EVE Search - Projectile Weapons

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Projectile Weapons - Balancing

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.09.23 17:03:00 - [1] Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 23/09/2009 17:07:37 Originally by: CCP Nozh Mid-range crystals and hybrid charges give a bonus to capacitor consumption, projectile ammo is reduced in size. We don't like this, so we're looking at changing it to a tracking bonus. You mean you are going to let all the "middle" ammo types add tracking? What about giving the generally useless close range T2 ammo that role? Originally by: CCP Nozh After ship hitpoint adjustments, the alpha strike of artilleries isn't nearly as impressive as it was a while back. In our first iteration of these changes we've increased the damage modifier by 50%, along with the rate of fire. I sincerely hope you are not planning on changing small artillery in this fashion. The Thrasher can already one volley 85+% of of all small targets (its primary victims), a 50% increase would allows 3-4 thrashers using just 1-2 volleys to down cruisers. M and L artillery on the other hand can definitely use the love. Otherwise looks good. I do hope you find a solution to the pointless short range T2 ammo though, but it can wait I suppose EDIT: Why on earth is this posted in F&I, will you immediately move it to its proper section (ie. one down).
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.09.24 18:57:00 - [2] Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 24/09/2009 18:59:10 Quite right. With a tweak to large artillery's damage, extra clip size and shuffling ammo/damage types around (for the explosive primary damage) a bit and projectiles are more than halfway decent. Still need an increase in tracking for large AC's to allow for the close range option and the added fall-off as already mentioned. Small guns are almost perfectly balanced as far as I have experienced. Largely due to the much tighter spread, but as close to perfect as we are likely to get. Cruiser/BC guns on Rupture, Hurricane, Vagabond which are by far the most frequently used gunboats are adequate as is. They will benefit immensely from more fall-off and more focused damage types, so much so that the class risks being skewed heavily in their favour. Any increase in medium projectile damage should be taken out of their tracking .. damn Rupture is almost unbeatable as it is guns/missiles/drones and easy fittings PS (off topic): Tachyons for all the hate/love they invoke are maddening to fit and use. Even with maxed skills I need multiple fitting mods for a full rack and the oversized capacitor on the Apocalypse is sucked dry in no time flat. PPS: 800's on the Apocalypse will be the new king of Amarr PvP if all changes to ammo/range/tracking go through
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.09.28 18:52:00 - [3] Holy crap. Remind me not to be hit by large artillery any more, those things are going to hurt Good deal on the ammo sizes as well, a healthy clip increase for most types from what I can tell. Are you still planning on swapping the various types around to give the high damage ones more of an explosive focus instead of the EM focus?
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.09.28 20:54:00 - [4] Not sure why people are screaming for more without even having tried these new numbers. First iterations are generally followed by seconds and thirds are not unheard of. Try them out against various targets and report back so we can get it out of the way. There are lots of other complaints queuing up and you Minmatar are hogging the DEVs PS: Guess a Minmatar BS fleet will have to assign targets on squad basis if 8-10BS will insta-gib 1 BS (DD proof BS no longer required so less EHP) .. going to be some fancy target calling required.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.09.29 08:35:00 - [5] Minmatar are not being used at all and are nowhere to be seen in space or on killboards .. Minmatar are very good the sub-BS classes and are no slouches in the T2 area either (Vagabond, Scimitar, Claw, Stiletto, AFs). Minmatar are not even close to the utter gimp-ness of Amarr prior to resist, Apocalypse and speed changes so please find a complaint other than "they are not used". - AC's will be getting more damage as the base ammo numbers are going up. - AoE Doomsday is being killed so fleet EHP will likely drop a good deal making alpha matter again. - AC's will ALWAYS have lower damage than Hybrids/Lasers. They offer all damage types and high tracking in a capless weapon system, not to mention a sizeable dronebay on nearly all gun bonus ships. - Small artillery does NOT need more damage. The Thrasher can already 1-2 volley all destroyers and frigates if you control transversal. * Large AC's should have their tracking increased to mirror their smaller cousins and take advantage of the better manoeuvrability of the Minmatar BS. * Medium artillery might need the bump higher than 25%, SiSi should sort that out but note that the Hurricane with artillery is already damn close to 1-2 volleying unbuffered cruisers so might be overkill.