Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
Weapon Rebalance: New Philosophy.
Warning!
This is a long post. If you have the A.D.D. (Attention Deficit Disorder) please consult a doctor before reading any further. You have been warned.
If you have no interest in weapons and rebalancing please follow this link
As it stands the turret weapon systems in EVE mostly differ in stats.
Artillery has slow RoF, large DPV, bad Tracking etc. Pulses have medium-fast RoF, medium-small DPV, great Optimal etc. All of the above are numbers. Stats.
So CCP strives to balance weapons in EVE while keeping them somewhat unique by changing stats. It is a very difficult task as there's only so much you can do before the stats of what is meant to be a totally unique system come close to those of another.
The ideas that are described below would first and foremost break the current meta game and balance all in order to rebuild weapons in EVE with more than stats as their main selling point.
Disclaimers!
#1 Not all of the following ideas are mine. Some have been suggested by friends, some have been born in conversations with coalition members.
2# If it seems like I'm leaving some weapon systems out it is because I am. I was either unable or unwilling to find ways to alter each one to make it unique.
Without further ado:
New mechanics behind old weapons.
Beams. As is Beam Lasers are a long range, higher RoF than Artillery, sniper weapon. They have poor tracking which is a bit better than Artillery. They have a much lower DPV. No matter how you look at current Beam Lasers you find yourself comparing them to Artillery. But Arties have one thing going for them that Beams don't. They have high alpha. Taking down ships that would otherwise have a chance to spring back due to logistics or local tank in a single volley of a fleet. That gives them the edge. Now time for Beams to get a new identity.
Beams. It's in their name. Pulses are the strobe lights of EVE. Giving damage with every blink. Beams should never stop dealing damage. It should be a stream of light destroying everything in its path.
Give Beams a charging mechanic.
Damage increases over the time that the gun is cycling. Damage is constant. On a large turret it can start at 200 and over a set period of time rise to 1600 on a Beam fitted armor tanked Abaddon. Balance? Sure. Once the cycle stops the charged up power drops to zero. As damage is constant so should be the cap drain. At a level of an Abaddon it should be similar if not higher than that of an active tanked double rep Hyperion where you cycle your cap boosters non-stop. Giving the weapon a set maximum range (much like on missiles) with no falloff would give it a better chance on the field as well as forcing the ship to stay in range as it risks that the charge cycle stops. Jammed? Cycle stops. Cap-dead? Cycle stops. Targets moved just out of range? Go back to start. Giving the weapons a perfect tracking where missing is impossible would mean that it's not useless if the foes came too close (as long as they aren't neuting). But to avoid it becoming the best way to dispatch fast, sig/speed tanked ships making the damage sig based (you guessed it, much like missiles) would help. In the end you'll have the best weapons to kill fat buffer tanked ships that aren't going to escape or move out of range. Capitals maybe? Why not.
* * *
Blasters. I always thought of blasters as a space version of shotguns. Short range, high damage, no chance of missing once close enough and devastating effects on the target. But shotguns in RL have more uses than just close range MDK. They have great utilitarian capabilities. Rounds that work as electroshock, rounds that bust down door, non-lethal rounds that stun the target etc. Applying that philosophy to blasters in EVE would give them more purpose. Hard to get close but impossible to survive against should the opponent screw up before your last few percent of hull are bleeding out. To counter that chronic inability to get in range in fleet fights give blasters a good way to compensate. Utility rounds. ECM and Webbing Rounds come to mind. Balancing that would be hard but it would give blasters a soul and a reason to exist.
* * *
Railguns. Low DPS, low DPV, low tracking, hard to fit, high cap consumption. Only way to currently fix them is to make them similar to either Beams or Arties. That's if you use stats. But how about giving it piercing rounds instead. As it stands railguns have no place. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place. I mean a Beam and an Arty. So give it a role the no weapon has at the moment. Make it the best way to counter logistics. Keep the bad tracking, keep the bad DPS, keep the high fitting requirements. I'm kind today. Give it rounds that can go through the main tank of a ship and slightly (<- read that word again) damage the soft underbelly. Drake getting repped by Basilisks. It has no back-up and no way to escape. But you just can't break the tank. Not enough in fleet to alpha any of the ships, not enough DPS, neuting not doing enough, no ECM on field. Enter the Railgun. 8/10 of the damage falls of shields and gets instantly repped up. 2/10 go through and with nothing to fix that armor the second line from the top slowly starts to turn crimson. Apply the same principle to a Hurricane with an Archon camping the station. Suddenly having logistics on your side in small gang warfare may no longer win you every engagement. Balanced by having low damage output and horrible tracking they would have place in very specific gangs. But at least they'll have a home.
