blasters too right?
OK i guess i have to say it again why use rails when you can use the much better arty or autocannons buffing the ship isnt going to make the gun any better
Edit: I wish people would read past posts because this "make the ships faster" is becoming a dead horse |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 06:08:00 -
[1042] - Quote
Dear Nimrod Nemesis,
A Hyperion with a full rack of 350mm Rails can in fact run Kin/Therm level 4's every bit as fast as the standard Tech 1 hulls of the Teir 1 and 2 Gallente BS line up and sum times it can run them faster then ether one.
Edit: Just to clear that up alittle bit. What I mean my standard Tech 1 hulls is not the Navy versions. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 06:18:00 -
[1043] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:
OK i guess i have to say it again why use rails when you can use the much better arty or autocannons buffing the ship isnt going to make the gun any better
Edit: I wish people would read past posts because this "make the ships faster" is becoming a dead horse
I would normaly agree with you but I dont think you read the post. It wisely suggest that the speed and aglity boost be placed on the Hybirds not the ship. So the real question is will Winmatars pick auto cannons for range and dmg selection or blaster/rails for more speed?
|
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 06:59:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Ahaha, the "make hybrids cause ships to go faster," suggestion is being repeated.
Now I know why CCP doesn't read the forums, jesus christ. |
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
560
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 09:19:00 -
[1045] - Quote
There is this place called the Sphere of Commitment. In this place of hell you are subjected to energy neutralizers, scramblers and stasis webifiers. This place, is extremely hard to escape. This place of pain and suffering is where Gallente blasters live. Their optimal range is smack in the middle of the sphere. It is the only short range high damage weapon platform that can not live outside of the sphere or it will do nothing for damage. Chances are, you took some damage getting to this place where your damage can be applied. Being scrammed and webbed means you will not be coasting out of the Sphere of Commitment anytime soon without dying.
I see some people say to give blasters better optimal range to fix them. To what extent? Even if it was double, you still would be in the sphere if you wanted to do any meaningful damage. So change to longer range ammo with blasters? OK, but then your damage will be pointless and why are you even there? So if the optimal was increased where Gallente blaster ships could apply antimatter damage and not be inside the sphere they would basically be something like auto cannons, except no damage selection and you burn cap shooting. At that point, you might as well just fit auto cannons and save yourself the trouble.
I see some people say increase the alpha. OK, but why would you go with blasters with artillery does the same job, with no cap usage and at incredible range, well outside the sphere? Again, you might as well just go with artillery.
So what about tracking increase you say? They are already getting an increase, but it really is not making it worth getting that close. Increase it more you say?? So then it will be a support murder machine. No thanks.
Different damage type selection? *sigh* Like missiles and projectile ammo? Why? That still wont fix them. Why would you go with blasters to pick damage type when missiles and projectiles do the same thing from the comfort of being outside the sphere?
There really is only one thing left. DPS. Yes they already have the best, but it is only by 7-10% better. Hardly worth getting into a tackled situation for such a tiny edge. Now some of you who do the solo thing or even very, very small skirmishes will blasters will swear they are great now. OK, but what about larger fights? Medium to large and extremely large?? Bottom line is they are horrible at those. No reason what so ever to take your 7-10% DPS advantage and try and chase down the enemy ships who are mostly faster, more agile and have been pissing damage all over your face the whole time while you try and get into optimal range to do any real damage.
The only choice really is to increase the DPS more. And by more I don't mean some **** poor 10% or some crap like that. I am talking upwards of 20-25%. Time to make it really worth getting into that sphere of hell. Time to make that sphere of hell be what the enemy calls being close to you when your ripping into them with blasters. I know some of you will cry out and say things like, "But, but the Vindicator will become a monster!" Yeah well the Nightmare and Machariel are monsters in their own right so why not the Vindicator?
Now in order to not do the cheap and easy way out and give them larger alpha strikes, the way to go is dramatically reduce ammo size and cost evenly. Then increase the rate of fire of blasters a lot. Adjust the base damage and rof till you wind up with 20-25% DPS.
Just please do not turn blasters into some wannabe version of something we already have on another weapon platform. Blasters is all about getting in their face and doing large amounts of DPS and melting them. Not insanely over the top tracking or long optimal range or really good falloff or any of that.
Blasters is MASSIVE damage per second!
|
Dunmur
Tempered Logic KRYSIS.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 12:10:00 -
[1046] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:There is this place called the Sphere of Commitment. In this place of hell you are subjected to energy neutralizers, scramblers and stasis webifiers. This place, is extremely hard to escape. This place of pain and suffering is where Gallente blasters live. Their optimal range is smack in the middle of the sphere. It is the only short range high damage weapon platform that can not live outside of the sphere or it will do nothing for damage. Chances are, you took some damage getting to this place where your damage can be applied. Being scrammed and webbed means you will not be coasting out of the Sphere of Commitment anytime soon without dying.
I see some people say to give blasters better optimal range to fix them. To what extent? Even if it was double, you still would be in the sphere if you wanted to do any meaningful damage. So change to longer range ammo with blasters? OK, but then your damage will be pointless and why are you even there? So if the optimal was increased where Gallente blaster ships could apply antimatter damage and not be inside the sphere they would basically be something like auto cannons, except no damage selection and you burn cap shooting. At that point, you might as well just fit auto cannons and save yourself the trouble.
I see some people say increase the alpha. OK, but why would you go with blasters with artillery does the same job, with no cap usage and at incredible range, well outside the sphere? Again, you might as well just go with artillery.
So what about tracking increase you say? They are already getting an increase, but it really is not making it worth getting that close. Increase it more you say?? So then it will be a support murder machine. No thanks.
Different damage type selection? *sigh* Like missiles and projectile ammo? Why? That still wont fix them. Why would you go with blasters to pick damage type when missiles and projectiles do the same thing from the comfort of being outside the sphere?
There really is only one thing left. DPS. Yes they already have the best, but it is only by 7-10% better. Hardly worth getting into a tackled situation for such a tiny edge. Now some of you who do the solo thing or even very, very small skirmishes will blasters will swear they are great now. OK, but what about larger fights? Medium to large and extremely large?? Bottom line is they are horrible at those. No reason what so ever to take your 7-10% DPS advantage and try and chase down the enemy ships who are mostly faster, more agile and have been pissing damage all over your face the whole time while you try and get into optimal range to do any real damage.
The only choice really is to increase the DPS more. And by more I don't mean some **** poor 10% or some crap like that. I am talking upwards of 20-25%. Time to make it really worth getting into that sphere of hell. Time to make that sphere of hell be what the enemy calls being close to you when your ripping into them with blasters. I know some of you will cry out and say things like, "But, but the Vindicator will become a monster!" Yeah well the Nightmare and Machariel are monsters in their own right so why not the Vindicator?
Now in order to not do the cheap and easy way out and give them larger alpha strikes, the way to go is dramatically reduce ammo size and cost evenly. Then increase the rate of fire of blasters a lot. Adjust the base damage and rof till you wind up with 20-25% DPS.
Just please do not turn blasters into some wannabe version of something we already have on another weapon platform. Blasters is all about getting in their face and doing large amounts of DPS and melting them. Not insanely over the top tracking or long optimal range or really good falloff or any of that.
Blasters is MASSIVE damage per second!
No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices.
For this buff to work you would need at least 3/4 the range of the other gun types instead of 1/4.
For example
+30% Damage +30% Falloff + optimal
Now 30% may seem like alot of damage BUT when you include the fact that its only kin+thermal and still uses cap it seems balanced
30% more range would make it still shorter than autos and since gallente are still the slow turds and minmatar are still the fastest it would still be possible to kite them but the window would be smaller. The extra range is necessary to give gallente some added utility in fights where the enemy might be spread out.
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
394
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:20:00 -
[1047] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices.
boosting blaster ships mobility would solve this issue. don't forget that the blaster issues are not from the guns alone.
[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:40:00 -
[1048] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices. boosting blaster ships mobility would solve this issue. don't forget that the blaster issues are not from the guns alone.
+ 1 |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 13:58:00 -
[1049] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices. boosting blaster ships mobility would solve this issue. don't forget that the blaster issues are not from the guns alone. so my eagle will be able to chase down a zealot? |
Opertone
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
116
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:25:00 -
[1050] - Quote
Please, revise RAILGUNS, rails need more performance...
We, Caldari want to have worthy line-up of railgun ships.
We need damage, we need weapon that can break any tank at some cost. Can you increase CAP requirements for tech 2 ammo, but give it a damage bonus, instead of optimal. Rails could fire slower, but hit harder than blasters. Tweak dmg mod and ROF of larger size rail, make smaller size rails (i mean large hybrid, smaller caliber 250, 350, 425mm) fire faster, larger guns fire harder and reload slower. |
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
394
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:31:00 -
[1051] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Grimpak wrote:Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices. boosting blaster ships mobility would solve this issue. don't forget that the blaster issues are not from the guns alone. so my eagle will be able to chase down a zealot?
I said blaster ships, not hybrid ships in general.
buuuut, maybe caldari gunboats could get a bit more of mobility too... [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 14:35:00 -
[1052] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Naomi Knight wrote:Grimpak wrote:Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices. boosting blaster ships mobility would solve this issue. don't forget that the blaster issues are not from the guns alone. so my eagle will be able to chase down a zealot? I said blaster ships, not hybrid ships in general. buuuut, maybe caldari gunboats could get a bit more of mobility too... hmm why isnt it a blaster ship especially as it will have only optimal? it can fit blasters get bonus for them too so it is a blaster ship:P just like zealot can use both beams and pulses |
Tania Russ
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:00:00 -
[1053] - Quote
Tried to read as much of this threadnaught as I could... Sorry if reiterating.
Having been flying blaster boats for years, and as well having tried to use rails in PvP. Awful.
Here are the biggest issues for Gallente ships.
1. Too slow. 2. Not very agile. 3. Not enough tank if they are going to be slow and not agile. 4. Hybrids are pretty much fail across the board. 5. Drones not good enough.
Blasters: 1. Not enough damage output 2. Not enough range 3. Not enough tracking
Rails: 1. Not enough damage output 2. Not enough tracking
For a drone-centric society, Gallente are as well awful nerfed in the drone department. Gallente ships should be bristling with drones and have major drone bonuses, more than they currently have. Gallente ships should make drones faster, hit harder, and they should make them tougher. They do to some extent now but not nearly enough.
How do we fix these issues?
1. Give gallente ships a webber range bonus 2. Make them more agile 3. Give blasters a range bonus - even small blasters should hit effectively out to 10 km. Every other small weapon does. 4. Tank bonuses if they are going to be slow. Major tank bonuses. 5. More drones, more drone CPU, more drone buffs 6. Make rails do more DPS than blasters but unable to hit at close range. We are talking about higher technology weapons here supposedly. Why are they so fail? If not this then at least more tracking for rails and more DPS for rails.
Not saying all of these must be adopted, but a combination of these ideas must be adopted. It's illogical to think that ships as badly nerfed as Gallente have been would even be built in our "future culture" of EVE as is. They suck too bad. |
Dunmur
Tempered Logic KRYSIS.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 15:55:00 -
[1054] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices. boosting blaster ships mobility would solve this issue. don't forget that the blaster issues are not from the guns alone.
Once again if you buff the ships nothing will change except instead of a slow gallente boat with autocannons you will have a faster gallente boat with autocannons. |
Kraden Kidtrell
Tempered Logic KRYSIS.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:04:00 -
[1055] - Quote
I'm a Gallente Pilot, and I find Rails to be kinda disappointing, but I guess I have to ask, even if my ship goes faster, why would I want to use Rails, if Artillery is so much better and have less draw back on cap and such? From what I've seen, though the ship itself may need some love, the Gallente weapons need alot more.... |
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
560
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 16:36:00 -
[1056] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices.
For this buff to work you would need at least 3/4 the range of the other gun types instead of 1/4.
For example
+30% Damage +30% Falloff + optimal
Now 30% may seem like alot of damage BUT when you include the fact that its only kin+thermal and still uses cap it seems balanced
30% more range would make it still shorter than autos and since gallente are still the slow turds and minmatar are still the fastest it would still be possible to kite them but the window would be smaller. The extra range is necessary to give gallente some added utility in fights where the enemy might be spread out.
Like I said in my post. If your going to be outside the sphere; you might as well role with a different weapon platform that will do the job better.
|
Dunmur
Tempered Logic KRYSIS.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:08:00 -
[1057] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices.
For this buff to work you would need at least 3/4 the range of the other gun types instead of 1/4.
For example
+30% Damage +30% Falloff + optimal
Now 30% may seem like alot of damage BUT when you include the fact that its only kin+thermal and still uses cap it seems balanced
30% more range would make it still shorter than autos and since gallente are still the slow turds and minmatar are still the fastest it would still be possible to kite them but the window would be smaller. The extra range is necessary to give gallente some added utility in fights where the enemy might be spread out.
Like I said in my post. If your going to be outside the sphere; you might as well role with a different weapon platform that will do the job better.
If just a dps buff makes blasters viable ill eat my hat. They need utility/versatility otherwise they will continue being the race that just kills one or two targets then spends the next 5 -10 mins moving to the next target. Travel time will ruin any dps advantage you have if you survive long enough to even get in range.
This is of coarse only going to matter in medium to large battles So if you want them to only have a spot in solo and very small group pvp, a dps buff is fine. |
Yaturi
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 17:14:00 -
[1058] - Quote
I would like to see a break from the thermal kenetic bond hybrids have. Why not 25% of each damage type. Plasma could be considered explosive and electromagnetic in nature. Couldn't it?
Hybrids are suppose to be higher technology. Why not uniform damage distribution |
Angeliena
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:02:00 -
[1059] - Quote
Please increase base t2 webs to 75%. |
bornaa
GRiD.
107
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 18:16:00 -
[1060] - Quote
from Test Server Feedback sub-forum:
CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
|
|
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 19:23:00 -
[1061] - Quote
bornaa wrote:from Test Server Feedback sub-forum: CCP Tallest wrote:Perdition64 wrote:CCP Tallest, any plans on further developing the hybrid changes before patch day so they can actually make an impact come Winter? Yes indeed. I was just about to post an update. * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) ..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
a) Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. there is no better ammo than faction antimatter b) Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges). still dont know how is this gonna help c) Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets). improvement,but irrelevant d) Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) good improvment |
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 20:42:00 -
[1062] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote: * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets)
..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
These baby-steps are maddening. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:36:00 -
[1063] - Quote
indicast wrote: a) Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. there is no better ammo than faction antimatter b) Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges). still dont know how is this gonna help c) Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets). improvement,but irrelevant d) Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) good improvment
a) hope they will do something about T2 blaster long range ammo -if they don't then I'll hope the ship will have tools to catch prey and hold it, like enough med slots or speed
b)this will help when you use cap booster charges, actually this is a huge improuvement
c) well meh the +5% but, let's not cry too much if this 5% is on top of the already 10% on SISI. We're arround the numbers a lot of players already stated in different threads if it's total 15%, coupled with tracking increase this might be the top solution for blasters dmg and application issues.
Now this doesn't help the ship get in range fast enough or be fast enough. Let's wait for ship tweaks and if they're good after this, might well be enough i'd say.
d) I wouldn't say good, I'd say baby step. Now if those 5% are on top of the current 10% (I guess) it's not bad, depends if the mid/long range ammo will receive some bonus has well like projectiles ammo. More base ROF also would be nice, like 5 to 7.5% on top of current stats.
Somehow I have the feeling this could be it for hybrids, with ship tweaks that are needed on top of these to actually make them competitive, then we will not be talking about gallente, we will be talking about gallente AND caldari.
Edit: This is where the whole difference will be set between caldari and gallente ship bonus, both must be competitive and attractive with different uses, so ships bonus work will be a lot harder I guess. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 22:41:00 -
[1064] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:CCP Tallest wrote: * Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. * Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges) * Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets) * Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets)
..also, Hail falloff penalty will be 25%, not 0%.
These baby-steps are maddening.
the 5 sec reload time is nice:P
|
Julius Foederatus
Hyper-Nova
66
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:35:00 -
[1065] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:indicast wrote: a) Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. there is no better ammo than faction antimatter b) Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges). still dont know how is this gonna help c) Blaster damage +5% (except XL turrets). improvement,but irrelevant d) Railgun tracking +5% (except XL turrets) good improvment
a) hope they will do something about T2 blaster long range ammo -if they don't then I'll hope the ship will have tools to catch prey and hold it, like enough med slots or speed b)this will help when you use cap booster charges, actually this is a huge improuvement c) well meh the +5% but, let's not cry too much if this 5% is on top of the already 10% on SISI. We're arround the numbers a lot of players already stated in different threads if it's total 15%, coupled with tracking increase this might be the top solution for blasters dmg and application issues. Now this doesn't help the ship get in range fast enough or be fast enough. Let's wait for ship tweaks and if they're good after this, might well be enough i'd say. d) I wouldn't say good, I'd say baby step. Now if those 5% are on top of the current 10% (I guess) it's not bad, depends if the mid/long range ammo will receive some bonus has well like projectiles ammo. More base ROF also would be nice, like 5 to 7.5% on top of current stats. Somehow I have the feeling this could be it for hybrids, with ship tweaks that are needed on top of these to actually make them competitive, then we will not be talking about gallente, we will be talking about gallente AND caldari. Edit: This is where the whole difference will be set between caldari and gallente ship bonus, both must be competitive and attractive with different uses, so ships bonus work will be a lot harder I guess.
The 10% dmg boost was only for rails, so that's only 5% more damage on blasters, which is not near enough to make up for the **** range.
|
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:41:00 -
[1066] - Quote
YES 5 second reload time. These improvements aren't gonna fix hybrid boats as a whole, but they'll be a great little boost for the ones that are already flyable. I'm still crossing my fingers for improvements to Null and Void, which would really let us take advantage of the quicker reload. |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 01:08:00 -
[1067] - Quote
So I put together a post to contribute to a previous discussion on this topic. Things I thought were justified given the changes to pulse lasers and auto-cannon. Changes I thought were most likely to happen. Mind you, there's nothing regarding long range hybrid turret (rail-gun). There is nothing wrong with rails. Beams and Artillery are just better and artillery has also made beam lasers outmoded (at-least, based on current popular doctrines). The most important suggestion was a increase to stasis webifier range. Which would help alot of pilots that have difficulty immobilizing targets. There should also be a increase in scrambler range in retrospect.
"Decided to contribute instead of just critique ....
Proxyyyy's Changes (slight increases that will increase the close range pvp viabilty of blasters)
Blaster Turret (excluding capital turret) - Minus 20% - Hybrid Turret Activation
15% increase - Optimal 30% increase - Falloff 10% Increase - Tracking
Minus 15% - Signature Resolution
12.5% increase - Damage Modifier Minus 11% - Duration
Gallente Battleship/Cruisers/Destroyers/Frigates (T2) (Base, Blanket Increase) - Minus 10% - CPU
10% Increase - PowerGrid
20% increase - Structure
Base inertia or mass should be modified in some way as to increase agility of all gallente ships. Making gallente ships the most agile (faster align time and acceleration (turn rate etc)) bla bla bal.
Stasis Webifier 2 - I also think stasis webifier 2 Optimal, should Increase from 10,000m - 12,500 (30% increase in range, when overloading ofc). This is a broad boost to armor ships effectiveness, when engaging ships with higher velocity (solo). Increasing the margin for error for a Cynabal for example.
Heat/Thermodynamics = tracking increase for all turrets (just makes sense) - Another idea I had was a change or addendum to the current heat mechanics. Over Heated turrets should also have a increase in tracking along with increasing turret rate of fire. Currently that's not the case." |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 01:24:00 -
[1068] - Quote
My suggested changes will in no way change the current dynamics, which is why I introduced the stasis webifier changes.