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.09.29 19:35:00 - [6] Over time DPS wins over Alpha. This is common sense and knowledge. A visualization like that does not however take into account that high Alpha removes enemy ships sooner compared to high DPS thus decreasing incoming fire. Nor does it take into account the probable EHP of the various ships. On top of this the graph also needs to include how many weapons you are using on ships other than the Tempest. An eight Tachyon Apocalypse caps out rather fast in a constant fire scenario, I dread to think how that poor Armageddon will handle the drain Still waiting for SiSi data from BS slugging it out, no way of knowing for sure what needs changes without "live" testing.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.09.30 17:33:00 - [7] Hasn't high-alpha been the whole point of the several year long complaint session? In straight fleet slug-fest Matari BS will still be 3rd or 4th in effectiveness. But then the in your face fight is not what they are designed for. Say a wing of 20-30 Tempests with their own covops warp-in and target caller. - Warp in at at 150km, - Insta-pop 2-3 BS, - Warp out. Repeat. No Scorpion will be safe ever again, when the overview flashes you are already dead. Hell no sub-capital ship will be safe with an independent Artillery formation making hit-and-run attacks like that. I just hope that Sov Mk.2 will actually allow for that kind of tactical actions. About time fleet warfare became more than a glorified Space Invaders knock-off.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.03 07:08:00 - [8] With the additional EM damage to EMP ammunition, Minmatar do almost the same amount of EM damage with their short range ammo as Amarr does with theirs (24 v 28). I suppose CCP are aware of this and will tweak all Amarr T2 resistances to suit this new paradigm? At the very least swap/tweak ammo types to give Minmatar their explosive primary. If not Amarr will have a racial resist bonus to just two ships, the Hound/Breacher, which as far I know are the only ones with an actual explosive bonus (ie. utterly useless resists). The EM increase makes Minmatar equal to or better at dealing EM damage than Amarr when RoF/Tracking is factored in at short range.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.03 10:26:00 - [9] Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 03/10/2009 10:27:15 Originally by: Etho Demerzel I too would prefer that Fusion was the highest damage ammo, but look at the bright side: - Half of EMP ammo damage is Explosive and kinetic, which are the T2 resists of Amarr. - Most of the time minmatar use barrage/tremor, which are purely Exp/kin Tremor is for sniping and very little sniping is done in/on T2 hulls. Barrage wont be used nearly as much when EMP gets the massive boost that is on the table, a 20% increase in the EM component .. EM which is at present probably the most valuable damage type around. Keep in mind that fall-offs will probably increase substantially making the need to change from EMP even more of a moot point. EMP L will be doing 24EM/16EXP/8KIN if I understood the Dev post correctly. That means that the Amarr primary T2 bonus only applies to 1/3rd of the damage and the secondary to 1/6th. Compare the 28EM/20TH on multifrequency crystals against T2 Minmatar resists and you get a massive discrepancy. This is of course unless CCP is planning on scrapping the RPG element entirely and normalizing all resistances across all races.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.03 16:52:00 - [10] Originally by: Dinamita Tona ..so following that assumption, for example tempest should alfa any untanked ship to its class... So you want artillery to be an anti-BS directional doomsday basically. Yes, that would work splendidly for fleet balance RoF is irrelevant if using hit'and'run tactics since guns are primed by the time you are ready to hit again after a warp-out. The 75% boost allows less than a squad worth of Tempest's to one-shot most common fleet ships. All other races require several squads to achieve the same. It will require the Tempests/Maelstroms to warp around separate from the main fleet but effect will be devastating. If you were to push alpha as far up as you suggest, high-sec suicide ganking in artillery boats and low-sec gate griefing would run out of control. Furthermore, fleet fights would consist of nothing but Minmatar ships warping around to tactical safe spots since no other ship/weapon type can hope to put down enough damage before they warp off again.

Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.05 08:34:00 - [11] First the complaint was that Minmatar ships had no place in fleets due to range/damage/alpha after HP buff. Then CCP offers a vicious serrated rusty scalpel for use in fleet warfare, now the complaint is that the scalpel doesn't work in PvE? I suggest we let the Gallente get their needed attention for blasters and that Minmatar take another couple of years to figure out just what the hell they want .. not a good idea eh? Introduce the third tier artillery. Let the two top tiers get the Alpha treatment and the lowest tier remain close to current status with lower alpha but higher RoF/tracking .. might even double as the weapon of choice for the "range unknown" engagements. Laser boats generally use Tachs for fleets and Mega beams for PvE following a similar thinking dam+tracking > alpha against AI.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.05 12:12:00 - [12] Originally by: Stygian Knight P.S. how did you all played before weapon grouping? Logitech G15 macro to activate all of course High alpha artillery boats are right up PL's alley. Like super-sized stealth bombers but with without the pesky wait for travel time Going to be nasty in the hands of organized groups. Good times for sure.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.06 07:48:00 - [13] Weapons are and should be balanced against PvE as well PvP. When the missile formula was changed all rat speeds were tweaked in order to not making missiles useless in PvE. If Angels pose a serious problem for artillery users, then a decrease of their speed and/or increase of their signature would be a lot better than increasing artillery tracking which risks unbalancing PvP. Were artillery to get a large tracking increase, they would never have to actually do the "run" part in hit'n'run. We could see swarms of Claymore/Halo boosted Tempests zooming around in their optimal hitting everything but never getting hit themselves. Increase Fall-off and add a little tracking to give the faint of heart a little more breathing space, but don't ask for nano-snipers. Originally by: Tiger's Spirit I have apoc too, but do you dont think about, the Apoc with short range weapon too overpowered ? Not really no. Damage with Scorch at those ranges is about the same as sniper damage (4-500 dps) add that tracking prevents you from hitting anything moving <20-30km away and it is really not that good. It gets range but generally has less damage/tracking than all other ships that operate at that range. The new TC/TE which are going to add fall-off as well optimal will even this out even further making the PulsePoc a thing of the past since a lot more ships will be able to get close to the 50% sniper range (70-80km). Large ACs need more tracking to be in line with their smaller cousins. Medium and Smalls on the other hand do not. They are already absolutely brutal in close range where no other weapon can track. Large ACs should be able to do the same. ACs (and projectiles in general) trade damage versatility and their cap-less status for raw damage. This has been the way of things since before I joined over 3 years ago. Can you imagine the outcry that would happen if lasers had a damage spread like EMP ammo does? This seems to be what some of you want, and hate to tell you this but it would insanely overpowered. Ships like the Harbinger would be using AC's since they would be better overall than the bonused lasers and leaves tons of fitting for goody tank.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.06 11:24:00 - [14] Originally by: Hun Jakuza With your skill ? Almost ~600 DPS without drones. Sure it is possible to do what you claim with 8 guns, triple heat sinks and dual+ tracking. Problem is that todays short-range BS means RR .. unless you are included into fleet expressly to counter ECM ships I don't see why any FC would want your glass-cannon in a buffer/RR gang. Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Hirana: Are you mad. Unknown. My therapists usually have to enter therapy themselves before they have time to diagnose me I have all weapon support skills at 5, Laser and Hybrid specs at 4 and Projectile spec at 1, will be 4 in a few days (joining in on the coming arty fad). Maybe my luck just sucks but my Tachyons never get anything but 'light hits' firing at a moving target while aligned (standard plate fleet fit). Blasters DO indeed have better tracking/damage but they have no range to speak of and suck almost as much cap as lasers do after their bonus. The single most effective way to kill blaster/laser ships is to neut them. Properly flown Neut Rifter kills a Taranis with very little effort, against lasers it is the same thing, you can add a TD instead of web to guarantee a win. This is why capless weapons matter. Dual-neut