Well, there you go. |
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
Post was so long that TL;DR didn't fit.
Summary (TL;DR) :
New Beams with a charge mechanic allowing it to ramp up damage over time and destroy fat, buffer tanked targets faster than ever before.
New Blasters with extreme close-range damage and utility rounds to web, jam and annoy the opponent.
New Railguns with piercing rounds to counter Logistics and heavy active tanks as well as giving a perfectly good way to wear those fancy new earing to the wife. What do you mean it's not supposed to go ALL the way through? Oh...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
92
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:46:00 -
[3] - Quote
Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:
New Beams with a charge mechanic allowing it to ramp up damage over time and destroy fat, buffer tanked targets faster than ever before.
So, like, a long range weapon with a low rof but a high alpha? If only there was a weapon like that in EVE... Oh wait!..
|
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:50:00 -
[4] - Quote
Razin wrote:Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:
New Beams with a charge mechanic allowing it to ramp up damage over time and destroy fat, buffer tanked targets faster than ever before.
So, like, a long range weapon with a low rof but a high alpha? If only there was a weapon like that in EVE... Oh wait!..
Reading. It is hard.
Charge mechanic. No alpha to speak of. Constant damage that increases to a certain point over time. If you're familiar with Starcraft 2 you can look at Void Rays to get a better idea.
Starcraft Wiki wrote:The Void Ray's damage output gradually increases the longer it remains on a single target. |
Written Word
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
99
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
I'm going to say no to ECM blasters. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
Written Word wrote:I'm going to say no to ECM blasters.
Ya coward, what are you afraid of?
They can't catch you anyway |
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:57:00 -
[7] - Quote
Written Word wrote:I'm going to say no to ECM blasters.
CCP thought about it before. There's a mission item called Experimental Hybrid ECM Rounds if I recall correctly. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
221
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 17:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:
As it stands the turret weapon systems in EVE mostly differ in stats.
This is an amazing statement.
While being true, it is incomplete, and at the same time you make it sound like a bad thing.
I applaud you for making my head spin just a little. :)
This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:04:00 -
[9] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:
As it stands the turret weapon systems in EVE mostly differ in stats.
This is an amazing statement. While being true, it is incomplete, and at the same time you make it sound like a bad thing. I applaud you for making my head spin just a little. :)
That is the idea, you smart little cookie. It's there to get you to read the rest of the post. You figured it out. Come 'ere let me give you a nice big hug. |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
92
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:11:00 -
[10] - Quote
Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:Razin wrote:Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:
New Beams with a charge mechanic allowing it to ramp up damage over time and destroy fat, buffer tanked targets faster than ever before.
So, like, a long range weapon with a low rof but a high alpha? If only there was a weapon like that in EVE... Oh wait!.. Reading. It is hard. Charge mechanic. No alpha to speak of. Constant damage that increases to a certain point over time. If you're familiar with Starcraft 2 you can look at Void Rays to get a better idea. Starcraft Wiki wrote:The Void Ray's damage output gradually increases the longer it remains on a single target. I suggest you invest a little more in explaining then. And no, I've never played Starcraft. Never liked RTS type games (Homeworld was about the only exception). |
|
Digital Messiah
The Scope Gallente Federation
66
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:13:00 -
[11] - Quote
Currently the weapon systems aren't to bad off. With the hybrid changes which will undoubtedly be nerfed before release. I can't see any huge issues. Laser turrets perhaps need some saving grace outside of being forced into scorch. But very little to be sure, if any.
Also this thread belongs in features and ideas. Not general discussion. "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" |
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:19:00 -
[12] - Quote
Digital Messiah wrote:Currently the weapon systems aren't to bad off. With the hybrid changes which will undoubtedly be nerfed before release. I can't see any huge issues. Laser turrets perhaps need some saving grace outside of being forced into scorch. But very little to be sure, if any.
Also this thread belongs in features and ideas. Not general discussion.
Not settling for okay is the idea. Plus railguns aren't going to be fixed with those changes that have been published so far. Blasters will be better but not great and not as good as the other systems either.
Ideas presented above give EVE more flavor. New mechanics to old weapons will freshen things up.