Mind you, Gallente will still be useless for most pilots in-game. So, when I think about ways to change that. The only thing I can think of is a increase in damage projection. Anything other than this would fall short of making Gallente useful for the majority of pilots. Most of whom only engage other pilots within a fleet setting.
The only other option is a massive increase in damage. Which seems to ludicrous, in my opinion (things would be broken). So, since I know a large damage increase will never happen. Go for the only other thing that will increase Gallente ships viabilities in-game.
Slight changes are all that is needed for most pilots who solo pvp with gallente ships. The majority of the player base will quickly find slight changes inadequate.
Only a fool would not have seen this coming. The player base had a chance to push for something significant (projected damage) and has failed to take advantage. Apparently, because auto-cannons are the poor mans laser. So, no one wants blasters to be the r3tard3d mans auto-cannons. Funny thing is. The poor mans laser turned out to be a HUGE boost to Minmatar. Why not do the same with Gallente?
Anyway, I like the changes that CCP has introduced. Most ships above destroyers will remain the same (with the exception of blaster-Rokh, buffer/blaster Ferox). While Gallente and Caldari frigates have been boosted in a significant way to compensate for the changes to small auto-cannons (rail-Taranis, rail-Comet, rail-Tristan (thing got boosted twice), blaster-Daredevil, Catalyst, rail-Cormorant, rail-merlin (this thing also got boosted twice), blaster-Harpy). Changes that were not needed at all.
Good stuff CCP! |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
394
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:44:00 -
[1069] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Grimpak wrote:Dunmur wrote:No matter how much you buff damge that kinda range is far too limiting. You warp to 0 land on a ship kill it then what? Most fleets are far too spread out for this mindset to be effective and since you are the slowest ship you really have very limited choices. boosting blaster ships mobility would solve this issue. don't forget that the blaster issues are not from the guns alone. Once again if you buff the ships nothing will change except instead of a slow gallente boat with autocannons you will have a faster gallente boat with autocannons.
blaster issues are compounded by 3 problems:
problem 1: they don't do enough damage for their extremely short range problem 2: blaster ships are too slow for the ranges they operate problem 3: besides 1 or 2 rare cases (nano shield hyperion), the best tank that maximizes your cap available for the mandatory mwd and weapon consumption also hampers their mobility even further.
so, how you fix the problems?
Fixes for problem 1: A) either make them AC's Mk. II (boost range) or B) give them a massive damage boost and cut range accordingly (best option would be to cut enough range so that L blasters get outdamaged at 12-14km, and get piffle damage beyond the 15km. from this you can apply a similar fix to M, altho with shorter ranges).
A) doesn't require any further fixes, but it's not desireable since besides homogenizing the entire short range lineup, matari ships are still more mobile and can deal more types of damage. B) requires that problem 2 is fixed, and this is the crux of the problem, since that means to make blaster ships more mobile than matari ships.
Fixing problem 3 is much more complicated since armour rigs and plates are also the domain of amarr, and that means that fixing these mods for galente also means an indirect boost to amarr.
so, presented by these problems, we are confronted by 3 ways to fix them 1 - Fixing problem A the AC way (bleh) 2 - Fixing problem A and B the damage + higher mobility way (community divided) 3 - complete removal of hybrids from the game, SP refunded and caldari and galente re-focus on missiles and drones respectively.
in all honesty, as time goes by, I'm inclined further and further for the removal option since that will solve this issue for good, and I can finally stop imaging myself doing bull rushes in a deimos and delivering pain on someone's face. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Vilgan Mazran
Aperture Harmonics K162
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:59:00 -
[1070] - Quote
Changes seem to be going in the right direction. I'm still a bit confused as to what role rails are best designed to fill. I personally think the medium and large blasters need another 5-10% boost in dps beyond the latest listed changes. I really don't think small blasters need any further boosts without some time on tranquility though, the taranis is looking pretty uber already. |
|
Dunmur
Tempered Logic KRYSIS.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 03:52:00 -
[1071] - Quote
Vilgan Mazran wrote:Changes seem to be going in the right direction. I'm still a bit confused as to what role rails are best designed to fill. I personally think the medium and large blasters need another 5-10% boost in dps beyond the latest listed changes. I really don't think small blasters need any further boosts without some time on tranquility though, the taranis is looking pretty uber already.
lol the taranis was already good. These changes wont effect the major blaster platforms much, lets hope they are just the start. |
pashared
Harbingers of Khaos Cant Be Arzed
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 08:42:00 -
[1072] - Quote
I dunno why we insist on keeping this short range crux. we have lots of ammo for hybrids, most of them pretty much use less. why not use these to influance the effect we want in blasters.
iron Tungsten irdiuim lead ---------------------------------------------------blaster line thorium Uranium plutonium antimatter
think of ammo as fuel types, only some fuel types can create the energy needed for full blaster "reaction" the other ammos are used to control Plasma Confinement by stronger Magnetic Fields, which allow for much longer range but lack a true blaster reaction. |
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
493
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 10:34:00 -
[1073] - Quote
indicast wrote: a) Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. there is no better ammo than faction antimatter b) Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges). still dont know how is this gonna help
a) Neutrons with Null L are perfectly competitive with 800mm ACs out to 25-30km, before tracking enhancers. With the reduced reload time, it's feasible to fight with null and switch ammo when you get in range. Medium blasters need some love, tho. b) Hybrid ammo was twice as large as projectile ammo, with similar ROF (or higher with rails), hybrid boats tend to carry cap boosters. Good for long engagements. What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644 |
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 11:04:00 -
[1074] - Quote
i have an ideea how to improve a gallente ship at least
deimos has 1 extra non turret/launcher high slot that is almost useless how about remove it and add a medium slot for a web or anything else that actualy helps. |
Dunmur
Tempered Logic KRYSIS.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 13:02:00 -
[1075] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:indicast wrote: a) Hybrid turret reload time will be 5 seconds. there is no better ammo than faction antimatter b) Hybrid ammo will be 50% smaller (and turret capacity reduced to keep same number of charges). still dont know how is this gonna help
a) Neutrons with Null L are perfectly competitive with 800mm ACs out to 25-30km, before tracking enhancers. With the reduced reload time, it's feasible to fight with null and switch ammo when you get in range. Medium blasters need some love, tho. b) Hybrid ammo was twice as large as projectile ammo, with similar ROF (or higher with rails), hybrid boats tend to carry cap boosters. Good for long engagements.
Its competitive until they load barrage ammo then its not even close |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 13:09:00 -
[1076] - Quote
Grimpak wrote: problem 3: besides 1 or 2 rare cases (nano shield hyperion), the best tank that maximizes your cap available for the mandatory mwd and weapon consumption also hampers their mobility even further.
Fixing problem 3 is much more complicated since armour rigs and plates are also the domain of amarr, and that means that fixing these mods for galente also means an indirect boost to amarr.
Make the boosts only for Gallente Ships..problem solved and once more sets the Gallente apart from the herd. TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
Bhaal Chinnian
Hedion University Amarr Empire
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 13:24:00 -
[1077] - Quote
Ok this has probably been brought up before but why not have all of that shiny faction stuffsz actually mean something when fit to a ship of it's faction?
In regards to Gallente: *** Make the 100mn Fed Navy ABs able to fit on BC and above. These ABs offer NO AGILITY when fit on a strategic cruiser or BC and thus would be perfect to solve the Gallente speed problem to keep range without encroaching on Minnie agility.
***Apply the Damage bonus only to the Fed Navy mag stabs and only apply it to Gallente BC and above, else default==1.125dam,10%rof
and so on and so on.
Ever notice those FactionModifiers in EFT? Maybe some dev, somewhere, a loooong time ago was waay ahead of me
TESTES..TESTES..1...2..........3? |
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 13:34:00 -
[1078] - Quote
I've been thinking, hybrids, need their own piece, but one that will not turn them in ac, not lasers.
Maybe make it a mode of, say 10 seconds, maybe more, when they will not shoot bang! In one cycle. A bang-bang! Two or three shots. And their line of fire will increase, depending on the type of guns (small, medium, large) That is, the queue as a assault rifle. With a break of 20-30 seconds. When you use this function you can not. For example:
1) Small blasters Rail - a series of 2 shots per cycle, distance of the shot, does not increase (there are so okay with it, as last amended), break 30 seconds.
2) Medium blasters - a series of 2 shots per cycle, a distance shot +100% (this is not a lot of antimatter in the middle blaster shoots only ~ 7 km. Will be ~ 14 km) break 30 seconds. 2a) Average Rail - 10s, a series of 3 shots, distance shots +50%. (With these two types of hybrids, very bad, they need a push like this to be useful) break 30 seconds.
3) Large blasters - a series of 2 shots per cycle, a distance shot +20%. 3a) Large Rail - a series of 3 shots per cycle, not a shot distance. break 30 seconds.
This feature can provide a hybrid, as well as for Galento for Caldari. Do not turn them into ac or lasers.
And at the same time, meet people, they will be the "ultra-damag" and will be the distance, but it will not be superior over other types of weapons
What do you think? |
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
493
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 13:42:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Jack Dant wrote: a) Neutrons with Null L are perfectly competitive with 800mm ACs out to 25-30km, before tracking enhancers. With the reduced reload time, it's feasible to fight with null and switch ammo when you get in range. Medium blasters need some love, tho.
Its competitive until they load barrage ammo then its not even close
Barrage moves the cross over point to 20km. In practice, most AC boats will use two slots for TEs, which increases the range considerably. And makes barrage useless compared to faction inside point range.
Theorycrafting here, but with the lessened cap use and increased tracking, a mega might reasonably drop cap booster and/or web for tracking computers. That would let it match tempest/mael performance inside warp disruptor range. While retaining the option to use high damage ammo at close range with just 5s swap time. What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644 |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
394
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:13:00 -
[1080] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:That would let it match tempest/mael performance inside warp disruptor range. While retaining the option to use high damage ammo at close range with just 5s swap time.
there you go, you just exposed the reason why more is needed to be done to blasters and their hulls. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
|
Tania Russ
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:45:00 -
[1081] - Quote
Here's a thought, apologize if this has already been considered...
Hybrids tend to be looked down upon because they are clearly ineffective in comparison to other weapons types.
Maybe the only fix is a radical change to the platform overall.
Here's what I suggest: no more blasters or rails, but 1 weapon that bhaves as either a blaster or a rail, depending on ammunition.
So for close range encounters, your new hybrid weapon can fit say, Faction AM and blast the hell out of someone at close range. They try to kite, you switch over to longer range ammo, and the same weapon behaves like a rail.
This has two advantages. One, the hybrid platform now has interesting possiblities for both PvE and PvP. Two, the problem of obsolescence is dealt with as the advantages of this adaptability would offset disadvantages like lower tracking speed, lower damage, etc.
What do you think? |
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
493
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 14:49:00 -
[1082] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Jack Dant wrote:That would let it match tempest/mael performance inside warp disruptor range. While retaining the option to use high damage ammo at close range with just 5s swap time. there you go, you just exposed the reason why more is needed to be done to blasters and their hulls.
I don't follow.
If blasters are as good as ACs inside long point range (28km), and better inside web/scram range (11km), then they are balanced against each other, no? What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644 |
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:00:00 -
[1083] - Quote
.[/quote]so, presented by these problems, we are confronted by 3 ways to fix them 1 - Fixing problem A the AC way (bleh) 2 - Fixing problem A and B the damage + higher mobility way (community divided) 3 - complete removal of hybrids from the game, SP refunded and caldari and galente re-focus on missiles and drones respectively.
in all honesty, as time goes by, I'm inclined further and further for the removal option since that will solve this issue for good, and I can finally stop imaging myself doing bull rushes in a deimos and delivering pain on someone's face.[/quote]
they cant because they break originality of each races bonus,so yeah gallente should be removed is nothing can be done to make them at a similar level |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:13:00 -
[1084] - Quote
Well In gallente description from DUST site is nothing about blasters :) check this out.
But in other side drones are very hard in PVP etc...
Champions of liberty and fierce guardians of the human spirit, the Gallente Federation is the only true democracy in New Eden. Some of the most progressive leaders, scientists, and businessmen of the era have emerged from its diverse peoples. Pioneers of artificial intelligence, the Federation once relied almost entirely on drone fleets to defend its beliefs and borders. But the limitations of this technology and the lack of a human elementGÇöboth in terms of a military strategy, and as a means of spreading influenceGÇö eventually reached a critical point. Today, Gallentean starships are manned by some of the bravest men and women of New Eden.
Well they are the bravest coz they are flying not armed ships in very raw world :)
|
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:24:00 -
[1085] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:Well In gallente description from DUST site is nothing about blasters :) check this out.
But in other side drones are very hard in PVP etc...
Champions of liberty and fierce guardians of the human spirit, the Gallente Federation is the only true democracy in New Eden. Some of the most progressive leaders, scientists, and businessmen of the era have emerged from its diverse peoples. Pioneers of artificial intelligence, the Federation once relied almost entirely on drone fleets to defend its beliefs and borders. But the limitations of this technology and the lack of a human elementGÇöboth in terms of a military strategy, and as a means of spreading influenceGÇö eventually reached a critical point. Today, Gallentean starships are manned by some of the bravest men and women of New Eden.
Well they are the bravest coz they are flying not armed ships in very raw world :)
There will be always a need for miners and victims.
|
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:25:00 -
[1086] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote:Well In gallente description from DUST site is nothing about blasters :) check this out.
But in other side drones are very hard in PVP etc...
Champions of liberty and fierce guardians of the human spirit, the Gallente Federation is the only true democracy in New Eden. Some of the most progressive leaders, scientists, and businessmen of the era have emerged from its diverse peoples. Pioneers of artificial intelligence, the Federation once relied almost entirely on drone fleets to defend its beliefs and borders. But the limitations of this technology and the lack of a human elementGÇöboth in terms of a military strategy, and as a means of spreading influenceGÇö eventually reached a critical point. Today, Gallentean starships are manned by some of the bravest men and women of New Eden.
Well they are the bravest coz they are flying not armed ships in very raw world :)
There will be always a need for miners and victims.
Amarr, Minmatar and Caldari ships also are destroyed sometimes XD http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:31:00 -
[1087] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote: Amarr, Minmatar and Caldari ships also are destroyed sometimes XD
only when there is no gall toons around thats why i like them when they are in fleet, they gimme hp buffer :P |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:40:00 -
[1088] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Phoenix Torp wrote: Amarr, Minmatar and Caldari ships also are destroyed sometimes XD
only where there is no gall toons around thats why i like them when they are in fleet, they gimme hp buffer :P
In fleet there is Arazu or Lachesis or taranis - gals are the best tacklers. Lachesis and Arazu will be even better after this patch. But this is all what we can see in fleets heh so if you are gallente this is the only option.
On Capital ship lvl gals are the best. Thanatos, Nyx are very very :) Moros is ok.
Problem is in HAC's and BC's and this lvl need to be boosted. Brutix is sucker Myrm is very Good with AC's :)
|
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 15:51:00 -
[1089] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote: Problem is in HAC's and BC's and this lvl need to be boosted. Brutix is sucker Myrm is very Good with AC's :)
Don't forget BS. I haven't got Gallente BS to V for nothing... http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:09:00 -
[1090] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote: Problem is in HAC's and BC's and this lvl need to be boosted. Brutix is sucker Myrm is very Good with AC's :)
Don't forget BS. I haven't got Gallente BS to V for nothing...
I think the biggest buff Gallente BS could get would be making the domi look cooler. Then people would actually fly it and realize it's one of the best T1 BS hulls in the game. Certainly on par with the phoon for cost-effectiveness. |
|
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:21:00 -
[1091] - Quote
Lekgoa wrote:Phoenix Torp wrote:Keen Fallsword wrote: Problem is in HAC's and BC's and this lvl need to be boosted. Brutix is sucker Myrm is very Good with AC's :)
Don't forget BS. I haven't got Gallente BS to V for nothing... I think the biggest buff Gallente BS could get would be making the domi look cooler. Then people would actually fly it and realize it's one of the best T1 BS hulls in the game. Certainly on par with the phoon for cost-effectiveness.
Dominix is a suicidal ship. Megathron could be it (think it doesn't have tank bonuses), but his aided-DPS bonuses do it a nothing-or-all ship (so an all-DPS ship). It's normal that the best skilled pilot can think it's a good ship, but it's easy to destroy it. Another matter is his utility in L4 with his cost... http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:33:00 -
[1092] - Quote
The domi is certainly the best T1 PvE ship, but I was talking more about PvP. It can function as a dual web mega with better damage projection or a 475dps/161k ehp curse or guardian, and if you get 3 hospital domis with cap transfers good luck breaking whatever it is they're repping. That being said, I fly solo or in small gangs and rarely see over 40 ships in an engagement. I know the Gallente BS line blows for bigger fleet fights. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:36:00 -
[1093] - Quote
Lekgoa wrote:The domi is certainly the best T1 PvE ship, but I was talking more about PvP. It can function as a dual web mega with better damage projection or a 475dps/161k ehp curse or guardian, and if you get 3 hospital domis with cap transfers good luck breaking whatever it is they're repping. That being said, I fly solo or in small gangs and rarely see over 40 ships in an engagement. I know the Gallente BS line blows for bigger fleet fights.
You haven't seen yet what a flacon/damp arazu coupled with SB or HAC can do to solo ships, and wallente actually are just loot pinatas
Low sec is perfect for this kind of tactic. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:50:00 -
[1094] - Quote
Dunmur wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote:Dunmur wrote: LOL a rail brutix beating a ac cane now ive seen it all.
Wait is that a pig flying over there...
Stuff about a viable rail-kiter... This is purely hypothetical of-course but... If each medium hybrid turret gave a 4.25% boost to speed, then a Rail-Brutix would have enough speed to kite an AC Cane, and a Blaster-Brutix would have enough speed to get into-range before it's too late (sometimes). An unusual fix? Yes. Viable? Looks like it to me. We're just brain-storming and discussing here, and I think this is worth discussing. Just wondering if you also know that if your that fast and agile-enough to kite with rails you can also finaly catch and pin someone with blasters too right? OK i guess i have to say it again why use rails when you can use the much better arty or autocannons buffing the ship isnt going to make the gun any better Edit: I wish people would read past posts because this "make the ships faster" is becoming a dead horse
Read my post again. The original is on pg.50 thread #989
I suggested adding a speed bonus to the GUNS not the ships.
If fitting hybrids made your ship faster, then the speed/agility problems that plague Blasterboats AND Railships would be reduced greatly. If you cause the GUNS to buff the speed, then hybrid ships would still be slow with ACs or arty or lasers fit.
As for (med) rails, if they gave a speed bonus to the ships that fit them, then they would be a very viable kiter for that "middle ground" between ACs and Arty. ACs have better tracking and more dmg at short-range, Artys have more alpha and better range, but worse tracking.
IMO rails aren't broken, it's the ships that fit them that can't maintain-range vs an AC ship, or close-range on a Arty ship. Combined with the up-coming 10% dmg boost to rails, and supposedly there will be a slight trackin-boost, this should make Rails a useful PVP tool.
Obviously, for each fit, their should be a counter, so for above said engagements, chances should be as close to 50/50 as possible. |
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
493
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 20:17:00 -
[1095] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:You haven't seen yet what a flacon/damp arazu coupled with SB or HAC can do to solo ships, and wallente actually are just loot pinatas Low sec is perfect for this kind of tactic. Because recons and bombers work so well under sentries. What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644 |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 20:24:00 -
[1096] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Ahaha, the "make hybrids cause ships to go faster," suggestion is being repeated.
