EVE Search - Projectile Weapons

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)
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.26 00:02:00 - [1] Edited by: RedSplat on 26/09/2009 00:06:08 The SINGLE most important thing you can do for AC's is tweaking the falloff calculations. AT max falloff we get 33% of on paper damage IF we can track the target and after sig radius effecting hit quality. Tweak the numbers till we have 65% on paper damage at max falloff. AC's ALWAYS fight in falloff as all other close range weapons outdamage them sub 5-8 km depending on weapon size; and we need to kite right at the end of web range to control range now thanks to weaker webs making such more dangerous. Dont just nerf falloff of lowers tier AC's and call it BALANCED as you've created differentiation within a weapon size, EDIT: Oh and buffing lasers by reducing cap usage AGAIN is ing **ed. No offense intended Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.27 23:29:00 - [2] Originally by: Beverly Sparks One of the false equality lies in that CCP think that falloff and optimal balance out at 1:1. Meaning Optimal+falloff should equal Optimal+falloff roughly. This is not true in the slightest. For every km of Optimal another ship gets over a projectile, the projectile should get 2 km of falloff, to at least achieve 86% damage at similar ranges. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.28 16:28:00 - [3] Originally by: Yalezorn Been rollin this around in my head the last few days, seeing a lot of posts talking about how bad projectile weapons are right now. One of the issues I've seen is the small clip size they have, resulting in having to reload often, and an overall drop in DPS. So, what if projectile ammo was all belt fed? What I mean is basically a combination of hybrid turret and laser mechanics, where basically your clip size is only limited by your cargo hold. You select the type of ammo for your guns to use from your hold, and the guns will fire continuously as long as you have ammo in your cargo bay. This would eliminate reloading for projectiles, allowing steady damage during a fight. That is a quality idea, devs getting this? Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.28 18:24:00 - [4] Edited by: RedSplat on 28/09/2009 18:24:29 Either increase base falloff on AC's or Make the tracking computer script give 1.5* the optimal bonus in Falloff Falloff sucks. 20km optimal or 20 km falloff- if you dont see the disparity in effectiveness between these two then you need to go back to square one and redesign Minmatar weapons. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.28 19:37:00 - [5] Good. The HP buff was badly botched- simply put it was too much of a buff. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.28 20:51:00 - [6] Originally by: Seishi Maru And there has been an improvement. Now a tempest is the best large scale gate camper in game. You put 3 SB with locking speed and 5 tempest can insta pop some BC. Or you can just fly any 5 other BS and accomplish the same thing without having to use a sucky weapons system and ship- and frankly, so what if you can kill a BC with 5 other ships. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.29 19:50:00 - [7] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida 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 Then your fits are failsauce Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.29 20:15:00 - [8] Originally by: Vyktor Abyss As a Gallente I fully support my Minmatar brothers and sisters having their weapons systems boosted. The only question I have is does this mean our Gallente hybrid weapons will be worse than Lasers, Projectiles and Missiles? Time for Eve on hard mode for me I guess. Rails are fail. Blasters are still awesome sub BS. Blasters are still awesome ON THE MEGA- and frankly why would you frankly a Domi or Hyp over a Mega these days... If you are having trouble getting into range with the scram changes investigate the more unusual fits. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.29 20:42:00 - [9] Originally by: Miriiah So yeah, as I stated earlier, I kinda like the PVE element of the game aswell, and I love Minmatar ships CCP Nozh, is there a chance Angel Resists can be altered to fit EMP L damage (second weakest to EM?) or Fusion to be put as the mainstream ammo, split damage with the 2 worst possible ammos to combine into 1 round for pvp aswell is abit :\| Balancing this game around PVE content insofar as ships and mods is a huge mistake Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.09.30 16:04:00 - [10] Originally by: Tyler Lowe The changes have made artillery crap for mission running. You are right that balancing around PVP is what needs to be done. Now, try the new fleet pest with AC's w/barrage and falloff rigs and a tracking computer scripted for falloff on SISI. No need to thank me Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.10.01 23:17:00 - [11] Does CCP not realize that high Alpha favors medium sized gang warfare? -Enough high Alpha ships on the field to instapop or 2 volley enemy DPS or E-War. -Not so many ships on the field that alpha is irrelevant as anything primarieddies instantly anyway. Sadly what we might call the critical number of ships for which high alpha fleets are most effective is rare in this game. Arty needs high Alpha to give it a role in EVE separate from other weapons (apart from Tachyons. ****ed idea that they are), but also needs an appropriate cycle time so as to not render it useless in protracted engagements nor those with 100+ BS on the field; only being able to shoot 1 in 5 targets and do appreciable damage, rather than one gun KM whoring, is a crappy situation. Originally by:** CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.10.05 17:21:00 - [12] Originally by: Tyler Lowe The addition of a launcher point to the Typhoon provides another answer. 5 x cruise and sentries is a perfectly viable PVE answe You are talking about the Fleet Typhoon. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.10.05 18:28:00 - [13] Originally by: Seriously Bored He's talking about both. Should be 6/6, but i still have a hardon. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat	Posted - 2009.10.06 15:59:00 - [14] If you don't think barrage is a necessity to have in your suite of options as a Minmatar pilot i suggest you bio your character and roll Amarr. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat Noir.	Posted - 2009.10.15 19:48:00 - [15] 1KM FALLOFF IS NOT EQUAL IN USEFULNESS TO 1KM OPTIMAL Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
RedSplat Noir.	Posted - 2009.11.06 00:16:00 - [16] Falloff. Until you either change hit degradation or give AC's 1/3 more range than Scorch in falloff (so they can actually do more than 30% of paper DPS as engagement ranges), then ... Lasers are still better in every way. and don't get me started on the flip flopping over Medium arty Alpha boosts. They need serious improvements, dont do a half hearted job. P.S The difference between AC tiers needs to be increased. Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.

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.