And General Discussion should allow you to discuss generally everything... that is discussable (Don't argue with me. It's a word.) However I'm sure I'll be moved soon enough *sigh* |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
235
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 18:50:00 -
[13] - Quote
Lol you call this a TL;Dr idea? i got a TL;DR idea that is about 22 posts long currently.
Either way I dont feel that this isnt a discussion and more of a FnI discussion or modules and ships discussion.
|
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:00:00 -
[14] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:Lol you call this a TL;Dr idea? i got a TL;DR idea that is about 22 posts long currently.
Either way I dont feel that this isnt a discussion and more of a FnI discussion or modules and ships discussion.
No? I never called it that. Summary at the end is as "TL;DR" as I could get it. Feel free to edit and create a shorter, more to the point version of that post if you like the ideas. I'd welcome that. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
78
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:03:00 -
[15] - Quote
Razin wrote:Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:Razin wrote:Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:
New Beams with a charge mechanic allowing it to ramp up damage over time and destroy fat, buffer tanked targets faster than ever before.
So, like, a long range weapon with a low rof but a high alpha? If only there was a weapon like that in EVE... Oh wait!.. Reading. It is hard. Charge mechanic. No alpha to speak of. Constant damage that increases to a certain point over time. If you're familiar with Starcraft 2 you can look at Void Rays to get a better idea. Starcraft Wiki wrote:The Void Ray's damage output gradually increases the longer it remains on a single target. I suggest you invest a little more in explaining then. And no, I've never played Starcraft. Never liked RTS type games (Homeworld was about the only exception).
Assuming I'm understanding the OP's idea correctly ...
current mechanic (assuming T1 Tachyons with Multifreq crystals fit to an Apoc, using base numbers and ignoring cycle time skills, etc.):
a volley does ~800 damage (full rack of guns), and then you have 12.5 sec cooldown. you're doing 64 DPS overall before skills.
new mechanic: each gun starts at 8 damage the second you engage, and you're doing a CONSTANT 8 DPS for the full cycle (64 DPS overall). 12,5 seconds later (cycle 2), the damage goes up 50% .. you're now doing a constant 12DPS for the full cycle (96 DPS overall) 12,5 seconds later (cycle 3) the damage goes up 50% ... you're now doing a CONSTANT 18 DPS for the full cycle (144 DPS overall)
repeat for say 10 cycles (~2 minutes) and you're pumping out approximately 460 DPS per gun (3680 DPS overall)... it just takes you 2 minutes to reach your top DPS... |
Digital Messiah
The Scope Gallente Federation
66
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:05:00 -
[16] - Quote
Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:Digital Messiah wrote:Currently the weapon systems aren't to bad off. With the hybrid changes which will undoubtedly be nerfed before release. I can't see any huge issues. Laser turrets perhaps need some saving grace outside of being forced into scorch. But very little to be sure, if any.
Also this thread belongs in features and ideas. Not general discussion. Not settling for okay is the idea. Plus railguns aren't going to be fixed with those changes that have been published so far. Blasters will be better but not great and not as good as the other systems either. Ideas presented above give EVE more flavor. New mechanics to old weapons will freshen things up. And General Discussion should allow you to discuss generally everything... that is discussable (Don't argue with me. It's a word.) However I'm sure I'll be moved soon enough *sigh* General discussion about EVE. Not features and ideas. Nothing to argue about lol.
As for drastically changing weapon systems. You should consider that many people spent a length of time in choosing their skill plan over years. Suddenly changing it to entirely different mechanics has the potential to do more harm than good. Rail guns are fine in my opinion. They have almost the best fall off + optimal in game, have competitive tracking to arty and beams, and simply need a damage upgrade, it doesn't hurt that they will also get a power grid and cpu requirement buff either. I have studied this topic in particular extensively.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1548002
As for the uniqueness of roles. You can only create so much diversity between them before you run into problems. Damage mechanics are not solely based on what weapons can do. They are varied far more by traversal and ship hulls. This can be seen with ships such as the dramiel for example.
"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
221
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:10:00 -
[17] - Quote
Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:War Kitten wrote:Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:
As it stands the turret weapon systems in EVE mostly differ in stats.
This is an amazing statement. While being true, it is incomplete, and at the same time you make it sound like a bad thing. I applaud you for making my head spin just a little. :) That is the idea, you smart little cookie. It's there to get you to read the rest of the post. You figured it out. Come 'ere let me give you a nice big hug.
I read the rest of it - it was interesting but I doubt we'd ever see it happen. It was this one sentence that caught my eye because it made so little sense the way you were using it.