Now I know why CCP doesn't read the forums, jesus christ.
Maybe because it's a pretty good idea. ;)
I'm REALLY not sure why you think it's so awful to begin with. Most of our pissing-match had to do with you telling me how dumb I was for disagreeing with nerfing Rail-range.
I looked-through your post again, and I only see a few arguments against my proposal. All of which don't seem to have much basis, and seem to be formed on false-assuptions.
One said that rails opperate outside of point and logistics range anyway, so buffing thier speed wouldn't help at-all.
I provided you an EFT dmg graph that CLEARLY demonstrates how med rails DO in-fact opperate within long-point range. So, the way I see it, a med rail-boat would be a very viable kiter if it had a decent speed-buff. We both know probing mechanics killed large rails. The guns themselves aren't broken. As for PVE, a decent damage buff and fitting req reduction should help to bring them on-par with other systems. (Which is exactly what CCP is proposing, NOW with an added tracking buff too.)
One of your other arguments say that Minmatar ships would fit hybrids and be super OP in the speed dept.
You're right, if a Minmatar ship fit Hybrids, it WOULD be very fast... BUT it has no hull bonuses for Hybrids, so it would have very sub-par dmg, tracking, range, use more cap, etc, etc... So, it's a trade-off. Which seems fair to me.
Your last argument addressed issues that hybrid ships would be OP with a speed-buff.
I explained to you that my proposed speed-buff wouldn't be HUGE, just enough to get balance back-in. With my proposed speed-buff, if a Gallent ship fit a passive armor tank, all the speed penalties would cause-it to still be slower than most other ships (except maybe armor tanked Amarr, but they have range advantages). If they fit an active armor tank, or shield-tank, without any speed-penalties, they would be average speed. If and only IF they fit minimal-tank and some nanos/speed-rigs, would they then be faster than most ships. Your suggestion that my proposal would allow hybrid ships to fit huge armor-tanks and still be way faster than everyone else, while burning-around anihilating everything in-sight is NOT what I proposed at-all.
Let's discuss what's wrong with my proposal so I can improve-it into something more-useful. You rolling your eyes and sighing with dissaproval while making sarcastic comments in attemps to discredit me aren't helping anyone. We're on the same team, we both want to see Blasters and Rails become more useful. Just because I don't agree with your rail-fix idea, doesn't mean you have to automatically dissagree with my fix-idea. |
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:19:00 -
[1097] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Ahaha, the "make hybrids cause ships to go faster," suggestion is being repeated.
Now I know why CCP doesn't read the forums, jesus christ. Maybe because it's a pretty good idea. ;) I'm REALLY not sure why you think it's so awful to begin with. Most of our pissing-match had to do with you telling me how dumb I was for disagreeing with nerfing Rail-range. I looked-through your post again, and I only see a few arguments against my proposal. All of which don't seem to have much basis, and seem to be formed on false-assuptions. One said that rails opperate outside of point and logistics range anyway, so buffing thier speed wouldn't help at-all. I provided you an EFT dmg graph that CLEARLY demonstrates how med rails DO in-fact opperate within long-point range. So, the way I see it, a med rail-boat would be a very viable kiter if it had a decent speed-buff. We both know probing mechanics killed large rails. The guns themselves aren't broken. As for PVE, a decent damage buff and fitting req reduction should help to bring them on-par with other systems. (Which is exactly what CCP is proposing, NOW with an added tracking buff too.) One of your other arguments say that Minmatar ships would fit hybrids and be super OP in the speed dept. You're right, if a Minmatar ship fit Hybrids, it WOULD be very fast... BUT it has no hull bonuses for Hybrids, so it would have very sub-par dmg, tracking, range, use more cap, etc, etc... So, it's a trade-off. Which seems fair to me. Your last argument addressed issues that hybrid ships would be OP with a speed-buff. I explained to you that my proposed speed-buff wouldn't be HUGE, just enough to get balance back-in. With my proposed speed-buff, if a Gallent ship fit a passive armor tank, all the speed penalties would cause-it to still be slower than most other ships (except maybe armor tanked Amarr, but they have range advantages). If they fit an active armor tank, or shield-tank, without any speed-penalties, they would be average speed. If and only IF they fit minimal-tank and some nanos/speed-rigs, would they then be faster than most ships. Your suggestion that my proposal would allow hybrid ships to fit huge armor-tanks and still be way faster than everyone else, while burning-around anihilating everything in-sight is NOT what I proposed at-all. Let's discuss what's wrong with my proposal so I can improve-it into something more-useful. You rolling your eyes and sighing with dissaproval while making sarcastic comments in attemps to discredit me aren't helping anyone. We're on the same team, we both want to see Blasters and Rails become more useful. Just because I don't agree with your rail-fix idea, doesn't mean you have to automatically dissagree with my fix-idea.
After a calm reading at your post, I would support that feature to give a speed bonus inside hybrid guns. It's the best way to avoid these problems. http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 22:07:00 -
[1098] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:You haven't seen yet what a flacon/damp arazu coupled with SB or HAC can do to solo ships, and wallente actually are just loot pinatas Low sec is perfect for this kind of tactic. Because recons and bombers work so well under sentries.
You joke made me lol actually
EDIT: because I can ! |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 22:14:00 -
[1099] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote:Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Ahaha, the "make hybrids cause ships to go faster," suggestion is being repeated.
Now I know why CCP doesn't read the forums, jesus christ. Maybe because it's a pretty good idea. ;) After a calm reading at your post, I would support that feature to give a speed bonus inside hybrid guns. It's the best way to avoid these problems.
Why, thank you!
I think the main problem with my idea isn't really a problem with the idea at all....
It's the way I try to explain it.
I have trouble being concise. I like to give as much detail as possible so I'm not missunderstood.
Nobody likes reading through a wall-of-text, and this thread has a LOT of them.
I think people read the first few lines and give-up lol! |
Kathryn Archangel
Doomheim
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 01:24:00 -
[1100] - Quote
I hope they change the sound for 425mm rail guns. They don't sound like they're launching projectiles across a couple hundred km at hyper velocity! They sound like peashooters. The heaviest medium rail guns sound bigger.
Anyone else have thoughts on this? |
|
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
394
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 01:26:00 -
[1101] - Quote
Jack Dant wrote:Grimpak wrote:Jack Dant wrote:That would let it match tempest/mael performance inside warp disruptor range. While retaining the option to use high damage ammo at close range with just 5s swap time. there you go, you just exposed the reason why more is needed to be done to blasters and their hulls. I don't follow. If blasters are as good as ACs inside long point range (28km), and better inside web/scram range (11km), then they are balanced against each other, no?
on paper, they are better than AC's inside web range.
in reality, they aren't, since they need to get close (which they can't 99 times out of 100) only to do marginally better damage than AC's and pulses. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 07:28:00 -
[1102] - Quote
Sydney Nelson wrote:Dunmur wrote:Rip Minner wrote:Sydney Nelson wrote:Dunmur wrote: LOL a rail brutix beating a ac cane now ive seen it all.
Wait is that a pig flying over there...
Stuff about a viable rail-kiter... This is purely hypothetical of-course but... If each medium hybrid turret gave a 4.25% boost to speed, then a Rail-Brutix would have enough speed to kite an AC Cane, and a Blaster-Brutix would have enough speed to get into-range before it's too late (sometimes). An unusual fix? Yes. Viable? Looks like it to me. We're just brain-storming and discussing here, and I think this is worth discussing. Just wondering if you also know that if your that fast and agile-enough to kite with rails you can also finaly catch and pin someone with blasters too right? OK i guess i have to say it again why use rails when you can use the much better arty or autocannons buffing the ship isnt going to make the gun any better Edit: I wish people would read past posts because this "make the ships faster" is becoming a dead horse Read my post again. The original is on pg.50 thread #989 I suggested adding a speed bonus to the GUNS not the ships. If fitting hybrids made your ship faster, then the speed/agility problems that plague Blasterboats AND Railships would be reduced greatly. If you cause the GUNS to buff the speed, then hybrid ships would still be slow with ACs or arty or lasers fit. As for (med) rails, if they gave a speed bonus to the ships that fit them, then they would be a very viable kiter for that "middle ground" between ACs and Arty. ACs have better tracking and more dmg at short-range, Artys have more alpha and better range, but worse tracking. IMO rails aren't broken, it's the ships that fit them that can't maintain-range vs an AC ship, or close-range on a Arty ship. Combined with the up-coming 10% dmg boost to rails, and supposedly there will be a slight trackin-boost, this should make Rails a useful PVP tool. Obviously, for each fit, their should be a counter, so for above said engagements, chances should be as close to 50/50 as possible.
I dont even think that's needed as amarr ships or aka Lazers are good at thoughs kinds of games at thoughs ranges. 5% tracking inc should bring rails right in line with beams for tracking speed.
And the tracking bounses on alot of gallente gun boats would let them out fly amarr guns if they are not going all out amarr aka tracking disrupter fitted amarr ships starts looking good at this point though. Or at least better then it did yesterday. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 07:36:00 -
[1103] - Quote
Kathryn Archangel wrote:I hope they change the sound for 425mm rail guns. They don't sound like they're launching projectiles across a couple hundred km at hyper velocity! They sound like peashooters. The heaviest medium rail guns sound bigger.
Anyone else have thoughts on this?
Ya I feel the same way. But I feel that way about all Large Rails and not just the 425's |
Kumq uat
Guiding Hand Social Club Dystopia Alliance
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 16:55:00 -
[1104] - Quote
5% dps upgrade on blasters is just lulz. You need to do better than that Tallest if you want them to be viable. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:24:00 -
[1105] - Quote
Kumq uat wrote:5% dps upgrade on blasters is just lulz. You need to do better than that Tallest if you want them to be viable.
Maybe Tallest is not the best Tallest ... :( |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:29:00 -
[1106] - Quote
Railguns need a little more boost , especially tracking. They should be near as good as beams. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:31:00 -
[1107] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:Railguns need a little more boost , especially tracking. They should be near as good as beams.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
:) So say we all :) |
Cornette
Solar Revenue Service F0RCEFUL ENTRY
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 17:32:00 -
[1108] - Quote
I have a question, CCP Tallest:
Is there any reason why antimatter should have a -50% range bonus when blaster optimal are so poor? |
Dunmur
Tempered Logic KRYSIS.
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 18:09:00 -
[1109] - Quote
Cornette wrote:I have a question, CCP Tallest:
Is there any reason why antimatter should have a -50% range bonus when blaster optimal are so poor?
to try to force you to use a different type of ammo that is still ****** short range but negates any dps advantage you have :)
|
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 19:12:00 -
[1110] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Kathryn Archangel wrote:I hope they change the sound for 425mm rail guns. They don't sound like they're launching projectiles across a couple hundred km at hyper velocity! They sound like peashooters. The heaviest medium rail guns sound bigger.
Anyone else have thoughts on this? Ya I feel the same way. But I feel that way about all Large Rails and not just the 425's
Me three! The mediums sound pretty-good. I was so dissapointed when I fired that first shot with my shiny-new 425mm-fit Battleship for the first time.
You're right Rip, the Amarr do fill that role pretty-well. |
|
Lekgoa
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 22:15:00 -
[1111] - Quote
Moved to appropriate forum. |
Veryez
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 04:29:00 -
[1112] - Quote
What has not been mentioned is that a change (improvement) to tracking is an INCREASE in damage. For those who might not be aware of this, you might wish to read:
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadid=275675
or
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=97942
20% is a very substantial boost, and small blaster tracking/damage has always been good (20% might be too much for small's, but good for mediums and large). Get on SiSi and try it out - your damage output has improved. The 30% reduction is cap usage is nice, though not really essential given the superiority in passive tanking over active tanking since Revelations. I worry that the changes to Gallente ships (agility/velosity) might be a bit too much, but lets use sisi to determine that impact. Overall I believe these changes are warrented and well thought out. I am tired of the past CCP practices of every change being so OP as to make that group FOTM. Because of that, I can use all t2 weapons, I look forward to trying these changes out.
For the changes to T2 ammo, I simply say thank you and about time. For those that were here, the pre-nerfing of t2 ammo was always something that was going to be re-evaluated in the future for possible removal, so it has been a very long time coming |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
394
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 12:44:00 -
[1113] - Quote
Veryez wrote:What has not been mentioned is that a change (improvement) to tracking is an INCREASE in damage. For those who might not be aware of this, you might wish to read: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadid=275675or http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=9794220% is a very substantial boost, and small blaster tracking/damage has always been good (20% might be too much for small's, but good for mediums and large). Get on SiSi and try it out - your damage output has improved. The 30% reduction is cap usage is nice, though not really essential given the superiority in passive tanking over active tanking since Revelations. I worry that the changes to Gallente ships (agility/velosity) might be a bit too much, but lets use sisi to determine that impact. Overall I believe these changes are warrented and well thought out. I am tired of the past CCP practices of every change being so OP as to make that group FOTM. Because of that, I can use all t2 weapons, I look forward to trying these changes out. For the changes to T2 ammo, I simply say thank you and about time. For those that were here, the pre-nerfing of t2 ammo was always something that was going to be re-evaluated in the future for possible removal, so it has been a very long time coming
it still doesn't increase damage beyond "paper" stats tho, and "paper" stats are pretty much optimal circumstances.
in the end it's still not enough damage, considering both pulses and AC's that hit far better, altho, granted, at much longer ranges. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Lo Res
Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 13:58:00 -
[1114] - Quote
I'm sure this was probably mentioned somewhere in the 50+ pages here, but....
Do you really want to give a speed and inertia buff to the Falcon?
It's not flown like a blaster boat. It sits at range from a fight and jams people to hell.
So now it can sit at range and kite a brawl even better?
As a pilot that loves to kill off enemy ewar boats in a vaga, I don't like it.
And if you're going to show love to the falcon, why not do the same for its Tech 1 brother, the Blackbird?
Please pull the falcon off the list of ships getting a speed and inertia buff. or at least explain the rationale for the buff on the forums.
thanks. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
59
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 14:40:00 -
[1115] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Grimpak wrote:Jack Dant wrote:That would let it match tempest/mael performance inside warp disruptor range. While retaining the option to use high damage ammo at close range with just 5s swap time. there you go, you just exposed the reason why more is needed to be done to blasters and their hulls. I don't follow. If blasters are as good as ACs inside long point range (28km), and better inside web/scram range (11km), then they are balanced against each other, no? on paper, they are better than AC's inside web range. in reality, they aren't, since they need to get close (which they can't 99 times out of 100) only to do marginally better damage than AC's and pulses.
If you want i will show you, how much better in short range a Blaster than AC without any paper blabla.
|
Thelron
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 15:12:00 -
[1116] - Quote
Perhaps because the idea of ships that are supposed to sit at long range being slow-flying bricks (and thus barely capable of extending the amount of time before that range disappears, let alone maintaining it, oftentimes even against hulls a class above them) hasn't really worked out so well.
I dont think the relatively minor buff it (or any of the caldari ships for that matter) are getting will make it significantly more difficult to chase down anyway. I do agree the base hull should get the same benefit, however.
So, it sounds like rails are getting a tracking boost (a small one, but medium and especially large rails can use the help since they don't often get to use their suppsedly-primary advantage of "massively long range" and thus can't compensate for their tracking as well) but the damage bonus has been dropped with the introduction of shortened reload? Not sure about that, even if it does mean less penalty for switching ammo types... even the not-so-large large rails can throw AM almost as far as people generally talk about engagements taking place, especially on a range-bonused ship, so while that will be nice for frigates/destroyers (probably mostly destroyers) and maybe moa/ferox hulls (since M's do seem to do well switching back and forth a bit) I don't see that *really* helping much. Blasters, sure, since if you're being kited your choices are "switch" or "don't do damage". Rails, hopefully there's either still a bit of a raw damage boost being mulled over, or revisiting the hulls has become a solid "next priority." |
Alain Badiou
Shinken Shobu
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 19:49:00 -
[1117] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Stan Kirby wrote:Minmatar or projectile boost: - +100% artillery burst damage - overpowered cynobal, machariel, dramiel - huge falloff bonus from TE and TC. ... Gallente/hybrid boost: - blasters tracking speed +20% .... LOL - railguns +10% damage ... megaLOL CCP fail... again. It does have that feeling doesn't it?
Sadly I was extremely hopeful (I have 3x gal toons and love the Gallente concept), but I must agree with the above. None of the proposed changes will make hybrid/gal boats more useful in pvp. Having had endless conversations with corpmates about this, there is never a situation where a hybrid boat would be more useful then a projectile boat. Ever. Proposed fixes will not change this.
Something like AB speed bonuses to gallente hulls, making active armor tanking viable, % per level web bonuses (anything that can help gallente getting into range) seems necessary. Also, blasters need a damage and/or range increase to make up for the fact that you are in deep armor/hull by the time you get into range (if you ever do...).
Also, been said a million times, but TE's NEED there falloff bonus nerfed hard. |
Alain Badiou
Shinken Shobu
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 22:31:00 -
[1118] - Quote
Tania Russ wrote:Tried to read as much of this threadnaught as I could... Sorry if reiterating.
Having been flying blaster boats for years, and as well having tried to use rails in PvP. Awful.
Here are the biggest issues for Gallente ships.
1. Too slow. 2. Not very agile. 3. Not enough tank if they are going to be slow and not agile. 4. Hybrids are pretty much fail across the board. 5. Drones not good enough.
Blasters: 1. Not enough damage output 2. Not enough range 3. Not enough tracking
Rails: 1. Not enough damage output 2. Not enough tracking
For a drone-centric society, Gallente are as well awful nerfed in the drone department. Gallente ships should be bristling with drones and have major drone bonuses, more than they currently have. Gallente ships should make drones faster, hit harder, and they should make them tougher. They do to some extent now but not nearly enough.
How do we fix these issues?
1. Give gallente ships a webber range bonus 2. Make them more agile 3. Give blasters a range bonus - even small blasters should hit effectively out to 10 km. Every other small weapon does. 4. Tank bonuses if they are going to be slow. Major tank bonuses. 5. More drones, more drone CPU, more drone buffs 6. Make rails do more DPS than blasters but unable to hit at close range. We are talking about higher technology weapons here supposedly. Why are they so fail? If not this then at least more tracking for rails and more DPS for rails.
Not saying all of these must be adopted, but a combination of these ideas must be adopted. It's illogical to think that ships as badly nerfed as Gallente have been would even be built in our "future culture" of EVE as is. They suck too bad.
Seriously +1
|
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 22:53:00 -
[1119] - Quote
I'm starting to think CCP's changes are to focused on the current environment and game-play. I'll use the changes to artillery as an example here. Apparently, artillery were the worst of the long range turrets @ the time. This has alot to do with the superior range (optimals) of beam laser and rail-gun. Funny thing is, as soon as these changes were made. Which was directed towards what was the current dynamics (doctrines and mechanics @ the time). Sh!t changed! Was no longer as important to have that much range. This dichotomy is very amusing and now beam laser and rail-gun are outmoded. Will CCP change beam lasers to make them more useful? |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 23:17:00 -
[1120] - Quote
Another point of view a few pilots I know have been championing. While some have been trying to change to a logical penalty for armour plates and armor rigs. Both are suggesting a boost to armour plates and armour rigs, but the pilots i was referring too. Want to boost all close range set-ups (bigger issue). Not directed towards any specific racial ships or turret, but to increase the viability of all close range ships. My "idea" of a increase in stasis webifier range and warp scrambler range was taken from conversations, with some of these pilots. Their Idea is to keep the penalties to inertia (agility/align-time) and acceleration. Which is where they differ from the most popular views on the subject. What should be changed is armor rigs and plates penalty to base velocity of the ship and micro-warp-drive. So, a Thorax with 1600mm plate and armor rigs. Would be going 1400 meters second, instead of 1100 meters a second. Which makes alot of sense. Great Ideas that should be implemented. Although, this will help with the viability of not only Gallente ships, but also Minmatar and Armarr ships. |
|
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 23:23:00 -
[1121] - Quote
Gallente have almost no ships able to project damage and as a result are the least desirable (frigates are a exception for the most part). Minmatar had this issue, before the changes to projectiles and Artillery. Not to the extent of Gallente of course, but Amarr was more favourable in fleets and small gang as a result. There was no doubt auto-cannons could preform close range as well as they do now, but most suggested Amarr could do the same and better (using the Harbinger and Hurricane as an example here). So, the general consensus @ the time was ships lacking damage projection are limited, with regards to the dynamics of this game. They're destroyed alot more, less useful in fluid situations, less useful in fleets and are less desirable as a result.