Rupture/Hurricane and Tempest/Typhoon will utterly destroy any blaster/laser ship of their class and lower. Typhoon is even getting a massive boost with a 5th weapon slot making them the ship to look out for, the ultimate RR platform post-dominion. The dominance of pulse lasers, which I assume you are referring to, is a direct result of lower speeds - midrange simply lasts longer. The weapon itself is probably one of the most balanced around as it sacrifices cap, tracking, damage type to get that godly range. But if you absolutely want a suggestion for laser "nerf": Increasing laser cap use to minimize use on ships without bonus (laserMyrm for the win!) and reign in the indirect buff QR gave them. I have lost more pulse ships than I can count to AC ships simple because I can't hit a damn things up close or being neuted to oblivion. FFA on SiSi has already had the Tempest/Maelstrom gangs warping around killing indiscrimately. That is without any artillery tracking buff. Transfer to TQ; add higher speed and signature decrease from a Claymore with BS having agility hardwires and they will be nearly unstoppable as long as they keep rotating to new warp-ins (an insane bubble inferno might stop them though). Hit'n'Run frees you from needed ECCM so mid-lots can be all buffer and lock-time with low-slots adding tracking/damage/range. Minmatar will still suck in a long range stand-off fight, but who cares when they can rip out your spleen and be over the hills before you can respond? After adding fall-off to TC and TE,increasing EMP damage, upping alpha and making some of the more "lol" ammo types usable projectiles don't need all that much more. Large artillery and ac's could do with more tracking, especially ac's but that is about it. Minmatar was never the long-range slugger, if that is what you want you should ask for the Tempest bonuses to be changed to range instead of damage. Buffing artillery to the levels some here want will have repercussions reaching far beyond fleets (like lowsec sentry immune party-poppers ).
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.06 17:07:00 - [15] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset This is a common misconception, I just wish that those who keep repeating this would check their facts first and provide some numbers. I have yet to see a single blaster fit using anything but straight damage/rof/trimark rigs. Since I have never encountered it, it remains theory and thus not factored in. Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Two posts ago you suggested that even if they kept subpar dps and range that better tracking for arty would be OP. With the high alpha? You are damn right it would be unbalanced. We are talking a single squad insta-popping buffered fleet BS, not 3-4 squads like all other weapons .. but one. If you throw range and tracking on top of that alpha no one in their right mind would fly anything but artillery boats, just like the Apoc dominates now thanks to unmodified range potential. My Tachyon fits rarely if ever include tracking/range enhancers on the Apoc, why should they when you get superior range without? Room for more tank/gank, but unmodified tracking + aurora makes for rather poor hits against moving targets. The 200km+ fit has no such issues though, due to the addition of tracking/range mods. Originally by: Neutrino Sunset When I asked what compromise Amarr should have.... My answer based on pulses is valid for beams as well, increase cap consumption. A relatively small increase will force the Apocalypse to stagger guns or pause to maintain fire with a hefty dps decrease as a result. Will utterly destroy any remotely useful Abaddon fits but that can be solved independently Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Your post did get me thinking though. How on earth does a neut Rifter without a web fitted kill a Taranis? Without web? I recommended the TD against laser wielders. A neut is infinitely more effective than a nos due to the way nos works, as long as the Rifter keeps spamming neut whenever he has cap for it a nos will give nada, but more importantly his guns wont fire for more than 20% of the time or so. You learn all the dirty tricks in the Sub-BS classes flying in FW .. some rather ingenious solutions to problems in this cesspool we call home. On topic, my suggestions for last bit: - Decrease 1400 grid need enough to allow full rack+MWD and change on Tempest. Fitting mods MUST be required for heavy buffers. - Increase large AC tracking to to S/M ratios. - Increase tracking on large artillery a smidgen or halve large tremor penalty. - Increase large artillery base range a bit, wont need much with falloff added to TE/TC.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.29 08:13:00 - [16] Errr, Nozh. First off, With the uber-nature of that Phased Plasma ammo all minmatar ships will be able to burn down Amarr t2 hulls with little problems with little danger to themselves (tracking/damage types). What weapon do you propose Amarr use against Minmatar T2 hulls? The racial primary damage has always been the one tanked by the opponents T2 hulls but this pretty much scraps that idea without compensating any of the other three races in a similar fashion. Lasers have very little effect against the absurd resists especially since all Matar ships are able to buffertank and still carry full combat gear with minimal/no compromises - the only race able to do that. Secondly, with more damage and range you will have to reduce their tracking rather significantly to be in line with lasers and blasters. Lastly, increase fitting requirements for ALL auto cannons and the larger medium artillery. Now that Minmatar are getting the firepower they should also experience the joy of having to chop off toes to shoehorn on a buffer tank fit. At the current rate you are going to end up with close range Abaddon's being better off using autos due to the far superior damage profile and tracking of projectiles.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.03.12 12:53:00 - [17] Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2 Actually right now projectiles are 10X better than hybrids. Autocannons are better than ALL other weapon systems now. Ability of missiles to use what is essentially single damage types without the silly explosion radius/velocity to mess things up. Stupidly low fitting requirements, stupidly high tracking and now focused damage types .. if you plan on engaging anything below 15km range projectiles trump any other alternative. Artillery is now on par with lasers/missiles .. different mode of operation though so not for everyone. Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2 Although lasers still are overpowered. This is aimed at Scorch I take it? The crystal that is made completely useless by a single EM resist mod? Between cap use, ****-poor tracking and spastic fitting requirements, lasers were never OP .. I for one am glad that the CSM reps have notice the imbalance caused by the projectile boost. It was sorely needed, but when you take the synergy between hulls, low fittings, good damage, speed etc. into account no other race has a chance in hell to compete against Minmatar sub-BS hulls .. even in a straight slug-fest. They lack the mid-range and that is all, they are godly close in (where blasters are supposed to be) and well above average in long range.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.03.20 11:02:00 - [18] Originally by: Nuts Nougat This is aimed at Barrage I take it? The ammo that is made completely useless by a single explosive resist mod? See what I did there? Yeah I saw. You managed to completely ignore the fact that base explosive resists on the whole are considerably lower than base EM requiring two (2) explosive mods to achieve same effect. Nice try though. ACs (not as applicable to large) need a significant bump in fitting costs to be anywhere near balanced. Their performance is now on par with lasers but requires no cap, have missile like damage selection, superior tracking and are so easy to fit that it is almost negligible. Scorch is great, but with slow'ish hulls and poor tracking the benefit is all but lost except in situations where you have a swarm of minions holding targets down. PS: Did you know that you can tracking tank a MWD/DLP Slicer using any AB frig when caught? It even translates to all larger guns as well, FMP/HP Zealot can be tracking tanked by an AB cruiser. Range is utter crap compared to tracking everywhere but in bubble-land.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.03.24 07:33:00 - [19] Originally by: Nuts Nougat ...Now I'm not saying that harb will kill a hurricane every time, chance is about 50/50 if both pilots know what they're doing If that was the case then the chance of the Harbinger winning drops to a big fat zero. Two medium neuts (small injector more than cover cap need) instead of the place holder RR modules combined with the 15-20% speed advantage of the Hurricane guarantees a win .. fall-off doesn't factor in when you have rammed the Hurricane into the Harbinger. When comparing EHP it might be proper to include damage types, that Hurricane has slightly (2-4k) more when against scorch and slightly less against MF whereas the Harbinger has less against both barrage and fusion .. moot point once cap is gone though as Harbinger damage will drop to whatever is possible in between neut-cycles. With all things being equal a Harbinger's only chance against a Hurricane today is to use the gimmicky shield-gank fit and/or the lamest of the lame: ECM drones.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.