In a computer game, pretty much everything is defined by its stats, and you're arguing that changing those around isn't enough to differentiate one turret from another?
Your interesting beam laser idea can be accomplished entirely through stats. Your charging time is reload time, cycle time is nearly nill, damage per shot also very low. Voila.
Your ECM / web ammo idea for blasters is just a matter of adding different stats to their ammo, or triggering them to work like mid-slot ECM / webber mods when loaded with that ammo. The shotgun / no aiming thing would just be a huge increase in the tracking stat.
Your railgun idea is worded awkwardly but appears to be some sort of shield-piercing idea in a mis-guided attempt at making it logistics-proof. (Armor can be RR'd too) This is contrary to the design principle of Eve's damage system, but could easily be achieved with another stat. Damage already bleeds through to armor at a rate based on a pilot skill, which is technically a stat.
So where is your ground-breaking, stat-free idea?
This is my signature.-á There are many others like it, but this one is mine. |
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:12:00 -
[18] - Quote
Velicitia wrote:Assuming I'm understanding the OP's idea correctly ...
current mechanic (assuming T1 Tachyons with Multifreq crystals fit to an Apoc, using base numbers and ignoring cycle time skills, etc.):
a volley does ~800 damage (full rack of guns), and then you have 12.5 sec cooldown. you're doing 64 DPS overall before skills.
new mechanic: each gun starts at 8 damage the second you engage, and you're doing a CONSTANT 8 DPS for the full cycle (64 DPS overall). 12,5 seconds later (cycle 2), the damage goes up 50% .. you're now doing a constant 12DPS for the full cycle (96 DPS overall) 12,5 seconds later (cycle 3) the damage goes up 50% ... you're now doing a CONSTANT 18 DPS for the full cycle (144 DPS overall)
repeat for say 10 cycles (~2 minutes) and you're pumping out approximately 460 DPS per gun (3680 DPS overall)... it just takes you 2 minutes to reach your top DPS...
Almost. There are no actual visible cycles. The entire time you're focusing on 1 target a cycle is going. Damage increases as you continue to fire on that target until it reaches the maximum allowed. It really is a stream of light. A Beam rather than a Pulse.
You way seems perfectly valid as well and that would be easier to implement. |
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:22:00 -
[19] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:
I read the rest of it - it was interesting but I doubt we'd ever see it happen. It was this one sentence that caught my eye because it made so little sense the way you were using it.
In a computer game, pretty much everything is defined by its stats, and you're arguing that changing those around isn't enough to differentiate one turret from another?
Your interesting beam laser idea can be accomplished entirely through stats. Your charging time is reload time, cycle time is nearly nill, damage per shot also very low. Voila.
Your ECM / web ammo idea for blasters is just a matter of adding different stats to their ammo, or triggering them to work like mid-slot ECM / webber mods when loaded with that ammo. The shotgun / no aiming thing would just be a huge increase in the tracking stat.
Your railgun idea is worded awkwardly but appears to be some sort of shield-piercing idea in a mis-guided attempt at making it logistics-proof. (Armor can be RR'd too) This is contrary to the design principle of Eve's damage system, but could easily be achieved with another stat. Damage already bleeds through to armor at a rate based on a pilot skill, which is technically a stat.
So where is your ground-breaking, stat-free idea?
It's not stats-free but stats you're changing are changing the mechanics behind the weapons. You're giving them purpose beyond simply firing every cycle and doing a set amount of damage.
New stats to ammo (There's no ammo that slows down targets. Bombs are the only ammo with ECM properties) are new stats and not modified old ones.
Railgun idea is not anti-shield. It's anti-RR and active tanks. You aim at doing damage to that which is beneath the main tank. I've yet to see many fleets with both armor logistics and shield ones. With them the stat you change gives EVE a new mechanic. Currently you can't put someone's hull into 0% (results in a wreck) without having their armor and shield at 0% first.
So yes, it's all stats but the different modification and addition to the stats of current weapons make them as different as bow and sword which in turn is the whole idea behind the new philosophy. |
Rellik B00n
Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers The 0rphanage
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:26:00 -
[20] - Quote
OP, whilst you have obviousy spent some time thinking about these things im not going to comment directly on your ideas.
I like rebalancing, I like the nerfbat.
both these factors make the game an evolution that means no one thing remains 'top dog'' for too long.
This is a good thing.
So although your ideas are no doubt sound im just as happy to stick to the current way of doing things, its far more organic and random and it serves to make everything worth using at some point, its just a question of when.