That is'nt just an issue for Gallente, but all ships that operate close range. Which would mean. CCP needs to take a serious look @ Stasis webifier range, warp scramler range and a change to armour plates and rigs. Maybe, even lower warp disruption range to 22.000 or 20,000 meters. This would make it more difficult for more mobile ships to maintain range and hold a target within warp disruption range. |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 23:28:00 -
[1122] - Quote
Another very interesting Idea I've heard that I fully endorse. Is a boost to sentry drones. Allowing sentry drones to warp, while having limited to no base speed. For example; a fleet warping to a interceptor 200,000 meters on grid to engage another fleet. Also a boost in heavy and medium drone hit points, tracking, velocity and damage output. The changes to sentry drones will give Gallente the 'fleet option' (Cry Havoc + Ishtar). |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 01:40:00 -
[1123] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:Another very interesting Idea I've heard that I fully endorse. Is a boost to sentry drones. Allowing sentry drones to warp, while having limited to no base speed. For example; a fleet warping to a interceptor 200,000 meters on grid to engage another fleet. Also a boost in heavy and medium drone hit points, tracking, velocity and damage output. The changes to sentry drones will give Gallente the 'fleet option' (Cry Havoc + Ishtar).
Very carefull with drone bruffs.
Every race drones should be usefull ? -yes, sure it's dumb to carry only warriors hobgobs hammers ogres shield/armor drones and vespas 600/Hornets 300.
There should be somehow ways to improve all those drones useless either dps ones or warfare ones.
Is it ridiculous heavy drones are that slow? -of course it is, if we can see it I hope CCP can see it too one day.
When I say very carefull with drone buffs and specially sentry is just because you don't want to change from fleet canes and arty maels for spider rep/remote energy sentry Domis or Rattles, you can't even imagine the r+ñpe face a fleet of those can be.
EDIT: Imagine a 250man fleet of Rattlesnakes tanking 1600dps with no effort +logis, yes alpha can take them down even if heavy tanked (EHP) but I guess improved sentry s (more than they are now) would also **** the maels fleet fingers in the nose. |
Veryez
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 02:28:00 -
[1124] - Quote
Grimpak wrote: it still doesn't increase damage beyond "paper" stats tho, and "paper" stats are pretty much optimal circumstances.
in the end it's still not enough damage, considering both pulses and AC's that hit far better, altho, granted, at much longer ranges.
You are misrepresenting the facts. Pulses and AC's do not "hit better", with a 20% tracking boost and a 5% damage boost the megathon with null outperforms an equivalently setup Tempest with barrage inside 20k. outside 20k, the tempest will outperform the Mega. Since the Tempest must engage w/in disrupter range to hold the mega in place, it's window of superiority is 4k. Yes I want improvements to Hybrids, but I do not want them OP and the FoTM. CCP has gone a long way to make up for their shortcomings without forcing us to fit additional mods to make them perform. And next to EM, Kinetic damage is always a good choice.
Switching to RF Fusion vs CN Antimatter, the cross over point is around 12k, but the difference in damage jumps up by an additional 28% in favor of the Mega.
The mega has almost double the tracking of the Tempest, which results in significantly better hits thus the paper damage difference is actually smaller than the actual damage difference. But 1 vs 1's are not realistic on TQ, nor are these ships setup equivalently. In general the Tempest makes up for it's lacking performance (as does the hurricane) by incorporating a buffer shield tank and loading up damage and tracking mods in lows. But those are ship differences, not weapons differences, and the Rokh can fit a very nice shield buffer tank and load up the lows with damage mods and TE's and perform well. BTW, start fitting TE's on your Blaster ships in place of one Mag Stab, I have.
But this is all theory, the days of jumping around in a mega and soloing a small gang are over. CCP does not want these ships to perform like this and if they start to, they will nerf them into uselessness (again). In gangs, I consider anything within Optimal + .6*Falloff to be in my advantage range w/Blasters. Using Blasters does not always mean engaging in optimal (which is actually always larger than AC's optimal - another falsehood spouted here often). The closer I get to optimal the more advantage I have. Lets face it, we have to make a decision to engage in a very short time period and forcing a bad situation often leads to a lost ship. But this is no different than arguably the best short ranged brawler in the game the Geddon, which never has the option of running (but I still love that ship).
The changes to projectiles made mini pilots have to change setups to take advantage of them, As I said before I can use all T2 large weapons, I just adjust my fittings sometimes using setups I learned on other ships. Don't get me wrong, I want to use my Mega again (badly), I just don't want to have use it all the time. If they improve it but don't make it OP, it should be safe from future nerfs for a long time (at least that's my hope). BTW, have you tried the daredevil on sisi yet? |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 07:29:00 -
[1125] - Quote
Lo Res wrote:I'm sure this was probably mentioned somewhere in the 50+ pages here, but....
Do you really want to give a speed and inertia buff to the Falcon?
It's not flown like a blaster boat. It sits at range from a fight and jams people to hell.
So now it can sit at range and kite a brawl even better?
As a pilot that loves to kill off enemy ewar boats in a vaga, I don't like it.
And if you're going to show love to the falcon, why not do the same for its Tech 1 brother, the Blackbird?
Please pull the falcon off the list of ships getting a speed and inertia buff. or at least explain the rationale for the buff on the forums.
thanks.
If you get killed by any ship at range your ether out numbered or just unwilling to go to warp. Ether way it's just fine that you die. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 07:32:00 -
[1126] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Grimpak wrote:Jack Dant wrote:Grimpak wrote:Jack Dant wrote:That would let it match tempest/mael performance inside warp disruptor range. While retaining the option to use high damage ammo at close range with just 5s swap time. there you go, you just exposed the reason why more is needed to be done to blasters and their hulls. I don't follow. If blasters are as good as ACs inside long point range (28km), and better inside web/scram range (11km), then they are balanced against each other, no? on paper, they are better than AC's inside web range. in reality, they aren't, since they need to get close (which they can't 99 times out of 100) only to do marginally better damage than AC's and pulses. If you want i will show you, how much better in short range a Blaster than AC without any paper blabla.
kk when do you want to meet on sisi. You fly that Talon and I wil get in a Tornado and you show me you bad ars that blaster dmg projection is. |
Tiger's Spirit
Troll Hunters INC.
59
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 09:51:00 -
[1127] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:kk when do you want to meet on sisi. You fly that Talon and I wil get in a Tornado and you show me you bad ars that blaster dmg projection is.
I see, you want fight with two unbalanced ships. 600dps ship vs 1126dps ship. Very tricky. I think this is your AC better than Blaster in short range blabla truth.
You will flight with a tempest and i will with a megathron or dominix, that's a fair fight and those ship not unbalanced.But don't cry when i melting you. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
199
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 10:24:00 -
[1128] - Quote
Tiger's Spirit wrote:Rip Minner wrote:kk when do you want to meet on sisi. You fly that Talon and I wil get in a Tornado and you show me you bad ars that blaster dmg projection is. I see, you want flight with two unbalanced ship. 600dps ship vs 1126dps ship. Very tricky. I think this is your AC better than Blaster in short range blabla truth. You will flight with a tempest and i will with a megathron or dominix, that's a fair fight and those ship not unbalanced.But don't cry when i melting you. Pff dont listen to this noob pls, he is a noob hungarian,with bigger mouth than brain ,nobody likes him thats for sure. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
394
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 13:21:00 -
[1129] - Quote
Veryez wrote:BTW, have you tried the daredevil on sisi yet?
if any, the boosts they are doing to blasters shouldn't be applied to small ones at all. that was always my opinion since before all this conudrum, so if they are giving the same changes to small blasters, then I guess that the DD now tramples over the "overpowered" status with ease.
also the outperforming margin of blasters vs AC's damage wise isn't anything new, they (blasters) already did more *paper* dps than AC's by a relatively good margin. the issue vs AC's is both application and platform-wise. the AC's can hit farther than blasters, and still do respectable damage, all tided up to a very mobile platform. However, range isn't where blasters should fail vs AC's but the actual platforms, where blaster ships are too slow and cumbersome for the ranges they apply.
where they do trail behind in every aspect (xcept platform, damage, damage types and absolute tracking) is pulses. before changes the differences are abysmal. a mid range weapon that trades off ~5-10% raw damage for 300% more range and even ability to track much better at optimal than blasters. tracking boost of the blasters is nice, but it still makes them struggle when in comparision to pulses. Adding the shallow damage margin between both and you can see why people have been asking for more damage, even if a need to make them have even shorter ranges is required to keep them balanced.
many don't really mind shorter ranges for blasters if they actually do damage proportional to that range, and have platforms that allow the blasters to to reach that range, something that still doesn't happen today and still won't be happening after the boosts.
blasters should do overwhelming damage at point blank ranges, but require the ships themselves to act like their damage projection stat. that's how blasters were back in 2005, and that's how they should be, even if that means that the blaster ships achieve mobility that surpasses minmatar hulls. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Ho'Taru
Brony Excavations Inc
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 15:49:00 -
[1130] - Quote
Before I start, I fully admit that I have little in the way of PvP experience yet, so the following is just a random idea from following the conversations on Gallente/hybrids.
I noticed a bit of an uproar about the idea of just a single Gallente ship getting a webifier strength bonus, so I'm guessing that there's been a bit of a history on that front. I do think though that a good way to deal with the Gallente needing to get up close is to have a difference in effectiveness of webifiers between a blasterboat and the opponent. It struck me that instead of making Gallente webifiers more effective, you could get a similar effect by making the opposing webifiers less effective. Give the webifiers a longer ranger (or add some varient webifiers that are weaker but with the longer range), and I think it would go a long way towards fixing the problem.
Basically, Minmatar would be the fastest/most nimble race, but Gallente would use more of a steamroller approach to speed whereby silly little things like webifiers aren't going to slow them down much.
As for actual implementation, I can think of 2 methods off the top of my head: - Change the mechanics for webifiers so that they have a strength rating that is compared to the target's propulsion strength rating. If the target's propulsion is stronger than the webifier, the speed reduction is only partially applied to the target. I think that this would be the more powerful and flexible option in the long term, but would involve more of a core change to the game mechanics, so may not be doable in time for the winter update.
- Give appropriate Gallente ships a bonus that reduces the effect of webifiers targeting them. This could either be as a flat role bonus, or as a bonus per level of skill. If it is a per level bonus that replaces an existing bonus, I would fully expect it to be a stong reduction in webifier effect, possibly even to the point of adding up to a -100% bonus in some cases. This I expect would be doable within the current game mechanics.
Any thoughts on this approach? |
|
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 18:15:00 -
[1131] - Quote
Well, pilots are already able to field very powerful drone fleets. I can reference Cry havoc (Ishtar), space perverts and forum warriors united (Vexor), with regard to successful use of sentry drones in low security and no security space. Both entities utilizing sentry drones very effectively.
In the past I started suggesting using alternatives to what was becoming a very popular fleet doctine (Abaddon). One of the alternatives I suggested was Armageddon's, setup like Abaddons. Which was theory until Draketrain and Evoke (earliest entities to do this) put them into practice. Interesting enough! Evoke has been assimilating Gallente battleships into fleets for awhile. They've been using Megathrons with dual tracking computers. So, Evoke fleets were not uniform in terms of ships, but set-ups (Megathrons with dual tracking computers = 400dps @ 35km and other armour battleships with dual tracking computers). All of this was long before it became standard for AAA.
The advantages to using Dominix and Armageddon is cost for performance (one fourth the price of Abaddons). Both have alot of hit-points, projected and applied damage. The Dominix advantage is the 'assign drones' command. The limitation of ships that use sentry drone is control range, not mobile and drones can be destroyed.
I've already lead fleets of Dominix 4 times, with upward of 100 pilots. Versus conventional fleets of Drakes, Tempest and Abaddons. You quickly notice the limitations (No movement, better for defence = fleet engaging you and not the other way around). Although, they still preform very well. In terms of damage, target switching projecting and applied bla bal bla...
Allowing sentry drones to warp. Will make drone ships better @ skirmishing. Making a Myrmidon a alternative to Drakes in smaller engagements. Would also be a big NERF to ECM. |
Veryez
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 00:41:00 -
[1132] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:
also the outperforming margin of blasters vs AC's damage wise isn't anything new, they (blasters) already did more *paper* dps than AC's by a relatively good margin. the issue vs AC's is both application and platform-wise. the AC's can hit farther than blasters, and still do respectable damage, all tided up to a very mobile platform. However, range isn't where blasters should fail vs AC's but the actual platforms, where blaster ships are too slow and cumbersome for the ranges they apply.
where they do trail behind in every aspect (xcept platform, damage, damage types and absolute tracking) is pulses. before changes the differences are abysmal. a mid range weapon that trades off ~5-10% raw damage for 300% more range and even ability to track much better at optimal than blasters. tracking boost of the blasters is nice, but it still makes them struggle when in comparision to pulses. Adding the shallow damage margin between both and you can see why people have been asking for more damage, even if a need to make them have even shorter ranges is required to keep them balanced.
many don't really mind shorter ranges for blasters if they actually do damage proportional to that range, and have platforms that allow the blasters to to reach that range, something that still doesn't happen today and still won't be happening after the boosts.
blasters should do overwhelming damage at point blank ranges, but require the ships themselves to act like their damage projection stat. that's how blasters were back in 2005, and that's how they should be, even if that means that the blaster ships achieve mobility that surpasses minmatar hulls.
There would have to be some fundamental changes in EvE before I'd agree with that last statement. AC's have lowest optimal and lowest base damage in optimal. Their advantage of damage projection would be completely nullified if they weren't fastest. However your points are basically correct. Blasters need something, the changes so far are a step in the correct direction, however making blaster boats the fastest (even w/plates on) would simply remove AC's from the game. If you couldn't maintain range with the lowest damage weapons why would you ever use them?
Again we run into the issues that revelations forced down our throats. By shifting tanking from active tanking to passive tanking, the speed difference between shield tanks and armor tanks was made significant. Speed is important in small gang warfare (which wh's boosted nicely). If we did not have to plate up armor tanks, the speed difference would be minimalized, and the extra low might even be used to neutralize any speed difference.
Perhaps you're solution is the easiest, though boosting damage into significant levels really should be met with removing these speed boosts (though leaving the agility ones) or reducing optimal range below AC's. Other changes would be too hard (changing webber ranges and/or scrambler/disrupter ranges) and would take a much longer time to properly test. Like I said, I want to use my blasters again, but I don't want to use them all the time.
And yes, on Sisi, the Dram is nerfed and the DD gets the boosts, nuff said. |
Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
394
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 02:30:00 -
[1133] - Quote
Veryez wrote:Grimpak wrote:
also the outperforming margin of blasters vs AC's damage wise isn't anything new, they (blasters) already did more *paper* dps than AC's by a relatively good margin. the issue vs AC's is both application and platform-wise. the AC's can hit farther than blasters, and still do respectable damage, all tided up to a very mobile platform. However, range isn't where blasters should fail vs AC's but the actual platforms, where blaster ships are too slow and cumbersome for the ranges they apply.
where they do trail behind in every aspect (xcept platform, damage, damage types and absolute tracking) is pulses. before changes the differences are abysmal. a mid range weapon that trades off ~5-10% raw damage for 300% more range and even ability to track much better at optimal than blasters. tracking boost of the blasters is nice, but it still makes them struggle when in comparision to pulses. Adding the shallow damage margin between both and you can see why people have been asking for more damage, even if a need to make them have even shorter ranges is required to keep them balanced.
many don't really mind shorter ranges for blasters if they actually do damage proportional to that range, and have platforms that allow the blasters to to reach that range, something that still doesn't happen today and still won't be happening after the boosts.
blasters should do overwhelming damage at point blank ranges, but require the ships themselves to act like their damage projection stat. that's how blasters were back in 2005, and that's how they should be, even if that means that the blaster ships achieve mobility that surpasses minmatar hulls.
There would have to be some fundamental changes in EvE before I'd agree with that last statement. AC's have lowest optimal and lowest base damage in optimal. Their advantage of damage projection would be completely nullified if they weren't fastest. However your points are basically correct. Blasters need something, the changes so far are a step in the correct direction, however making blaster boats the fastest (even w/plates on) would simply remove AC's from the game. If you couldn't maintain range with the lowest damage weapons why would you ever use them? Again we run into the issues that revelations forced down our throats. By shifting tanking from active tanking to passive tanking, the speed difference between shield tanks and armor tanks was made significant. Speed is important in small gang warfare (which wh's boosted nicely). If we did not have to plate up armor tanks, the speed difference would be minimalized, and the extra low might even be used to neutralize any speed difference. Perhaps you're solution is the easiest, though boosting damage into significant levels really should be met with removing these speed boosts (though leaving the agility ones) or reducing optimal range below AC's. Other changes would be too hard (changing webber ranges and/or scrambler/disrupter ranges) and would take a much longer time to properly test. Like I said, I want to use my blasters again, but I don't want to use them all the time. And yes, on Sisi, the Dram is nerfed and the DD gets the boosts, nuff said.
thus why I said decrease of range on blasters, even removal of falloff from them. (L) blasters should be able to dish overwhelming damage below 12-15km tops, even going as far as dropping the range to 10km if neeeded. If you have a ship that is very fast, but can only deal damage on ranges where it needs to commit fully (below 10km), then said ship needs to have an overwhelming advantage. In case of blasters, supposedly the weapon that deals the most damage of the game, this doesn't happen at all in current game mechanics (xcept for frigate blaster ships, but those, as I said above, shouldn't really had received any kind of boost), since you have too slow ships that deal marginally better damage. Currently an AC ship is faster by a good margin, running circles around you with ease while shaving off your armour 1 layer at a time, while a pulse boat can start doing damage at 3x your range and increase damage instantly according the close you get to him. So what's wrong for a fast ship only being able to deal damage inside the 10km barrier?
Also, AC's aren't used on optimal. they have their humongous falloff for that. it's not hard for AC's to deal respectable dps on ranges above 20km while maintaining a much superior speed than both pulse and blaster platforms.
and finnally, no, the easiest solution to the blaster issue is deleting them, followed to making them into poor copycats of AC's. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
Veryez
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 03:51:00 -
[1134] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:thus why I said decrease of range on blasters, even removal of falloff from them. (L) blasters should be able to dish overwhelming damage below 12-15km tops, even going as far as dropping the range to 10km if neeeded. If you have a ship that is very fast, but can only deal damage on ranges where it needs to commit fully (below 10km), then said ship needs to have an overwhelming advantage. In case of blasters, supposedly the weapon that deals the most damage of the game, this doesn't happen at all in current game mechanics (xcept for frigate blaster ships, but those, as I said above, shouldn't really had received any kind of boost), since you have too slow ships that deal marginally better damage. Currently an AC ship is faster by a good margin, running circles around you with ease while shaving off your armour 1 layer at a time, while a pulse boat can start doing damage at 3x your range and increase damage instantly according the close you get to him. So what's wrong for a fast ship only being able to deal damage inside the 10km barrier?
Absolutely nothing, in fact other than perhaps adjusting the range for cruiser sized weapons. This is a very reasonable suggestion. In this scenario Blaster boats could have straight line speed, while AC boats could have agility. It would be interesting to test this on sisi.
Grimpak wrote: and finnally, no, the easiest solution to the blaster issue is deleting them, followed to making them into poor copycats of AC's.
Well you can forget that thought with fully 1/2 of the eve races using Hybrids, deleting them simply isn't an option. Since CCP's stopped responding to this thread, it sounds like their mind's pretty well made up. The solution isn't ideal, but it's a noticible improvement and should get blaster and rail boats back out of the hanger. I'll at least keep trying to utilize them, and for small hybrids this is a very large boost, if you're not flying them in PvP after this, you should be.
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 06:00:00 -
[1135] - Quote
Veryez wrote:Well you can forget that thought with fully 1/2 of the eve races using Hybrids, deleting them simply isn't an option.
1/2 of the races supposed to use hybrids don't.
1 uses missiles
1 doesn't have the choice but to cross train minmatar/amarr or be stuck at gate/station games and finally train for carriers/supers to have something decent to fly.
Indeed hybrids are f++cking awesome for 50% of the game races. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 22:09:00 -
[1136] - Quote
Fully support the laser-caldari initiative. Make it happen ccp! |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 23:34:00 -
[1137] - Quote
Nimrod Nemesis wrote:Fully support the laser-caldari initiative. Make it happen ccp!
I fully support the Projectial-gallente initiative. Make it happen CCP! Just remove Hybird weapons altogether. |
Tacct
The NightClub Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 02:43:00 -
[1138] - Quote
Ho'Taru wrote:Before I start, I fully admit that I have little in the way of PvP experience yet, so the following is just a random idea from following the conversations on Gallente/hybrids.
I noticed a bit of an uproar about the idea of just a single Gallente ship getting a webifier strength bonus, so I'm guessing that there's been a bit of a history on that front. I do think though that a good way to deal with the Gallente needing to get up close is to have a difference in effectiveness of webifiers between a blasterboat and the opponent. It struck me that instead of making Gallente webifiers more effective, you could get a similar effect by making the opposing webifiers less effective. Give the webifiers a longer ranger (or add some varient webifiers that are weaker but with the longer range), and I think it would go a long way towards fixing the problem.
Basically, Minmatar would be the fastest/most nimble race, but Gallente would use more of a steamroller approach to speed whereby silly little things like webifiers aren't going to slow them down much.
As for actual implementation, I can think of 2 methods off the top of my head: - Change the mechanics for webifiers so that they have a strength rating that is compared to the target's propulsion strength rating. If the target's propulsion is stronger than the webifier, the speed reduction is only partially applied to the target. I think that this would be the more powerful and flexible option in the long term, but would involve more of a core change to the game mechanics, so may not be doable in time for the winter update.
- Give appropriate Gallente ships a bonus that reduces the effect of webifiers targeting them. This could either be as a flat role bonus, or as a bonus per level of skill. If it is a per level bonus that replaces an existing bonus, I would fully expect it to be a stong reduction in webifier effect, possibly even to the point of adding up to a -100% bonus in some cases. This I expect would be doable within the current game mechanics.
Any thoughts on this approach?
This is something I was also thinking and support. Sure, blasters can melt ships at close ranges, but that doesn't matter if those ships can break away once you engage them. Maybe gall ships shouldn't have the highest speed, but they should be able to stay on an enemy once they are already there. Blaster gall ships should also not be penalized for doing what their ship is meant to do, get in close.
By introducing a resistance to webifiers to Gallenete blaster boats they would not trade spaces with Minmatar ships in terms of speed. They would still have to manage to get in range first. But this would also allow them to keep up with ships attempting to run/kite once already engaged at close range. It would also prevent their weapon system from working against them as they do now through forcing them to get within web/scram range. Whether to add a set resistance or a per level one, that would all need testing to determine, as well as to which ships it should apply to.
As an example: CCP has released the Talos supposedly as an anti-capital, anti-battleship vessel. One inherent problem with this is that once the Talos gets in range of the target, it becomes webbed and scrammed, thus nullifying the speed tanking aspect of the ship class. Sure you can stay outside that range but then you reduce your damage as well as the angular velocity, once again making the speed pointless. At the same time the battleships and capitals you are attacking are releasing drones and/or fighters.
The biggest part to take from this change would be that you wouldn't be buffing blaster damage but only their ability to apply that damage once they are within usable range. |
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
131
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 06:10:00 -
[1139] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Projectial-gallente initiative.
Spelling like minmatar is the first step! Good show! |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 07:13:00 -
[1140] - Quote
Tacct wrote:Ho'Taru wrote:Before I start, I fully admit that I have little in the way of PvP experience yet, so the following is just a random idea from following the conversations on Gallente/hybrids.
I noticed a bit of an uproar about the idea of just a single Gallente ship getting a webifier strength bonus, so I'm guessing that there's been a bit of a history on that front. I do think though that a good way to deal with the Gallente needing to get up close is to have a difference in effectiveness of webifiers between a blasterboat and the opponent. It struck me that instead of making Gallente webifiers more effective, you could get a similar effect by making the opposing webifiers less effective. Give the webifiers a longer ranger (or add some varient webifiers that are weaker but with the longer range), and I think it would go a long way towards fixing the problem.
Basically, Minmatar would be the fastest/most nimble race, but Gallente would use more of a steamroller approach to speed whereby silly little things like webifiers aren't going to slow them down much.
As for actual implementation, I can think of 2 methods off the top of my head: - Change the mechanics for webifiers so that they have a strength rating that is compared to the target's propulsion strength rating. If the target's propulsion is stronger than the webifier, the speed reduction is only partially applied to the target. I think that this would be the more powerful and flexible option in the long term, but would involve more of a core change to the game mechanics, so may not be doable in time for the winter update.
- Give appropriate Gallente ships a bonus that reduces the effect of webifiers targeting them. This could either be as a flat role bonus, or as a bonus per level of skill. If it is a per level bonus that replaces an existing bonus, I would fully expect it to be a stong reduction in webifier effect, possibly even to the point of adding up to a -100% bonus in some cases. This I expect would be doable within the current game mechanics.
Any thoughts on this approach? This is something I was also thinking and support. Sure, blasters can melt ships at close ranges, but that doesn't matter if those ships can break away once you engage them. Maybe gall ships shouldn't have the highest speed, but they should be able to stay on an enemy once they are already there. Blaster gall ships should also not be penalized for doing what their ship is meant to do, get in close. By introducing a resistance to webifiers to Gallenete blaster boats they would not trade spaces with Minmatar ships in terms of speed. They would still have to manage to get in range first. But this would also allow them to keep up with ships attempting to run/kite once already engaged at close range. It would also prevent their weapon system from working against them as they do now through forcing them to get within web/scram range. Whether to add a set resistance or a per level one, that would all need testing to determine, as well as to which ships it should apply to. As an example: CCP has released the Talos supposedly as an anti-capital, anti-battleship vessel. One inherent problem with this is that once the Talos gets in range of the target, it becomes webbed and scrammed, thus nullifying the speed tanking aspect of the ship class. Sure you can stay outside that range but then you reduce your damage as well as the angular velocity, once again making the speed pointless. At the same time the battleships and capitals you are attacking are releasing drones and/or fighters. The biggest part to take from this change would be that you wouldn't be buffing blaster damage but only their ability to apply that damage once they are within usable range.
You could base it off of ship Mass and add a new ship Attirbute called Engine thurst. Were by Gallente/Amarr Ships have the heavyest weight and strongest ship thurst to move them with would be less effected by Webbers as well as webbers would effect smaller ships more then larger ones do to Mass/Engine str. Just a ideal.
And with this new ship stat Galante ships would be the least effected by webbers with Amarr second and Winmatar/Caldarie can sort them selfs out some were in 3/4 place depending on just how ship Mass and Engine thurst work them selfs out.
That still leaves Minmatar the fastest most agl. ships in game. |
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 07:55:00 -
[1141] - Quote
Another way to even the playing field alittle is Tech 2 ammos.
Right now there are only a Long range and Short range tech 2 ammo that means there can be 6 more tech 2 ammos.
You can add in differnt dmg types for Hybirds and Lazors using more Tech 2 ammo's.
Granted it's not much but it's a start to leveling the playing field between the 3 differnt gun systems.
Were by you have 1 gun system that has 1 major draw back a 10 sec reload timer. And the other two systems suffer from many times that number of drawbacks.
Also when talking about drawbacks no one likes the fact that Lazers suck so much cap and have to have a crap cap bonces for the ships so that they dont cap out in a few secs to a few mins. You should rebalance Amarr ships and Lazors right along with Hybirds so they dont get left behind. Lazors are in second place compared to Projectials. They mite realy compete with them if you just cut cap on Lazors by 50% and give them a real combat bonce on there ships. Granted you mite also need to rebalance a few of the amarr ships cap power supply's.
|
BooooooBeeeeeer
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 08:48:00 -
[1142] - Quote
I would like to have seen the comments -í-í-á, they read this thread at all? Or answered once and that's enough? What do they think will make a hybrid its chip? Or consider that done enough? It's a shame to scream into the void, say anything at all, please |
Tania Russ
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 17:24:00 -
[1143] - Quote
I want to reiterate an idea I had that hasn't seen a lot of comment so far.
Precis: replace blaster and rail hybrids completely with 1 new weapon, that changes characteristics based on ammunition type.
So if you load "blaster" ammo, the weapon behaves as a blaster; load "rail" ammo and the weapon behaves like a rail.
This adaptability would level the playing field in terms of weapon choice without requiring the actual mechanics of the way rails and blasters function to change that much, because the sheer adaptability of this new hybrid platform would be beneficial enough to make it an attractive alternative to say, fitting ACs on a Gallente ship (which currently is sadly, the norm. Not that people would necessarily stop doing that.)
I think this change, comboned with some minor buffs to damage output and tracking as already outlined by CCP and under tet on SiSi, wouldotally revolutionize the use of hybrid weapons for both PvP and PvE. |
Sydney Nelson
Nelson Universal Aerospace
25
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 18:07:00 -
[1144] - Quote
This "webbifier effect" idea might be a pretty good fix.
Just re-do the webs so that they take the target ship's stats into effect.
The more mass a ship has, the harder it is to slow-down. Pretty simple really.
Conversely, the lighter and more agile a ship is, the easier it is to slow-down. I know EVE-physics is a joke, but THIS idea makes a lot of sense by real-life physics standards, which is always nice.
I still like the "mwd/speed/agility-bonus on hybrid turrets" idea too. |
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 20:08:00 -
[1145] - Quote
Tania Russ wrote:I want to reiterate an idea I had that hasn't seen a lot of comment so far.
Precis: replace blaster and rail hybrids completely with 1 new weapon, that changes characteristics based on ammunition type.
So if you load "blaster" ammo, the weapon behaves as a blaster; load "rail" ammo and the weapon behaves like a rail.
This adaptability would level the playing field in terms of weapon choice without requiring the actual mechanics of the way rails and blasters function to change that much, because the sheer adaptability of this new hybrid platform would be beneficial enough to make it an attractive alternative to say, fitting ACs on a Gallente ship (which currently is sadly, the norm. Not that people would necessarily stop doing that.)
I think this change, comboned with some minor buffs to damage output and tracking as already outlined by CCP and under tet on SiSi, wouldotally revolutionize the use of hybrid weapons for both PvP and PvE.
good luck with that,ccp doesnt even read the forums |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 08:51:00 -
[1146] - Quote
Hybirds were not broken in a single patch or day. They were broken over alot of patchs and I see it as a 3 fold brake that realy needs a 3 fold fix. So I would realy like it if you read all the way though and give your feed back/ideals and fixs and what you think is the best fix for each problem.
Problems.
1.) Projectiles and Lazers got buffed.
2.) Minmatar and Amarr ships were rebalanced and buffed alittle is some cases.
3.) Game Mechanics.
1.) I feel part 1 has been fixed. This changes are going to leave Hybirds better off today then they were yesterday. But this only true if parts 2-3 are just as fairly and evenly fixed as well.
2.) Hybird ship rebalancing. I feel the ship rebalancing is also just fine. But Minmatar and Gallente ships realy need to have that Acitve tanking bonus fixed.
I will place my fix for that here.
I personly feel that leting it affect remote reps mite be two powerfull. I am with thoughs that think it should add Hit points to shields/armor/hull. Now it do's not need to do all 3 it could be something like Minmater adds to Shields and Hulls and Gallente adds to Armor and Hulls. And just work out the right numbers of were it needs to be for the passive pvp tanks that realy do need the EHP.
3.) Game Mechanic's. This is the realy big one. The one few people can agre on whats right and whats not. Worst of all the sky's the limit or at least what the EVE program can be made to do is the limit. So there is no one right way to fix this there are alot of ways to do it that all work.
Here are is how I see Rails and Blasters working. Blasters need to own that space of 0km to 10km-15km depending of if its a Gallente blaster boat 10km or Caldari blaster boat 15km. And rails need to own that 150km to 250km space. How to make that happen is a very hot topic but must be talked about never the less. So I will place what I feel would be the best and most fair ideals here first the ones for Rails then the ones for Blasters. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 08:52:00 -
[1147] - Quote
Rails need to own that 150km-250km. Also I feel this changes not only boost Rails ships but all ships in EVE.
1.) First problem is you cant lock out pass 150km so change the locking range to 250km.
2.) Second problem people can just warp right to you after the first 100km. Need to push that on gride warp to mechanic out to 250km also.
3.) Third problem On gride scaning is way overpowered. We understand why the scaning changes had to be made for Worm Holes and also so no budy can hide in low sec. but we need a counter to this for Sniping plateforms. And best of all I dont think we even need to change a thing about how scaning works right now to fix this problem.
My ideal is a new Module. It will come in 3 flavors and with a high/low/mid slot placements. What this Module will do is randomly though off the scaner probes warp to location any were from 20km-80km depending on witch module was fited to ship ether the high/low/mid slot.
High slot Module
Con's Takes up a gun slot and just as much cpu/gride/cap as Large Hybird Turrent. It's the middle ground for Large turrents and it also more or less makes the High slot module the BS sized one.
This Module when turned on will consume cap but it thoughs the ship scan prob randomly off target by 40km-80km. Meaning that if the prober selects warp to 0km they will end up 40km-80km off target. If the prober were to for what ever reason select warp 20km then they would randomly end up 60km-100km way from you the 20km+the random 40km-80km. I know I am not very good at explaning this but I hope you get the ruff ideal here.
Low slot Module
Works just like the high slot only it has it's CPU/grid/cap cost set for cruisers. And it only thoughs off probs by 30km-60km
Mid slot Module Works just like the other to only it has it's CPU/grid set for frigs with no cap cost and it only thoughs off probs by 20km-40km.
Thats my ideal. I think it solves the Overpoweredness of combate scaning by thoughing in some randomness and removing the ablity to always! Land in perfect range zone for your ships. And adds into the game thoughs ranges at witch not only Rails work but we mite see some Tachies some times too.
And you have to remeaber that Hybirds are not Alph weapons there dps weapons and they need alittle time in one spot to effectivly apply some of it so there do's need to be that 40km-80km randomness in there. They land 40km it's time to move right away and never get the time to realy be effective. At 40km off mark there are still point cruiser with points going out to 20km it do's not take a cruiser very long with a mwd to cover 20km. But out at the 80km rails would have a chances to sit alittle bit longer and be able to apply effectivly some of there dps.
And on top of that I just feel that combat scaning is just to good and could use alittle smuging.
Blasters
Man there are alot of ideals for this one but I most like ideals that keep blasters at close range.
I have another broad sweaping ideal that will effect every ship in game and I belive it would help blaster boats out.
Add in a new ship stat called Engine Thrust or something in the lines. What this will be use for is to have a stat that ruffly covers the str of your ships engines. Naturely Armor tanking ships will have stronger engines to move there heavy ships around and probly a few of the Minmatar armor tanked ships too but to a lesser degree from Gallente or Amarr ships but to a greater degree of shield tanked ships.
Affter that we will change Webbers again. Webbers will be changed to graduly slow a ship down based off of the Mass and Engine Thrust/str of the targted ship.
I.E. The heavyer the ships and the stronger the ships engines the longer it will take for the webber to fully slow the ship down to the speed at witch all webbers work today.
What that will do for blasters is buy them more time in that 0km-10km/15km range.
It will also make webbers more usefull on smaller ships and less usefull on bigger ones. But we have ewar thats more usefull on differnt ships types then others already any ways and this webbers will still have the same total webbing str they have to day. They will only work better on smaller ships in the sences that a frig would be fully slowed much faster then a BS would be and it even is logical.
Ya thats my very best ideal for blaster boats its probly not the best but I at least think it is a more logical solution.
If you made it this far down I think you and greatly look forward to your feed back. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 11:09:00 -
[1148] - Quote
This is 58 pages thread without any respond from CCP's side.. I think is useless guys.. Almost final build is on SiSi and I think that this is all what we can get.
Welcome new/old fail-ente :(
Crap
|
Fox Strongbow
Arimius Holding The Ancients.
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 11:13:00 -
[1149] - Quote
Hi there CCP,
As you are focusing on making hybrid more viable as an option, may I formally request you take a look at the Ferox? As the Caldari Hybrid battlecruiser (as I understand this class of ship is the most commonly used by newer players) it is severely lacking in terms of l3 mission running / exploration / ratting , and I would LOVE to have a viable hybrid alternative to the drake.
I spent a few days trying everything I could to get its tank / dps ratio good enough and it just wasn't up to the task, even when you removed dps from the equasion the tank still fell through! I think the gunnery changes may increase its DPS to a runnable standard, but its tank is still really bad.
Ask anyone, it isn't really a viable ship and its a real shame as I personally prefer hybrids but am stuck in a drake as the ferox just can't tank even remotely well enough.
If you are looking at fixing Hybrids, one way of making them properly viable again is to fix the Ferox, as having a viable caldari alternative to the drake would be fantastic!. It says it should strike fear into the hearts of enemies, in fact, flying the thing strikes fear into my heart as its made of paper!
Please fix the Ferox's tanking ability, I would love to shelve my drake and power up some hybrids.
Thank you for reading my post :)
Fox |
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
96
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 11:26:00 -
[1150] - Quote
Ferox has a nice tank, however they lack a serious punch to even be remotely competible... If they want it to keep current bonuses I'd suggest giving it the 7th turret even if it originally started at 5. Optimal bonus is so hard to use in pvp for more than a few seconds and in PvE you often find yourself more in need of a damage bonus even if the extra range is nice with antimatter :-)
Pinky |
|
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 11:27:00 -
[1151] - Quote
Downloading SiSi patch right now... 280.26MB
http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 11:58:00 -
[1152] - Quote
Errr... well... the Electron Blaster Cannon II of my Hyperion in SiSi now have a Reload Time of "Less than one second". So we have almost insta-reload, like Amarr. http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 13:10:00 -
[1153] - Quote
Electron Blaster Cannon in Hyperion with 1 Mag Field Stab T2:
Belonging to EFT: Activation 6.3 Duration(RoF) 2.8998 Optimal 3000 Damage Modifier 4.56586 Falloff 7500 Tracking 0.0625
On SiSi Activation 9.555 >50% more CAP use Duration(RoF) 5.07s 75% more slower Optimal 4500 +50% optimal range Damage Modifier 9.037413 Almost doubled Falloff 12500km +66,67% Tracking 0.06495 +3.92%
EDIT: On EFT 121m/s and SiSi 143.8m/s http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
m0cking bird
Doomheim
95
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 13:52:00 -
[1154] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Electron Blaster Cannon in Hyperion with 1 Mag Field Stab T2:
Belonging to EFT: Activation 6.3 Duration(RoF) 2.8998 Optimal 3000 Damage Modifier 4.56586 Falloff 7500 Tracking 0.0625
On SiSi Activation 9.555 >50% more CAP use Duration(RoF) 5.07s 75% more slower Optimal 4500 +50% optimal range Damage Modifier 9.037413 Almost doubled Falloff 12500km +66,67% Tracking 0.06495 +3.92%
EDIT: On EFT 121m/s and SiSi 143.8m/s
Seems CCP likes my slight changes suggestions. Making me the winner of whatever game we're all playing... HAHAHAHHA! cough* I should work for these dudes. I will bring chaos to the FORCE!
Interesting though. That is a bigger increase in falloff and optimal than I suggested. Is this only on the Hyperion? @ work cant check. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 14:07:00 -
[1155] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Electron Blaster Cannon in Hyperion with 1 Mag Field Stab T2:
Belonging to EFT: Activation 6.3 Duration(RoF) 2.8998 Optimal 3000 Damage Modifier 4.56586 Falloff 7500 Tracking 0.0625
On SiSi Activation 9.555 >50% more CAP use Duration(RoF) 5.07s 75% more slower Optimal 4500 +50% optimal range Damage Modifier 9.037413 Almost doubled Falloff 12500km +66,67% Tracking 0.06495 +3.92%
EDIT: On EFT 121m/s and SiSi 143.8m/s
Playing on sisi at the first second came on live after the patch, I don't have anything looking like your numbers.
Skills, bugs, whatsoever? -I don't know but I really don't have nothing compared with the numbers you just thrown out there. In fact my numbres are worst.
My mega fitting hasn't changed, only it's dps got a little up very small speed increase and fitting just a little bit easier but nothing remarquable enough to make a dev blog.
On the other side I've clearly noticed Talos can fit a full rack of neutrons (shield fit) just like the nage (witch has a lot better range engagement) but can't fit a full rack of 425mm II ...
Awesome.
|
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 14:21:00 -
[1156] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Phoenix Torp wrote:Electron Blaster Cannon in Hyperion with 1 Mag Field Stab T2:
Belonging to EFT: Activation 6.3 Duration(RoF) 2.8998 Optimal 3000 Damage Modifier 4.56586 Falloff 7500 Tracking 0.0625
On SiSi Activation 9.555 >50% more CAP use Duration(RoF) 5.07s 75% more slower Optimal 4500 +50% optimal range Damage Modifier 9.037413 Almost doubled Falloff 12500km +66,67% Tracking 0.06495 +3.92%
EDIT: On EFT 121m/s and SiSi 143.8m/s Playing on sisi at the first second came on live after the patch, I don't have anything looking like your numbers. Skills, bugs, whatsoever? -I don't know but I really don't have nothing compared with the numbers you just thrown out there. In fact my numbres are worst. My mega fitting hasn't changed, only it's dps got a little up very small speed increase and fitting just a little bit easier but nothing remarquable enough to make a dev blog. On the other side I've clearly noticed Talos can fit a full rack of neutrons (shield fit) just like the nage (witch has a lot better range engagement) but can't fit a full rack of 425mm II ... Awesome.
I've got all the affected gunnery skills at 5 but Large Blaster Spec that's 4. And Gallente BS at 5. And... I've got a signature with my skills, blind XD. http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 14:49:00 -
[1157] - Quote
Time for the Mega. It has 5 Tracking Enhancer, 1 Mag Stab and 1 Track Computer. Also Large Hybrid rigs: Locus Coordinator Collision Accelerator Ambit Extension
Belonging to EFT, Neutron Blaster Cannon II stats:
Activation 13.65 RoF 5.07465s Optimal 6761.8379 Damage Modifier 9.92537 Falloff 27125.988m Tracking 0.09646
Belonging to SiSi:
Activation 4.41 -67.69% RoF 2.9s -42.85% Optimal 4503m -33.4% Damage Modifier 4.91143631065 -50.51% Falloff 16190m -40.32% Tracking 0.126377480832 +31.01%
It's definitive: Neutron is broken XD http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 15:15:00 -
[1158] - Quote
Don't know if it's a bug in SiSi but clearing stats without no skills involved (EveMon and Market in SiSi) this are the new stats and the variation from Evemon:
Electron Blaster Cannon II Capacitor 5.88 GJ -30% Falloff 6000m SAME Tracking 0.06 rad/sec +20% RoF 4.5s SAME DamageMod 2.205x +5% Optimal 4800m SAME CPU 44 tf -3 PG 1155 MW -12%
Ion Blaster Cannon II Capacitor 9.8 GJ -30% Falloff 8000m SAME Tracking 0.0552 rad/sec+20% RoF 6.75s SAME DamageMod 3.54375x+5% Optimal 6000m SAME CPU 53 tf -3 PG 1617 MW -12%
Neutron Blaster Cannon II Capacitor 12.74 GJ -30% Falloff 10000m SAME Tracking 0.05196 rad/sec 20% RoF 7.88s SAME DamageMod 4.41x+5% Optimal 7200m SAME CPU 58 tf -3 PG 2079 MW -12%
CCP don't read this thread. These were the initial changes that put in the Dev Blog. I would rechange it to a thread for sell our hybrid players. http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 17:15:00 -
[1159] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:CCP don't read this thread. These were the initial changes that put in the Dev Blog. I would rechange it to a thread for sell our hybrid players.
It's always useful gallente skills for Angel ships but yeah, hybrids still suck
-about hybrids skills, I have almost all perfect (spec at 4) - implants cover those small % difference and for sure give an excellent situation of this awesome hybrid rebalancing = crap |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 17:47:00 -
[1160] - Quote
The only way I could get my brutix to kill anything was to fill my head with snakes. And then it would only get up to 2000m/s overheated. That should tell you something. |
|
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
99
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 18:04:00 -
[1161] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Time for the Mega. It has 5 Tracking Enhancer, 1 Mag Stab and 1 Track Computer. Also Large Hybrid rigs: Locus Coordinator Collision Accelerator Ambit Extension
Belonging to EFT, Neutron Blaster Cannon II stats:
Activation 13.65 RoF 5.07465s Optimal 6761.8379 Damage Modifier 9.92537 Falloff 27125.988m Tracking 0.09646
Belonging to SiSi:
Activation 4.41 -67.69% RoF 2.9s -42.85% Optimal 4503m -33.4% Damage Modifier 4.91143631065 -50.51% Falloff 16190m -40.32% Tracking 0.126377480832 +31.01%
It's definitive: Neutron is broken XD
Looks like the exact stats with antimatter loaded.
|
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 09:11:00 -
[1162] - Quote
Onictus wrote:Phoenix Torp wrote:Time for the Mega. It has 5 Tracking Enhancer, 1 Mag Stab and 1 Track Computer. Also Large Hybrid rigs: Locus Coordinator Collision Accelerator Ambit Extension
Belonging to EFT, Neutron Blaster Cannon II stats:
Activation 13.65 RoF 5.07465s Optimal 6761.8379 Damage Modifier 9.92537 Falloff 27125.988m Tracking 0.09646
Belonging to SiSi:
Activation 4.41 -67.69% RoF 2.9s -42.85% Optimal 4503m -33.4% Damage Modifier 4.91143631065 -50.51% Falloff 16190m -40.32% Tracking 0.126377480832 +31.01%
It's definitive: Neutron is broken XD Looks like the exact stats with antimatter loaded.
Both situations, either EFT or SiSi, have AM loaded. However, the raw data in EveMon and market on SiSi states clear that the stats of the guns were what they put in the Dev Blog. http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
WisdomLikeSilence
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 10:41:00 -
[1163] - Quote
NErf Scorch. Nerf Autocannons. problem solved. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 12:25:00 -
[1164] - Quote
WisdomLikeSilence wrote:NErf Scorch. Nerf Autocannons. problem solved.
Number of clients nerf seems it's the only way to make things happen around here
|
joomla alacard
Indifferent Bastards
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 20:29:00 -
[1165] - Quote
(Note: please excuse the base stats if they are off - hopefully not drastically so - but I think I did the math right)
The Javelin improvement is definitely the shining star; however, even though I was initially very excited to hear about the hybrid turret changes, and ship velocity/inertia changes, the fittings that I can think of off the top of my head for a number of ships still seem to be limited damage-wise. For example, in a ship like the ferox, turrets are it's life-blood, but fitting all h.n. blasters has been possible, but at the cost of multiple lows just for enough powergrid when also concerned about having a decent passive shield. However, even when trying to maximize damage at the cost of ehp, the dps & ehp combo is not on par with other ships of the class. Hybrids will definitely be more effective as far as tracking and cap consumption is concerned (which is a blessing!) I was intrigued to see the difference this would make, so I looked up the base stats of two turrets to compare; heavy neutron blaster II and 425 autocannon II. According to EVElopedia, a comparison of the tracking of the HNBII vs 425ACII looks like this:
HNB II: 0.1000 rad/s --> (tracking 5) --> 0.1250 rad/s 425 AC II: 0.1056 rad/s --> 0.1320 rad/s (+ 5.6% speed of HNBII)
...not much of a difference. And honestly, I always thought of the superior tracking as insult on top of injury, since BC vs BC at a standstill; ACs slap harder and because of sig radius/terrible agility/velocity, outside of a couple ships, breaking their tracking isn't even an option, since the hybrids would break first (not to mention, sometimes you encounter 220 vulcans).
With the tracking boost to the HNBII, it gets a little more interesting:
HNB II: 0.1000 rad/s --> 0.1200 (+20%) --> (tracking 5) --> 0.1500 rad/s (+ 13.7% speed of 425ACII) 425 AC II: 0.1056 rad/s --> 0.1320 rad/s
Wait...agile hybrid turrets?! Nice. Now, let's look at frigate-class turrets: Light Neutron Blaster II vs 200mm Autocannon II...
LNB II: 0.3165 rad/s --> (tracking 5) --> 0.3956 --> 0.3956 rad/s 200 AC II: 0.3150 rad/s --> 0.3938 --> (+7.5%/lvl * 5 = 37.5%) --> 0.5414 rad/s (+36.86% faster!)
Wow. I, for one, didn't realize how much faster the rifter and dramiel track compared to their caldari/gallente antitheses. And let's be honest with ourselves... that's what most pvp frigate lone wolfs (wolves?) fly.
After the +20% (0.3165 --> 0.3798 rad/s):
LNB II: 0.3798 rad/s --> (tracking 5) --> 0.4748 --> 0.4748 rad/s 200 AC II: 0.3150 rad/s --> 0.3938 --> (+7.5%/lvl * 5 = 37.5%) --> 0.5414 rad/s (+14.03% faster)
Hmm...autocannons on certain ships (the typical contenders) are still quite a bit faster, but not nearly as big of a difference as before. Take into account the speed boost and/or inertia decrease on some ships, and they might turn out to be more of a threat. Also, notice that the tracking of the LNB II is now 20.57% faster than the comparable AC without the 7.5%/lvl tracking boost !
Even with these changes, I am skeptical that this will do much to shake up the current pecking order of base bc ship hulls, but it might have a moderate effect for cruisers. Like i'm sure many others have said, some ships just don't have a niche cut out for them. (You can polish a turd all you want, but in the end, you still want to flush it down the toilet.) However, the affect on the frig vs frig arena could be substantial. Aside from hybrid vs projectile, I am also curious to see what will happen to the potential for a nos/neut to be squeezed in to some fits that have up until now seemed to be stuck at 90% of potential. Also, wondering if that nos/neut will actually be effective at all, given far less cap use and MUCH better (comparatively) tracking. Not to put a sour note at the end, but none of these changes seem to make a dent in the sense of security passive fit/missile users have ...dra...*cough*...kes...*cough*. Get ready for a Dramiel black friday sale. Okay, these changes aren't really going to make anyone in their right mind want to abandon their little cheap-as-hell machine gun hummingbirds, but certain other ships are definitely going to start looking good. (Like greasy fast food at an inebriated 1am good.) |
marjolijn dragonslayer
unfair pleasure Elemental Tide
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 10:15:00 -
[1166] - Quote
The reloading time on hybrids is just terrible,
every 20 seconds you need to fit another type of ammo becaus the range doesnt apply anymore. taking 10 seconds per switch......
Take out at least half of the ammo types and make the bandwidth of the remaining ones wider, so atleast we can apply damage instead of reloading..... |
Planetmaster
Weekenders
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 14:35:00 -
[1167] - Quote
I was on SiSi and testing. And:
As i know its impossible to change situation without changing ships but there is some tweaks that can be done.
Please add some power grid and CPU to eris. This ship is impossible to fit. I don't know why it was done in that way. You added some inertia to it. But ship itself is still useless. Eris is not real interdictor its faildictor .... also maybe its possible to -one low slot and add it to mid ? Its gallante boat so at last WEB "must be" on this ship with only to slots in mid you can only MWD (essential on dictor) and Scrambler
More to come.. |
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
371
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 14:54:00 -
[1168] - Quote
The Eris should have a high slot moved to a mid with a ton of additional CPU. Maybe one extra missile slot... Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Planetmaster
Weekenders
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 15:07:00 -
[1169] - Quote
Deimos
I don't know where this ship can be used ? Its still unplayabe in fleets because rails sucks. Munin and Zaelot are far more better in Armor HACs. Deimos Sig Radius is big. What is not the worst but rails and ammo. Ammo ranges are still to tight you must switch this ammo over and over to gain any DMG. Its a fail CCP one more time.
Deimos on blasters is even worst. Not much tank to gank and slow ... how you want us to play with it ?
Ishtar
Maybe it will be good in small gangs and gate camps in 0.0 (coz drones). and perfect ratter as where it is now. It good ship for small gang can work as tanker / bait
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 18:00:00 -
[1170] - Quote
Planetmaster wrote:Deimos
I don't know where this ship can be used ? Its still unplayabe in fleets because rails sucks. Munin and Zaelot are far more better in Armor HACs. Deimos Sig Radius is big. What is not the worst but rails and ammo. Ammo ranges are still to tight you must switch this ammo over and over to gain any DMG. Its a fail CCP one more time.
Deimos on blasters is even worst. Not much tank to gank and slow ... how you want us to play with it ?
Ishtar
Maybe it will be good in small gangs and gate camps in 0.0 (coz drones). and perfect ratter as where it is now. It good ship for small gang can work as tanker / bait
Actually change it by vigilant and you have a decent hac, still crap range engagement but at least tank some dmg and actually does some dmg when it manages to get in range.
|
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 20:17:00 -
[1171] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Planetmaster wrote:Deimos
I don't know where this ship can be used ? Its still unplayabe in fleets because rails sucks. Munin and Zaelot are far more better in Armor HACs. Deimos Sig Radius is big. What is not the worst but rails and ammo. Ammo ranges are still to tight you must switch this ammo over and over to gain any DMG. Its a fail CCP one more time.
Deimos on blasters is even worst. Not much tank to gank and slow ... how you want us to play with it ?
Ishtar
Maybe it will be good in small gangs and gate camps in 0.0 (coz drones). and perfect ratter as where it is now. It good ship for small gang can work as tanker / bait
Actually change it by vigilant and you have a decent hac, still crap range engagement but at least tank some dmg and actually does some dmg when it manages to get in range.
yes but vigi is too expensive for Ally fleets ! :) its pimp ship ! :) |
Malus Rimor
Paragon.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 07:11:00 -
[1172] - Quote
marjolijn dragonslayer wrote:The reloading time on hybrids is just terrible,
every 20 seconds you need to fit another type of ammo becaus the range doesnt apply anymore. taking 10 seconds per switch......
Take out at least half of the ammo types and make the bandwidth of the remaining ones wider, so atleast we can apply damage instead of reloading.....
^^ This. In practice this is important. |
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 12:16:00 -
[1173] - Quote
Malus Rimor wrote:marjolijn dragonslayer wrote:The reloading time on hybrids is just terrible,
every 20 seconds you need to fit another type of ammo becaus the range doesnt apply anymore. taking 10 seconds per switch......
Take out at least half of the ammo types and make the bandwidth of the remaining ones wider, so atleast we can apply damage instead of reloading..... ^^ This. In practice this is important.
In SiSi they have insta-reload like Amarr. http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 13:00:00 -
[1174] - Quote
Phoenix Torp wrote:Malus Rimor wrote:marjolijn dragonslayer wrote:The reloading time on hybrids is just terrible,
every 20 seconds you need to fit another type of ammo becaus the range doesnt apply anymore. taking 10 seconds per switch......
Take out at least half of the ammo types and make the bandwidth of the remaining ones wider, so atleast we can apply damage instead of reloading..... ^^ This. In practice this is important. In SiSi they have insta-reload like Amarr.
Bug
Actually it's 5 seconds and it helps for engagement ranges but not about dps, tech 2 ammo needs serious improvements |
Lunce
PWNED Factor The Seventh Day
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 13:10:00 -
[1175] - Quote
As a Caldari pilot I've always looked at the Ferox and wondered why it's such a lousy blaster boat. It only has enough power grid to fit Electron Blasters, which leaves it completely anemic when it comes to DPS. If it had the PG to fit Neutron Blasters, it could actually be a decent PVP ship.
Just a thought. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 13:13:00 -
[1176] - Quote
Lunce wrote:As a Caldari pilot I've always looked at the Ferox and wondered why it's such a lousy blaster boat. It only has enough power grid to fit Electron Blasters, which leaves it completely anemic when it comes to DPS. If it had the PG to fit Neutron Blasters, it could actually be a decent PVP ship.
Just a thought.
Well actually it fits the same gun type than Diemost: electrons
Try to fit your Diemost with Neutrons
|
indicast
Conquerors Undead Space Solar Citizens
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 13:40:00 -
[1177] - Quote
WisdomLikeSilence wrote:NErf Scorch. Nerf Autocannons. problem solved.
nerf missiles too |
Treks Dot
The Kobayashi Maru
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 23:06:00 -
[1178] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:Bug
Actually it's 5 seconds and it helps for engagement ranges but not about dps, tech 2 ammo needs serious improvements
After some testing on SiSi I have to say that Javelin is fine now. Void needs to lose that damned tracking penalty and Spike could use more damage. Never had a problem with Null. Rails themselves need better base tracking. |
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
429
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 04:17:00 -
[1179] - Quote
Treks Dot wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:Bug
Actually it's 5 seconds and it helps for engagement ranges but not about dps, tech 2 ammo needs serious improvements After some testing on SiSi I have to say that Javelin is fine now. Void needs to lose that damned tracking penalty and Spike could use more damage. Never had a problem with Null. Rails themselves need better base tracking.
The problem with Rails is you're too damn slow to kite, unlike Artillery
Always ... Never ... Forget to check your references.-áPeace out Zulu! Hope you land well! |
DickbeardThePirate
Aliastra Gallente Federation
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 07:30:00 -
[1180] - Quote
I'm probably the least experienced person in this thread, so feel free to disregard this as I have no idea what I'm talking about, but these changes definitely seem underwhelming. Tripling the velocity and inertia buffs would help. |
|
Miss President
SOLARIS ASTERIUS
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 02:38:00 -
[1181] - Quote
what happened to removing Tech II missile penalties? |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 04:38:00 -
[1182] - Quote
One question to ccp. Haw gallente was able to won a war with calldari ?? |
David Xavier
The Scope Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 10:10:00 -
[1183] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:One question to ccp. Haw gallente was able to won a war with calldari ??
Even then the drones kicked the Caldari back home not the hybrid guns, just saying.
It was the master plan to trick the Caldari into using the inferior hybrid weapon systems, unfortunately we failed to develop a better one and got stuck with it too. I don't suffer from insanity.. I enjoy it ! |
Hungry Ghost
War Tactical Groups SOLAR FLEET
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 13:14:00 -
[1184] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:One question to ccp. Haw gallente was able to won a war with calldari ?? One side got wyvern and leviathan and the other nyx and erebus. What do you expect?
|
Explosivesonhand
The Hand of Ragnarok S I L E N T.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 08:27:00 -
[1185] - Quote
As much as I agree with the fact that these hybrid weapon bonuses are too little, too late; the biggest problem remains the ships they are fitted on. Many Gallente ships in particular. For specializing in close range fighting, Gallente ships are terribly slow. Not so much with their base speed as with their acceleration. Being armor based, most of these ships end up being less agile than all of their class counterparts save for Amarr ships. Gallete ships simply aren't fast enough. Instead of toying with base speed and a paltry 5% agility buff, go for an all agility increase on Gallente hybrid boats (all of them). Something that really lets them get up to max speed and get in someones face.
This makes perfect sense for a robust, technologically advanced ship that is still weighted with armor. Lower max speed but still good acceleration. 5% agility bonus simply isn't enough. |
Petra Sparkle
The Scope Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.21 20:21:00 -
[1186] - Quote
Gallente still suck in PVP, still too slow and not agile enough. I hate having to fly my none racial ships, I die to anything other than sh*t fit ships. and I'm tired of being laughed at in small gangs if i bring one.
tried out on SISI and it's still the same if you fit them as they are suposed to be fitted ( ie using stuff a Gallente is suposed to be fitted with) Rails still suck , low damage and low range compared to other guns, Blasters still broken I've never managed to use them in solo pvp ships either kite or run away every time.
The ships are still far too slow/not agile enough for the roles they are suposed to play.
The Catalyst is the only thing that might work I can see it taking over from the thrasher in small wolfpacks after Crucible
Thorax, Brutix and Domi all need a far bigger boost to bring them into line with other races. The Nemisis needs a big boost of some kind to stop it being the worst SB by far.
If you can give SB's a bit of love after the pilots complained about their I WIN button surely you can throw us lesser beings a bit more of a bone |
Malus Rimor
Paragon.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 00:40:00 -
[1187] - Quote
Petra Sparkle wrote: The ships are still far too slow/not agile enough for the roles they are suposed to play.
Agreed. |
xxxak
Intergalactic Syndicate Nulli Secunda
153
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 00:56:00 -
[1188] - Quote
Malus Rimor wrote:Petra Sparkle wrote: The ships are still far too slow/not agile enough for the roles they are suposed to play.
Agreed.
Agree.
I am maxx skilled on Caldari, Winmatar, and Amarr. I am a few days away from being max skilled on Gallente. I still see no reason to fly Gallente ships. I will probably buy a few hulls for spinning, and switch back to Winmatar for PvP. The nerfs to supercaps will cause more super pilots to join the largest alliances who can properly "support" their deployment, further concentrating firepower/wealth in EVE. The end result will be fewer "fun" fights, and will hurt EVE in the long run. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 04:25:00 -
[1189] - Quote
Do something with that ccp cant you see that ppl are really pissed ?? Yoo Soundwave think a little bit more about whole game not minis Or maybe you should switch your character to gallente to show gallente players some respect coz they was waiting too long huh ?? Nice idea ??? Ccp changed Or not ?? |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:22:00 -
[1190] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:Do something with that ccp cant you see that ppl are really pissed ?? Yoo Soundwave think a little bit more about whole game not minis Or maybe you should switch your character to gallente to show gallente players some respect coz they was waiting too long huh ?? Nice idea ??? Ccp changed Or not ??
Well me personly think it's Impossable to Realy fix Hybirds with out stepping on the toe's of Projectiles and Lazers.
Not to say that this changes dont help most importantly the tracking/dmg and reduced ammo reload times and also some of the fitting problems as well.
But the Tech 2 changes boosted all equaly as it should have too.
Now it's time to fix BS Missiles and there BS platforms and Rework some of the Gallente fleet over into drone boats and to raise drone dps to that of there Projectile and Lazer counter parts on Drone boats only.
That way Caldari and Gallente BS can start geting in on major fleet fights again. |
|
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
174
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:31:00 -
[1191] - Quote
Keen Fallsword wrote:One question to ccp. Haw gallente was able to won a war with calldari ??
How is babby formed? How girl get pregnent? |
Senlia Hucel-Ge
NoobsUnited
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 07:41:00 -
[1192] - Quote
That way
http://fukung.net/v/17625/ee41a1e3a6273ea83a7de3c089f2278b.jpg |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 19:08:00 -
[1193] - Quote
Lack of any feed back from CCP is rather depressing. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 19:30:00 -
[1194] - Quote
Herr Wilkus wrote:How girl get pregnent?
Send me your sister I'll show you
Ho we're talking about fake hybrids? -talos still sucks, and hard.
Naga is a really awesome sniper platform but dps is...meh
Sniper naga Target Tornado: 140km - you need a few Nagas to one shot that one
Sniper talos Target Tornado: 140km you really need a lot of those (terrible dps compared with naga rails)
Sniper Oracle Target Tornado: 140km, outch ! -almost one shot
Sniper Tornado Target Tornado: 140km - one shot
Sniper Machariel Target Talos: one shot (most of) Target Naga: one shot (most of) Target: Tornado: 2 shot (some one shot) Target Oracle: almost 3 shot (none one shot but several 2 shots)
Tornado wins -cheap throw away sniper platform Machariel wins - expensive but really awesome. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 19:52:00 -
[1195] - Quote
I guess the changes are final, In 6 months at the next expansion after people still don't use hybrids much in PvP I hope CCP dont take too much offence when most of the player base say we told you so. My only fear is that even after this period when it is obvious that Hybrids are still the weakest weapon platform in the game it will take another 3 years for them to be looked at agan.
I still love how Projectiles have the best tracking in most classes of short range weapons so even if a Galle ship manages to charge to point blank range the Mini will still be hitting better.
We cant get out of their range because they are faster and we cant get under their guns because they still in most cases have better tracking.(Unless on specific Galle boats with tracking bonuses). Guess all that's left is to not play Galle.
Out of curiosity, what is the character break down of the CCP staff. you dont by any chance mostly use Mini or Amarr do you. Was this a chicken or egg situation. Are you mostly Mini/Amarr because you know these races are the more powerful OR are these races more powerful because you mostly use Mini/Amarr and subconciously(hopefully) made these races the best. |
Malefaktor
Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 20:23:00 -
[1196] - Quote
First, I'd like to thank CCP for attempting to rebalance hybrid weapons and (to some extent) Gallente ships. That said, I agree with many have said here: The main problem with blasters is that the hulls that bonus them (Gallente boats primarily) are *too slow* to actually bring those weapons to bear.
The main issue is how Gallente ships stack up against Minmatar ships, the primary small gang PVP choice today. A Minmatar ship is fast enough that it easily kite a blaster boat outside of web range and then rain down unanswered firepower with it's 20km range AC's. If things go badly, the Minmi ship simply flies away.
Gallente ships lack an antidote to that situation, and I expect these changes will do little to fix do that.
IMO what Gallente ships really need is a *modest* +20% web range bonus (and maybe web strength bonus also). With a web range of 12km, this would make make it more RISKY for a Miinmatar ship to kite a Gally boat, but not impossible. It would also mean that Gallente ships could overheat their webs to 14.4km which would be even more scary for a Minmatar ship, but still not impossible to escape.
A web bonus would also fit neatly with the traditional tackling role for which Gallente ships were once famous. Just a thought... |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 01:34:00 -
[1197] - Quote
Malefaktor wrote:First, I'd like to thank CCP for attempting to rebalance hybrid weapons and (to some extent) Gallente ships. That said, I agree with many have said here: The main problem with blasters is that the hulls that bonus them (Gallente boats primarily) are *too slow* to actually bring those weapons to bear. The main issue is how Gallente ships stack up against Minmatar ships, the primary small gang PVP choice today. A Minmatar ship is fast enough that it easily kite a blaster boat outside of web range and then rain down unanswered firepower with it's 20km range AC's. If things go badly, the Minmi ship simply flies away. Gallente ships lack an antidote to that situation, and I expect these changes will do little to fix do that. IMO what Gallente ships really need is a *modest* +20% web range bonus (and maybe web strength bonus also). With a web range of 12km, this would make make it more RISKY for a Miinmatar ship to kite a Gally boat, but not impossible. It would also mean that Gallente ships could overheat their webs to 14.4km which would be even more scary for a Minmatar ship, but still not impossible to escape. A web bonus would also fit neatly with the traditional tackling role for which Gallente ships were once famous. Just a thought...
Has long has you can keep your target over/at max disruptor range and you can apply decent dmg while your target scratches you from time to time, the kitting ship will always win unless you make big piloting mistakes. Kitting games are the easier, you don't need to have the biggest dps, just takes some time but you'll always kill your target if you don't let it come or he doesn't have any tool over you to get in closer.
Nice stuff. |
Grey Stormshadow
draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1040
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 02:41:00 -
[1198] - Quote
As long winmatar stays winmatar I approve any lollente boost you make. It is good to be OP :)
Get |
J3ssica Alba
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 11:48:00 -
[1199] - Quote
Grey Stormshadow wrote:As long winmatar stays winmatar I approve any lollente boost you make. It is good to be OP :)
Then maybe nerf all other 3 races if you're leaving Gallente the same, problem solved and will cause lots of tears from non Gallenteans also ;) |
Malefaktor
Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 11:52:00 -
[1200] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote: Has long has you can keep your target over/at max disruptor range and you can apply decent dmg while your target scratches you from time to time, the kitting ship will always win unless you make big piloting mistakes. Kitting games are the easier, you don't need to have the biggest dps, just takes some time but you'll always kill your target if you don't let it come or he doesn't have any tool over you to get in closer.
Nice stuff.
Couple things there: First of all you're right. If the kiting pilot makes no mistakes then they will win eventually.
BUT a longer web range for the gallente would:
1) force the kiting ship farther out, which means less DPS with autocannons and more TTK on the gallente ship. That means more time to crawl to a gate, more time to redock, more time to wait for the cavalry to arrive, etc.
2) it would also give the kiting pilot much less room for mistakes if the gallente pilot tries anything fancy.
On that last point: the classic way to shake a kiting pilot is to fly away from them full speed and then suddenly whip back towards them while overheating your MWD. If the slower ship has a 12km range on its web (14.4km with heat) instead of just 10km, there's a lot less room for mistakes on the part of the kiting pilot.
Finally, a web bonus would actually give Gallente ships a military doctrine that sort of works. Use fast frigates to web targets from 11-12km and then move in with heavier blaster boats (Thorax, Brutix, Hyperion, etc.) to finish them off. |
|
Captain Africa
GRIM MARCH SpaceMonkey's Alliance
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 09:44:00 -
[1201] - Quote
Dev if you want to save the blaster ...then please read this thread ....you might just go WTF !
EVE Forums -+ EVE Technology and Research Center -+ Features & Ideas Discussion -+ "Captain the drone is at 0 "..... Warp |
MooCowofKow
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 22:57:00 -
[1202] - Quote
Why did you forget about my blaster Tengu? :( |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 00:04:00 -
[1203] - Quote
MooCowofKow wrote:Why did you forget about my blaster Tengu? :(
Because he doesn't want to land on top of my Proteus but my Proteus told me he would like to fit HML's, what do you think?
|
MooCowofKow
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 01:07:00 -
[1204] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:MooCowofKow wrote:Why did you forget about my blaster Tengu? :( Because he doesn't want to land on top of my Proteus but my Proteus told me he would like to fit HML's, what do you think?
Then what's the point of having a hybrid subsystem on the Tengu? |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 05:08:00 -
[1205] - Quote
MooCowofKow wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:MooCowofKow wrote:Why did you forget about my blaster Tengu? :( Because he doesn't want to land on top of my Proteus but my Proteus told me he would like to fit HML's, what do you think? Then what's the point of having a hybrid subsystem on the Tengu?
To prove the Proteus is the best blaster ship in it's class?
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 20:24:00 -
[1206] - Quote
MooCowofKow wrote:Tanya Powers wrote:MooCowofKow wrote:Why did you forget about my blaster Tengu? :( Because he doesn't want to land on top of my Proteus but my Proteus told me he would like to fit HML's, what do you think? Then what's the point of having a hybrid subsystem on the Tengu?
The answer is rails. |
Zepa
Real Indians Bora Alis
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 00:42:00 -
[1207] - Quote
Explosion Radius Fury Cruise Missile is terrible. |
Verity Sovereign
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
142
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 04:55:00 -
[1208] - Quote
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3012
Quote:Tech II Ammo
I did some comparison between the tech II ammo types and found that one hybrid ammo type did indeed need some work. I also found that the other turret types had some very underwhelming ammo. Rather than limit myself to only boosting the hybrid ammo, I will also be making some changes to other tech II ammo types. Javelin is quite obviously underpowered. The correlating laser and projectile ammo, Gleam and Quake, are equally underwhelming and they all need some change. Additionally, Hail sticks out as terribly underpowered.
Javelin (all sizes): Removed cap penalty Javelin, Gleam and Quake (all sizes): Removed tracking speed penalty, added 25% tracking speed bonus Hail (all sizes): Removed falloff penalty
Hail is terribly underpowered? Its falloff bonus is removed? Winmatar's effective range is pretty much all falloff. Now they'll do more damage than EMP/Fusion/Phased Plasma with the same range, and +25% tracking....
And the Blasters will still be stuck with void with the same -50% falloff modifier that they just removed from Hail.
Meanwhile, null is stuck with the lowest range boost of any of the T2 range boosting ammo (for the short ranged variant of eahc weapon type). Gallente still won't be able to catch Winmatar to get within blaster range. If they do, T2 autos will spit out much more DPS due to hail doing much better applied DPS. Caldari rails will be buffed though, yay for only 2 viable races. Drakes and Canes may become Drakes, Feroxs and Canes. Woot!
If you are going to get rid of the falloff penalty to hail, do the same to the penalty to Void, and optimal penalty of gleam. Give null+50% to falloff, what is this +25% BS? |
Liam Mirren
325
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 05:29:00 -
[1209] - Quote
Verity Sovereign wrote:CCP has a hardon for Minmatar and the "hybrid buff" actually buffs projectiles even more, making them more silly than ever. In the mean time the Gallente issues still aren't solved.
PS; Tornado is also pretty LOL
Yup.
Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude.
My guides: http://mirren.freeforums.org |
MooCowofKow
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 06:17:00 -
[1210] - Quote
Verity Sovereign wrote:http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3012 Quote:Tech II Ammo
I did some comparison between the tech II ammo types and found that one hybrid ammo type did indeed need some work. I also found that the other turret types had some very underwhelming ammo. Rather than limit myself to only boosting the hybrid ammo, I will also be making some changes to other tech II ammo types. Javelin is quite obviously underpowered. The correlating laser and projectile ammo, Gleam and Quake, are equally underwhelming and they all need some change. Additionally, Hail sticks out as terribly underpowered.
Javelin (all sizes): Removed cap penalty Javelin, Gleam and Quake (all sizes): Removed tracking speed penalty, added 25% tracking speed bonus Hail (all sizes): Removed falloff penalty Hail is terribly underpowered? Its falloff bonus is removed? Winmatar's effective range is pretty much all falloff. Now they'll do more damage than EMP/Fusion/Phased Plasma with the same range, and +25% tracking.... And the Blasters will still be stuck with void with the same -50% falloff modifier that they just removed from Hail. Meanwhile, null is stuck with the lowest range boost of any of the T2 range boosting ammo (for the short ranged variant of eahc weapon type). Gallente still won't be able to catch Winmatar to get within blaster range. If they do, T2 autos will spit out much more DPS due to hail doing much better applied DPS. Caldari rails will be buffed though, yay for only 2 viable races. Drakes and Canes may become Drakes, Feroxs and Canes. Woot! If you are going to get rid of the falloff penalty to hail, do the same to the penalty to Void, and optimal penalty of gleam. Give null+50% to falloff, what is this +25% BS?
T2 rails are still bad, hybrid Tengu is useless, Eagle is useless.
|
|
PJRiddick
CherryHill
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 17:37:00 -
[1211] - Quote
im gonna try this one more time, i replyed to this a bit ago bot for some reason the post didnt post,...>guess im a dumbass<
ANYWAY,...with that in mind,...
ill try to keep this short. I was looking over the specs for the long range T-2 ammo, and from what im seeing, its in the same group as the plutonium if memory serves me. Seeing that the T-2 ammo or SPIKE is a +80 but the tracking is .25, the only real advantge AFTER the patch coming will be the extra damage that the ammmo itself gives. With the Spike ammo and its short comings in the past, being .25 on tracking, ive stuck to the T-1 ammo only because it hits better and is a lot more accurate at range. With the upgrades to the weapons and the ammo, will this long range ammo hit any better?,...will i need to stick to the t-1 ammo or the faction ammo?
CCP,...take the tracking penelties off the SPIKE please,...Thank you |
Verity Sovereign
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
142
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 20:32:00 -
[1212] - Quote
a 75% tracking penaly does seem excessive
If one has 1.8x the range, than at optimal one needs 1/1.8 = 0.555 x the tracking speed to have the same hit quality as before.
I would like to see the long range T2 ammo for beams, rails, and arty have a 0.56x tracking multiplier instead of a 0.25 multiplier. |
Diehard Nuck
Diehard Nuck Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 23:44:00 -
[1213] - Quote
Came to read about the hybrid buff - really enjoyed reading about a small, practically useless hybrid buff and the nice AC ammo buff.
Looks like CCP has decided that the lore dictates Gallente should crosstrain or become miners. |
Otto Schultzky
Steller Exiles Inc Seventh Sanctum.
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 04:51:00 -
[1214] - Quote
After 60+ pages of "discussion" I am not holding my breath that Gallente/ Caldari hybrid weapons "platforms" will get a meaningful improvement.
So to whom it may concern in CCP game balancing department. If you can't make Gallente/ Caldari hybrid ships/ weapons "better" with out braking existing game balance, at least make them cheaper. Where their approximate mineral cost would reflect their combat effectiveness.
In a current state most hybrid ships larger that a frigate and smaller then capitals are like "white elephants that sent to hunt for elephant guns". |
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 08:02:00 -
[1215] - Quote
There is other thread for testing in SiSi and feedback https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=29692 http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp |
quasarabyss
HelpMyMissioners Epsilon Shimmy Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 22:15:00 -
[1216] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:
Also, don't forget caldari...
Caldari Pilot here, I used to train Hybrids until i realized how fruitless it was.
Looks like Hybrids are back on the menu.
Also, CCP have begun to work on CCP, the effect on the game itself is an indicator of a greater trend. A positive trend that I hope remains in place for a long time. Fingers crossed for more expansions like this one.
I read and post to forums because of DT. That is all. If my comments are discombobulated that might be because it is 11pm here. If you don't like it feel free to shoot me down in game, everyone else has. |
d3an0
Doomheim
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 12:22:00 -
[1217] - Quote
Blasters need more dps and alpha so when they finally do get the enemy pinned down, they really do face melt.
Gallente ships also need more speed bonuses and buffs so getting into range is actually possible when not warped in at 0. None of the silly falloff and optimal bonuses, that'd just ruin blasters purpose, although null and void could use some work. |
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
157
|
Posted - 2011.12.01 18:22:00 -
[1218] - Quote
Buffing blaster dps through the roof won't solve anything. The problem is simply that the race with the shortest range does NOT have the fastest ships like it should. It's really basic stuff. Armor rigs and plates reducing speed while being pretty much required in PvP certainly don't help either. Further evidence for what I'm saying can be seen on the frigate level: blaster frigates are and were not gimped because they can catch up to their target, furthermore, combat usually takes place within web range.
Also, once upon a time, Autocannons didn't have ridiculous falloff and had to actually get close to webbing range to deal enough damage. |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
65
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 06:12:00 -
[1219] - Quote
Verity Sovereign wrote:a 75% tracking penaly does seem excessive
If one has 1.8x the range, than at optimal one needs 1/1.8 = 0.555 x the tracking speed to have the same hit quality as before.
I would like to see the long range T2 ammo for beams, rails, and arty have a 0.56x tracking multiplier instead of a 0.25 multiplier.
This! The math dont lie. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
856
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 16:57:00 -
[1220] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Buffing blaster dps through the roof won't solve anything. The problem is simply that the race with the shortest range does NOT have the fastest ships like it should. It's really basic stuff. Armor rigs and plates reducing speed while being pretty much required in PvP certainly don't help either. Further evidence for what I'm saying can be seen on the frigate level: blaster frigates are and were not gimped because they can catch up to their target, furthermore, combat usually takes place within web range.
Also, once upon a time, Autocannons didn't have ridiculous falloff and had to actually get close to webbing range to deal enough damage.
Indeed, as it stands right now it's difficult to ask for more dps on blasters or rails without watching carefully and individually each ship.
Has you rightly said small blasters/rails are fine and by the way they were already before, they were the ones that needed no revamp at all but only ships tweaks.
Proportionally speaking between small and large guns, putting numbers out of my arse (just because I can but I will avoid) I'd say that blaster ships need a lot more speed, maybe a small increase in DPS and rails really a lot of DPS love.
While for blasters I think now that is about tweaking ships bonus that CCP will manage to bring them back to the light, Rails really suffer from the lack of alpha. I don't think the best way to compare rails with other weapon system, or even watching independently each weapon system is to watch numbers over time because of something basic in the game: engagement time You can't compare the dps of rails vs arty when one can instantly pop cruisers and the other one needs 5 shots then say that over time Rails have the biggest DPS.
Who shoots for 1hour a single BS? Who shoots BC's or cruiser for over 30mn? -hell even 3minutes, unless is structures ...
Average fight without logistics is about 30s to about 100sec (self rep bait tanks etc) so in my humble opinion you can't just pick numbers over time (how much time by the way). I guess long range weapons should be balanced around "target X" at "distance Y" with perfect skills and shooting for "Z" seconds based on average life time of ships using that kind of weapon system.
Then we would probably see that missiles need a huge dps improvement (travel time before applying dps) and rails are underground very deep looking for enraged hamsters.
Just some point of view about what actually is already done. More stuff will be done (I hope) so maybe and I hope I'll start using my racial ships and guns in fleets without read "gtfo with that shift and bring something useful" |
|
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2011.12.03 23:31:00 -
[1221] - Quote
The reason hybrids are failures is because they are actually not close-range / sniper weapons. Yet the devs are trying to make them work in a field they are not designed for.
And they can-¦t change that. Because they have already designed someone for these roles: the Minmatar. and since the Gallente mustn-¦t become like the Minmatar, they can-¦t become a dedicated close-combat/sniper race any more.
Cap-free weapons for combat exclusively within nos/neut range, multiple damage types to decrease the time to kill (thus making up for the increase of the ttk due to getting into range), the fastest and most agile ships to get into range (and shield tanks so you don-¦t need to gimp your speed to get EHP)... this is how a close combat race looks like. And yes, it-¦s 100% Minmatar, they are perfectly adapted for close range combat.
For sniping: sniping is everywhere all about fast and agile units, high alpha and low rate of fire (oh look, it-¦s the Minmatar again) There are reasons for it. You really can-¦t have a reasonable sniping mechanic without these characteristics. This is why sniping is pointless now and why the change to probing were needed when sniping was still a thing.
Meaning of course, you can only have sniping together with Artys and Minmatar. Trying to make rails and Gallente to do sniping is complete nonsense.
So, for close combat and sniping you need the Minmatar, and the Gallente will never be able to do it adequately (ironically they are designed to fit into the combat roles the Minmatar are currently covering... seemingly op, because all the advantages needed to make close combat competitive are married with the most flexible engagement ranges).
This is how the devs have designed the races, their ships, their weapons. It might have been unintentionally, the current state is the result of many many small changes over the years after all, so something like this can happen. But unintentionally or not, the devs have done it and now there are so many problems with balancing that you can-¦t ignore it any more. And you can-¦t fix it with a little more dps here and tracking there, because you are trying to go against the basic design of the races, trying to force them into roles they are not suited for and prevent them to fill out roles they are suited for. "You either need less science fiction or more medication."
"Or less medication and more ammo!" |
Nathan Andersons
Black Talon Aerospace Black Watch.
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 03:47:00 -
[1222] - Quote
Just a thought and something to consider,
but why not make rails slow rof and high alpha and artillery higher rof and lower alpha. Dont you think it would take longer for a rail gun to reload then it would an artillery shell^
Just a thought. |
Mekhana
Spiritus Draconis
435
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 20:11:00 -
[1223] - Quote
So CCP are you going to announce some further hybrid guns and boat changes for January or are you waiting for maximum rage quit effect from your players? |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2011.12.22 11:29:00 -
[1224] - Quote
Ccp ? Anything ??? |
Davon Kastire
Cosmos in Chaos Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.29 17:24:00 -
[1225] - Quote
Sebastian N Cain's comment should be getting more attention from CCP that it already is...surprisingly it's getting none. |
PinkKnife
PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore
71
|
Posted - 2011.12.31 04:29:00 -
[1226] - Quote
Sebastian N Cain wrote:The reason hybrids are failures is because they are actually not close-range / sniper weapons. Yet the devs are trying to make them work in a field they are not designed for.
And they can-¦t change that. Because they have already designed someone for these roles: the Minmatar. and since the Gallente mustn-¦t become like the Minmatar, they can-¦t become a dedicated close-combat/sniper race any more.
Cap-free weapons for combat exclusively within nos/neut range, multiple damage types to decrease the time to kill (thus making up for the increase of the ttk due to getting into range), the fastest and most agile ships to get into range (and shield tanks so you don-¦t need to gimp your speed to get EHP)... this is how a close combat race looks like. And yes, it-¦s 100% Minmatar, they are perfectly adapted for close range combat.
For sniping: sniping is everywhere all about fast and agile units, high alpha and low rate of fire (oh look, it-¦s the Minmatar again) There are reasons for it. You really can-¦t have a reasonable sniping mechanic without these characteristics. This is why sniping is pointless now and why the change to probing were needed when sniping was still a thing.
Meaning of course, you can only have sniping together with Artys and Minmatar. Trying to make rails and Gallente to do sniping is complete nonsense.
So, for close combat and sniping you need the Minmatar, and the Gallente will never be able to do it adequately (ironically they are designed to fit into the combat roles the Minmatar are currently covering... seemingly op, because all the advantages needed to make close combat competitive are married with the most flexible engagement ranges).
This is how the devs have designed the races, their ships, their weapons. It might have been unintentionally, the current state is the result of many many small changes over the years after all, so something like this can happen. But unintentionally or not, the devs have done it and now there are so many problems with balancing that you can-¦t ignore it any more. And you can-¦t fix it with a little more dps here and tracking there, because you are trying to go against the basic design of the races, trying to force them into roles they are not suited for and prevent them to fill out roles they are suited for.
This.
The projectile turrets as is, are ridiculously the best weapon in any possible scenario, except maybe structure shooting, and only then because you have to fill a cargo hold full of ammo. |
Nyla Skin
Dark Circle Enforcement Templis Dragonaors
67
|
Posted - 2012.01.04 09:11:00 -
[1227] - Quote
Sebastian N Cain wrote:The reason hybrids are failures is because they are actually not close-range / sniper weapons. Yet the devs are trying to make them work in a field they are not designed for.
Great post. I have been saying this ever since we started discussing crucible hybrid changes. Hybrids and gallente in general are just so full of contradictions. |
PinkKnife
PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore
71
|
Posted - 2012.01.07 22:48:00 -
[1228] - Quote
Nyla Skin wrote:Sebastian N Cain wrote:The reason hybrids are failures is because they are actually not close-range / sniper weapons. Yet the devs are trying to make them work in a field they are not designed for. Great post. I have been saying this ever since we started discussing crucible hybrid changes. Hybrids and gallente in general are just so full of contradictions.
Simple but outrageous solution, switch the falloff of every projetile/hyrbid turret. |
Todd Jaeger
Babylon Knights Controlled Chaos
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 12:12:00 -
[1229] - Quote
how about amarr buff?
gallente had fitting issues cause of cpu/pg before expansion,amarr still has it until this day. + gallente ships and hybrids seem overpowered to me right now. |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 12:30:00 -
[1230] - Quote
Todd Jaeger wrote:how about amarr buff?
gallente had fitting issues cause of cpu/pg before expansion,amarr still has it until this day. + gallente ships and hybrids seem overpowered to me right now.
HAHA :) Overpowered :) Ever tried to FLY ANY ? lol GAL SHIP OP !! LOL give me a break bro ... hahahah |
|
Jin Jukie
Blood Bond LLC New Eden Confederacy
6
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 20:11:00 -
[1231] - Quote
pvp the gallente way, Step 1 convo your target, get him to pull over so you can land in his cargo bay. Step 2 let your cap recharge Step 3 use smartboms to destroy your target, Even though your sitting in your targets cargobay your still out of range for blasters... |
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 01:11:00 -
[1232] - Quote
Jin Jukie wrote:pvp the gallente way, Step 1 convo your target, get him to pull over so you can land in his cargo bay. Step 2 let your cap recharge Step 3 use smartboms to destroy your target, Even though your sitting in your targets cargobay your still out of range for blasters...
Heh :) Perfect ! :) |
Todd Jaeger
Babylon Knights Controlled Chaos
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 18:56:00 -
[1233] - Quote
Jin Jukie wrote:pvp the gallente way, Step 1 convo your target, get him to pull over so you can land in his cargo bay. Step 2 let your cap recharge Step 3 use smartboms to destroy your target, Even though your sitting in your targets cargobay your still out of range for blasters...
actualy,you`re so wrong.and i can assume you havent flown gallente yet after the patch |
Jin Jukie
Blood Bond LLC New Eden Confederacy
6
|
Posted - 2012.01.13 21:28:00 -
[1234] - Quote
assume away. but my tat says your wrong. |
PJRiddick
CherryHill
6
|
Posted - 2012.01.14 06:45:00 -
[1235] - Quote
Sebastian N Cain wrote:The reason hybrids are failures is because they are actually not close-range / sniper weapons. Yet the devs are trying to make them work in a field they are not designed for.
And they can-¦t change that. Because they have already designed someone for these roles: the Minmatar. and since the Gallente mustn-¦t become like the Minmatar, they can-¦t become a dedicated close-combat/sniper race any more.
First off,...rails by desigh are uber long range sniper weapons. Im not sure where blasters come in but as far as rails go, Long range is there intent, with acuracy. I remember a blog about futuristic weapons that the u.s. milatary was designing and rails wereone of the weapons that was proposed. Imagine a weapon that would fire a 300 llb slug 4 and 5 times the speed of sound that could hit a target 100 miles down range with the acuracy with in a couple feet,....really impressive. From what i understand,...the U.S.milatary actually has such a weapon,...That ive heard. SO,...CCP,...give us this uber long range weapon with all the benifits!
Cap-free weapons for combat exclusively within nos/neut range, multiple damage types to decrease the time to kill (thus making up for the increase of the ttk due to getting into range), the fastest and most agile ships to get into range (and shield tanks so you don-¦t need to gimp your speed to get EHP)... this is how a close combat race looks like. And yes, it-¦s 100% Minmatar, they are perfectly adapted for close range combat.
For sniping: sniping is everywhere all about fast and agile units, high alpha and low rate of fire (oh look, it-¦s the Minmatar again) There are reasons for it. You really can-¦t have a reasonable sniping mechanic without these characteristics. This is why sniping is pointless now and why the change to probing were needed when sniping was still a thing.
Ive got to admit, i use to use artilary on my MEGA,..worked out great too, hits hard too. I went to rails just for the bonuses, but regardless the artis hit harder and did a much better job. That was before the love CCP gave the rails.
Meaning of course, you can only have sniping together with Artys and Minmatar. Trying to make rails and Gallente to do sniping is complete nonsense.
So, for close combat and sniping you need the Minmatar, and the Gallente will never be able to do it adequately (ironically they are designed to fit into the combat roles the Minmatar are currently covering... seemingly op, because all the advantages needed to make close combat competitive are married with the most flexible engagement ranges).
This is how the devs have designed the races, their ships, their weapons. It might have been unintentionally, the current state is the result of many many small changes over the years after all, so something like this can happen. But unintentionally or not, the devs have done it and now there are so many problems with balancing that you can-¦t ignore it any more. And you can-¦t fix it with a little more dps here and tracking there, because you are trying to go against the basic design of the races, trying to force them into roles they are not suited for and prevent them to fill out roles they are suited for.
Act fast CCP,....Gal is on the come back,...give us some more lovein!
|
Keen Fallsword
Billionaires Club BLACK-MARK
36
|
Posted - 2012.01.15 02:28:00 -
[1236] - Quote
PJRiddick wrote:Sebastian N Cain wrote:The reason hybrids are failures is because they are actually not close-range / sniper weapons. Yet the devs are trying to make them work in a field they are not designed for.
And they can-¦t change that. Because they have already designed someone for these roles: the Minmatar. and since the Gallente mustn-¦t become like the Minmatar, they can-¦t become a dedicated close-combat/sniper race any more.
First off,...rails by desigh are uber long range sniper weapons. Im not sure where blasters come in but as far as rails go, Long range is there intent, with acuracy. I remember a blog about futuristic weapons that the u.s. milatary was designing and rails wereone of the weapons that was proposed. Imagine a weapon that would fire a 300 llb slug 4 and 5 times the speed of sound that could hit a target 100 miles down range with the acuracy with in a couple feet,....really impressive. From what i understand,...the U.S.milatary actually has such a weapon,...That ive heard. SO,...CCP,...give us this uber long range weapon with all the benifits!
Cap-free weapons for combat exclusively within nos/neut range, multiple damage types to decrease the time to kill (thus making up for the increase of the ttk due to getting into range), the fastest and most agile ships to get into range (and shield tanks so you don-¦t need to gimp your speed to get EHP)... this is how a close combat race looks like. And yes, it-¦s 100% Minmatar, they are perfectly adapted for close range combat.
For sniping: sniping is everywhere all about fast and agile units, high alpha and low rate of fire (oh look, it-¦s the Minmatar again) There are reasons for it. You really can-¦t have a reasonable sniping mechanic without these characteristics. This is why sniping is pointless now and why the change to probing were needed when sniping was still a thing.
Ive got to admit, i use to use artilary on my MEGA,..worked out great too, hits hard too. I went to rails just for the bonuses, but regardless the artis hit harder and did a much better job. That was before the love CCP gave the rails.
Meaning of course, you can only have sniping together with Artys and Minmatar. Trying to make rails and Gallente to do sniping is complete nonsense.
So, for close combat and sniping you need the Minmatar, and the Gallente will never be able to do it adequately (ironically they are designed to fit into the combat roles the Minmatar are currently covering... seemingly op, because all the advantages needed to make close combat competitive are married with the most flexible engagement ranges).
This is how the devs have designed the races, their ships, their weapons. It might have been unintentionally, the current state is the result of many many small changes over the years after all, so something like this can happen. But unintentionally or not, the devs have done it and now there are so many problems with balancing that you can-¦t ignore it any more. And you can-¦t fix it with a little more dps here and tracking there, because you are trying to go against the basic design of the races, trying to force them into roles they are not suited for and prevent them to fill out roles they are suited for. Act fast CCP,....Gal is on the come back,...give us some more lovein! I dont think that they can do anything more with gal ships. They should but im afraid that they dont have idea how... Sad |
Aisha's Vengence
26
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 01:25:00 -
[1237] - Quote
Sebastian N Cain wrote:The reason hybrids are failures is because they are actually not close-range / sniper weapons. Yet the devs are trying to make them work in a field they are not designed for.
And they can-¦t change that. Because they have already designed someone for these roles: the Minmatar. and since the Gallente mustn-¦t become like the Minmatar, they can-¦t become a dedicated close-combat/sniper race any more.
Cap-free weapons for combat exclusively within nos/neut range, multiple damage types to decrease the time to kill (thus making up for the increase of the ttk due to getting into range), the fastest and most agile ships to get into range (and shield tanks so you don-¦t need to gimp your speed to get EHP)... this is how a close combat race looks like. And yes, it-¦s 100% Minmatar, they are perfectly adapted for close range combat.
For sniping: sniping is everywhere all about fast and agile units, high alpha and low rate of fire (oh look, it-¦s the Minmatar again) There are reasons for it. You really can-¦t have a reasonable sniping mechanic without these characteristics. This is why sniping is pointless now and why the change to probing were needed when sniping was still a thing.
Meaning of course, you can only have sniping together with Artys and Minmatar. Trying to make rails and Gallente to do sniping is complete nonsense.
So, for close combat and sniping you need the Minmatar, and the Gallente will never be able to do it adequately (ironically they are designed to fit into the combat roles the Minmatar are currently covering... seemingly op, because all the advantages needed to make close combat competitive are married with the most flexible engagement ranges).
This is how the devs have designed the races, their ships, their weapons. It might have been unintentionally, the current state is the result of many many small changes over the years after all, so something like this can happen. But unintentionally or not, the devs have done it and now there are so many problems with balancing that you can-¦t ignore it any more. And you can-¦t fix it with a little more dps here and tracking there, because you are trying to go against the basic design of the races, trying to force them into roles they are not suited for and prevent them to fill out roles they are suited for.
Can't find anything wrong with this. FML |
PJRiddick
CherryHill
6
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 14:45:00 -
[1238] - Quote
Please excuse this post but with this coming update, are there going to be any new goodies that i can expect, upgraded hybrids,...new Armor things, bonuses,...Anything?
I know that CCP gave the hypbrids some lovin this past patch but they have talked about doing more,..im just asking.
Thanks in kind
-=+>xXx<+=- Riddick Fly safe and eat yoru vegatables |
arenta Andedare
Phoenix Wake
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 20:25:00 -
[1239] - Quote
I believe that the gallente is extremely underpowered and requires a boost in not only the weapons but also the tanking. Armor tanking doesn't work out as well as shield in my experiences. Also, if they want to make the hybrid weapons better, they should upgrade them in all aspects, like damage, range and time taken per round (for a higher dps). I believe more with the time taken per cycle than damage and range, so it is unique in its own way. |
Charles Edisson
Aura of Darkness Nulli Secunda
28
|
Posted - 2012.01.25 09:13:00 -
[1240] - Quote
It's going ot be difficult to get accurate feedback on these changes. Hybrids have been the most underpowered weapon system in the game for years. As a result of this there are far fewer people skilled to used them to make feed back usefull.
The only way to get many people to change their skills to use them would be to make them overpowered relative to the other turret weapons as why train for a different weapon taking time when you already have something just as good. This would just create another imballance in the game though.
Overall I think Hybrids were left in a state of disrepair for too long a time. Shame there are too many flaming trollers on these forums for CCP to see through the BS and know what needed fixing. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 42 :: [one page] |