To add further perspective when I was just a young pup Gallente boats were the way to go, the blasterthron was the best ship in game. It looks as though we have almost come full circle and i look forward to seeing where we go next.
now, if I could just get them to look at making active tanking worth a **** again.......... |
|
Sakkar Arenith
PIE Inc.
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:29:00 -
[21] - Quote
hmm, I like the general idea. Many of us have suggested similar "side-effects" to weapons for a long time now, be it recoil, bypassing shields/armor or a great many other things.
However, back to your suggestions;
Your beam idea is actually quite striking, removing tracking, and adding a constant "charge". That by itself sounds brilliant indeed, but the details, like fitting and sub battleships sizes etc, need to be revisited too, still, I'm for that.
The blaster idea, well, I am good with the near perfect tracking thing, however, the side-effects like webbing etc you mention would better be found on Autocannons in my opinion. As such, I'd like to see on projectiles. Blasters should, lore wise at least, be the ultimate damage dealers at close range (to a degree, frankly, Gallente as a whole should focus on drones instead of blasters...)
And yeah, rail guns having a "penetration" or "bypass" effect, is actually something I myself proposed over five years ago.
So, let's hope that something in this direction will be done. |
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:33:00 -
[22] - Quote
Digital Messiah wrote:General discussion about EVE. Not features and ideas. Nothing to argue about lol. As for drastically changing weapon systems. You should consider that many people spent a length of time in choosing their skill plan over years. Suddenly changing it to entirely different mechanics has the potential to do more harm than good. Rail guns are fine in my opinion. They have almost the best fall off + optimal in game, have competitive tracking to arty and beams, and simply need a damage upgrade, it doesn't hurt that they will also get a power grid and cpu requirement buff either. I have studied this topic in particular extensively. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1548002As for the uniqueness of roles. You can only create so much diversity between them before you run into problems. Damage mechanics are not solely based on what weapons can do. They are varied far more by traversal and ship hulls. This can be seen with ships such as the dramiel for example.
Okay. I'll explain the real reason behind me posting this thread in General Discussion and not Features & Ideas. It is because noone reads Features & Ideas. By the way, half the threads in General Discussion are, one way or the other, actually suggestions and ideas about features. The other half are whine threads.
What is comes to diversity you need not look further than FPS games. Running around with 30 different SMGs isn't as fun as having the option to opt for a sniper rifle, a shotgun or a knife and few granades depending on the situation you find yourself in and your personal preferences.
|
Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
140
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:35:00 -
[23] - Quote
I like it. |
Goumeka Ghalvia
The Fuel Pump Brotherhood
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 19:39:00 -
[24] - Quote
Rellik B00n wrote:OP, whilst you have obviousy spent some time thinking about these things im not going to comment directly on your ideas.
I like rebalancing, I like the nerfbat.
both these factors make the game an evolution that means no one thing remains 'top dog'' for too long.
This is a good thing.
So although your ideas are no doubt sound im just as happy to stick to the current way of doing things, its far more organic and random and it serves to make everything worth using at some point, its just a question of when.
To add further perspective when I was just a young pup Gallente boats were the way to go, the blasterthron was the best ship in game. It looks as though we have almost come full circle and i look forward to seeing where we go next.
now, if I could just get them to look at making active tanking worth a **** again..........
There is the truth. Right now we adapt to what the developers do and all rush to the next FOTM weapon system. Tiny changes to stats make one system better than the other in general use. What would be interesting to see is different weapons being used in different situations while maintaining a single weapon system per race that works well in general use. Pulses will be the best choice when roaming around solo or in a small gang. Beams for very specific setups. Much like Artilery but without copying it's stats. |
Tear Miner
Republic University Minmatar Republic
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 20:17:00 -
[25] - Quote
I second the fact that this should belong in Features and Ideas.
The current guns are fine, these mechanics would require going back to the drawing board and who knows how it'd end up. I think CCP is doing a good job now of figuring out the areas that need to be improved and actually improving upon them. The hybrid work is ongoing, I believe it will span multiple expansions.
So, they've got it covered. I believe the work/thought you put into this would be better spent working on ideas/features within the current weapon framework. |
Velicitia
Open Designs
79
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 20:36:00 -
[26] - Quote
Goumeka Ghalvia wrote: Almost. There are no actual visible cycles. The entire time you're focusing on 1 target a cycle is going. Damage increases as you continue to fire on that target until it reaches the maximum allowed. It really is a stream of light. A Beam rather than a Pulse.
You way seems perfectly valid as well and that would be easier to implement.
I was using "cycles" because we already have that in the game (and there are mechanics that rely on them right now, like crystal damage). From a eye-candy perspective, you can see start shooting, and then no stopping until the target's dead or you shut off the lasers.
|
Alski
Fringe Nova INC. Ravensgaard
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 20:39:00 -
[27] - Quote
First I applaud you for thinking out of the box, something I do myself far too much when thinking about where Eve could go.
This should really be in features and ideas, people do actually read it, and its probably more likely to catch an appropriate devs eye there, but anyway...
Three big issues, ignoring the whole great big "you wanna do WHAAAT to my favourite weapons?!?!" :
- First changing all the weapon systems would mean fixing things that are not broken, energy and projectile turrets are fine as they are and don't need "fixing".
- Giveing hybrids the ability to hit through shields requires a counter weapon for the other two races that armor tank that has an equivalent effect, but that would be highly problematic because shields are irrelevant to armor tanks, meaning the equivalent is to go straight to hull, which is bad enough, but both systems would be bad anyway because your talking about one or two weapon systems out of nine (or five depending how you count em) making EHP irrelevant, and thats massively unbalanced and overpowered.
- The energy turret charging thing; "fixes" something that aint broken, but worse: there is no "real-time" in eve, as in a constant progressive effect, there are only server side 'ticks' that happen on the order of seconds to hours, the closer an event repeats to 1 second the more server load and therefore lag it creates, the closer to infinity it occurs the less lag.
Some guy that used to post on gave dev and F&I forums used to have a sig that was something along the lines of:
Quote: Whatever fancy thing you think a computer is doing, all its really doing is maths. Whatever fancy thing you think Eve is doing, all its really doing is database I/O.
Sometimes I think even the devs forget about the last bit
|
Xorth Adimus
Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:03:00 -
[28] - Quote
Goumeka Ghalvia wrote:Post was so long that TL;DR didn't fit.
Summary (TL;DR) :
New Beams with a charge mechanic allowing it to ramp up damage over time and destroy fat, buffer tanked targets faster than ever before.
New Blasters with extreme close-range damage and utility rounds to web, jam and annoy the opponent.
New Railguns with piercing rounds to counter Logistics and heavy active tanks as well as giving a perfectly good way to wear those fancy new earing to the wife. What do you mean it's not supposed to go ALL the way through? Oh...
Yes
No
Yes
Lets mix it up a bit if we go this far
New T3 ammo:
Beam - Laser wide beam rounds (5% thermal damage ramp up overtime upto 25% after 2 minutes, 25% signiture radius penalty) Pulse - Laser burning rounds (30% more thermal damage, 50% signiture radius penalty) T3 laser rounds causes heat damage on target and ship firing it Crystal burnout 2x higher then T2
Railgun - Hybrid piercing rounds (10% bypass shields, 15% signiture radius penalty) Blaster - Hybrid shrapnel rounds (7.5% bypass armour, 10% signiture radius penalty) T3 Hybrid rounds causes heat damage on target and ship firing it
Artillary - Projectile piercing rounds (10% bypass armour, 15% signiture radius penalty) Autocannon - Projectile shrapnel rounds (7.5% bypass shield, 10% signiture radius penalty) T3 projectile rounds cause 1% of their damage directly on the hull of target and on hull of ship firing it
Shrapnel Missiles (10% AOE damage, missile 2.5km, heavy missile 5km, torps and cruise 7.5km, 30% signiture radius penalty - penalty does not apply to fighters or fighter bombers)
T2 Defender missiles that target nearest hostile standing drone/ fighter/fighter bomber.
T3 Drones and fighters 99% immune to defender missiles, 10% higher resists then T2, 10% signature penalty.
Local repping (99%) or remote repping (80%) prevents some bypass damage for the kind repped - Makes larger scale logistics much more fun / tricky.
Also add heat reduction/ damage bypass reduction rigs for more pvp rig fitting options (life beyond trimarks / extenders). |
ElQuirko
Boxxed Up Industries
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 21:19:00 -
[29] - Quote
Rellik B00n wrote: now, if I could just get them to look at making active tanking worth a **** again..........
I have no words for you, unless you mean armor active tanking. |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
143
|
Posted - 2011.11.10 14:28:00 -
[30] - Quote
Moved from General Discussion. CCP Phantom - German Community Coordinator |
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |