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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 .. 90 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Liang Nuren The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.09.25 02:50:00 - [241] Originally by: Lili Lu I don't agree. You are taking alpha in isolation. In a fleet situation alpha is additive. If you make alpha too strong we will just replace Apoc as fotm with Tempest or Maels as fotm. Target caller: "Beta is primary" Fleet of Tempests: (after Beta alpha'd) "what is secondary?". At a certain size fleet, alpha will be all that matters, because opposing BSs can get alpha'd. If you make that threshhold very much lower there will be no reason not to fly fleets of all Minmatar all the time. Alpha is not additive. There's only so much required - and incidentally, as fleet sizes increase, alpha becomes much less meaningful. There is an iron clad proof of this. We should chat out of this thread about it. Quote: I do. Might not tech I cruisers totally disappear as a pvp option? And yes frigs can be alpha'd by any BS, but what about the thrasher eating frigs much more easily. No noob will be useful for anything in his tech I frig or cruiser. It would affect faction warfare most, probably. No more tech I frig tacklers is not a good thing imo. I don't believe this would be the outcome of the change. Quote: The question remains, how could you nerf the Apoc's bonuses and not have it land in the toilet again? I think anyone calling for a laser/apoc/zealot nerf needs to wait for the projectile buff to go through and see how the tempest/munnin fare in comparison with the change. I plan to. But boosting alpha won't change that the Apoc is the premier sniping platform. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Gavin Darklighter THE FINAL STAND The Final Stand.	Posted - 2009.09.25 03:41:00 - [242] Alpha ia king in huge fleet fights because your guns cycle don't cycle at their own rate of fire, but at the speed of the node. signature picture exceeds the size limit.~WeatherMan
yrknat	Posted - 2009.09.25 03:43:00 - [243] Originally by: Psyflame Edited by: Psyflame on 24/09/2009 02:05:22 Awesome! Very glad this is being looked into. Four points I would like to touch on: Range: In fleet fights, artillery simply lack the required range. Matar ships are often compared to 8x tachyon apocalypse to show the lack of balance. Tachyons are NOT a valid comparison because of their massive fitting requirements over other weapon systems. To solve the range issue, what is the chance of introducing something like 1800mm artillery, with MASSIVE (in-line with Tachyons) fitting requirements? More flavor - projectile ammo tiers: There have been repeated statements of the intent to make the weapon systems different; to give them flavor. A long time ago there was a devblog mentioning ammo tiers for projectiles. Tier one would be Fusion, PP, EMP. Equal range and damage, but different damage TYPES. Tiers two and three would offer more range in exchange for damage reduction, but would still offer more flavor in damage types. This would definitely make projectiles unique. Think we could run with this? Boost to what size weapons? I don't think there is any real issue with small projectiles. Small autocannons are so good that ships with a rocket bonus usually forgo their bonused weapons in favor of the higher-dps autos. Thrasher is generally considered the best destroyer for virtually any pvp situation and is hilariously good at what it does. Perhaps rebalance a few ships instead of the entire small proj platform? Medium projectiles are iffy. Rupture is undeniably one of (if not the) best t1 cruisers. A significant boost to medium autocannons would make rupture quite overpowered. On the other hand, the hurricane can be a bit slim on their gank/tank ratio. Need to be very careful with medium projectile changes imo. The only huge need for a boost has been to large projectiles. These have been substandard for quite some time. Over-boosting the small and medium classes may cause some serious balance issues. Barrage L: I realize you are changing the t1 ammo and am very happy about this, but Barrage L could use a SLIGHT damage buff to bring it in line. If you improve autocannon tracking (see: flavor) and give Barrage L a slight damage increase it should balance out the lower overall damage output. this
Spaztick Terminal Impact Kairakau	Posted - 2009.09.25 04:03:00 - [244] Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Alpha ia king in huge fleet fights because your guns cycle don't cycle at their own rate of fire, but at the speed of the node. Smart people petition 1000 man fleet fights for CCP to reinforce a node the day before so this isn't a problem.
m3rb3aSt Minmatar Advanced Component Research Enterprise GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.09.25 05:48:00 - [245] the projectile changes sound great. fix rockets and blasters as well. make rockets like a faster firing shorter ranged standard missile and to fix blasters simply increase the optimal and falloff slighlty and increase the dps. blasters should absolutely crush anything... if you can get in range.
Allen Ramses Caldari Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2009.09.25 07:04:00 - [246] I find it a bit humorous that this thread, with the inclusion of TD/TC changes popped up less than a day and a half after I made my thread in Assembly Hall . But wait... CCP Nozh is actually *fixing* something? I miss the old Nozh, the one who chose to publicly spit in the face of pilots who used missiles and those who liked speed as a variable. Why aren't you destroying things like you love to do, causing countless people to ragequit? (Yeah, I'm still bitter.) ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006.
Lee Dalton Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2009.09.25 07:36:00 - [247] ur hero 2 me <3 *** You're only as good as your last fight.
WarDecEvading NPCCorpAlt	Posted - 2009.09.25 08:07:00 - [248] Edited by: WarDecEvading NPCCorpAlt on 25/09/2009 08:11:41 Originally by: Spaztick Originally by: Gavin Darklighter Alpha ia king in huge fleet fights because your guns cycle don't cycle at their own rate of fire, but at the speed of the node. Smart people petition 1000 man fleet fights for CCP to reinforce a node the day before so this isn't a problem. Nothing should ever be balanced around performance faults. This still doesn't address any of the other issues with large artillery though: POWER GRID USAGE: Why can't the Tempest fit six turrets without a grid mod? The Hurricane, its smaller cruiser-sized cousin, can do that and it's one of the major reasons it's a good ship. Every other battleship can. The Tempest essentially loses a low slot for no good reason. RANGE: 152km optimal with Tremor and three range mods? Really? Other battleships can fire out to 180km or farther with similar fittings. OVERLAP: There really isn't a whole lot of distinction between the Tempest and the Maelstrom.
Chakarr	Posted - 2009.09.25 08:47:00 - [249] Yey! I'm so happy I could cry
Soyemia Minmatar Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.09.25 10:53:00 - [250] In order to make large ACs viable, we need bigger boost. Now they still will be beaten by blasters at 0-5km and by lasers always. BUT BUT they dont use can ain't a good argument. Active tanking is a rarity nowadays anyways so it's not a major part in warp dis range combat. Also, how does alpha boost boost tempest in any way in a fight? Any other fleet will still beat fleet of tempests because they have little range and small DPS. Alpha does not matter in large fleet fights.

Uncle Smokey	Posted - 2009.09.25 11:22:00 - [251] The idea of higher damage output in shorter timeframe, not just one volley from one ship. Back the day there was a chart that described where artilleries had some damage advantage for a volley or two, and where other turrets overtook them in damage over time. I'd like to see the same calculations with the new settings.
Ath Amon	Posted - 2009.09.25 11:29:00 - [252] Originally by: Uncle Smokey The idea of higher damage output in shorter timeframe, not just one volley from one ship. Back the day there was a chart that described where artilleries had some damage advantage for a volley or two, and where other turrets overtook them in damage over time. I'd like to see the same calculations with the new settings. it will stay mostly the same as the dmg/rof ratio will be the same burst dmg instead is achieved having better dmg/rof ratio and balancing the overall dps adjusting reload timers and clip size Originally by: Diana Merris Unfortunately, rather than address the slot layout/tanking issues for Minmatar the Devs have simple declared that it makes us "versitile".
Uncle Smokey	Posted - 2009.09.25 11:57:00 - [253] Originally by: Memnanan As for damage: some are ok i guess (seeing vaga's often enough). But Minmatar is supposed to be the "do or die" race, favouring speed and dps over tank. Speed was nerfed and thus made less important. In general Minmatar ships do have lesser tanks than other races, but as for damage: in hac fleets I keep seeing Zealots higher up on the killmails than the Muninns for damage done, so this isn't right. Also a crusader is capable of doing more damage than any Minmatar inty. As for the tier 1 BS: I've seen Armageddon fits that can do over 1000 dps. Still got to see the Phoon fit that can top that. So, currently Minmatar just isn't the "damage race" that it is supposed to be except for a few ships maybe. In practice, minmatar ships generally favor signature radius, signature resolution and base speed at expense of ALL other attributes in game. Then add bonus and turrets. You see vagabonds often because the difference in one of the inherent abilities is significant rather than marginal. Originally by: Ath Amon Originally by: Uncle Smokey it will stay mostly the same as the dmg/rof ratio will be the same burst dmg instead is achieved having better dmg/rof ratio and balancing the overall dps adjusting reload timers and clip size Aye. That right.
Cpt Branko The Scope	Posted - 2009.09.25 12:34:00 - [254] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 25/09/2009 12:37:24 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 25/09/2009 12:36:11 Originally by: AstroPhobic Sitting on a gate though... new muninn should out-alpha the old cane, with mobility and tracking(?) to spare. No. a1.5/b1.5=a/b Ah, you meant "old cane" - sure, but the new cane still wins by 20%. ~4320 alpha at max skills with RF EMP is nothing to sneeze at, although still don't find it so amazingly useful except vs frigs/ceptors with sensor boosters. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Mioelnir Minmatar Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik	Posted - 2009.09.25 12:44:00 - [255] [Ammo Raw Damage Values] Good. This also makes further discussions/comparisons a lot easier. [Damage Type Distribution] If I could choose to reorder projectile ammo, I'd like it like this. Raw damage values are for small ammo. -50%, Fusion, 9 Exp / 2 Kin -37.5%, EMP, 5 EM / 4 EXP / 1 KIN -25%, Phased Plasma, 8 THM / 2 KIN -12.5%, Titanium Sabot, 7 KIN / 2 EXP +-0%, Nuclear, 6 EXP / 2 KIN +20%, Proton, 6 EM / 1 KIN +40%, Depleted Uranium, 5 THM / 1 KIN +60%, Carbonized Lead, 2.5 EXP / 2.5 KIN This keeps the -50, +-0 and +60 ammo types at our racial explosive/kinetic damage profile, keeps EMP as the weird triple-split wildcard ammo and gives useable Thermal/EM types inbetween. [Tracking Computer / Tracking Enhancer Falloff Love] Nice. And needed since Tracking Disruptors could influence it. [Artillery Alpha / Clipsize] First, bringing back high volley damage brings Artillery back its flavour. This is good. It won't make Artillery competitive though. Currently 1400mm Howitzer IIs with Tremor on a 3x GyrostabII BS 5 Maelstrom have a 9.75sec RoF with a clipsize of 10. That's 10 seconds of reloading every 97.5 seconds, costing 9.3% DPS (10 / 107.5). Upping damage by 50% with constant DPS means +33% RoF, or 12.99sec. So the DPS loss due to reloads shrunk to 7.15%. That is a lot better than it was and closer to 425mm Rails (5.95% loss with 3x MagStab II and 25% RoF Bonus). Further adjusting 1400mm to also get to 5.95% reload loss would mean +163% damage and +62% RoF, which is probably a bit over the top. Adjusting the clipsize would mean 13 rounds per clip. Since that is an ugly number, I vote for 15 round clips. This will drop the reload-loss for 1400s to 4.88%, mitigating the lower DPS over prolonged fights a bit. [Projectile Range] There are currently 2.5 projectile weapon types that suffer from range deficiencies. - Large Artillery: 1400mm with 1x T1 rig and 1 Tracking Computer get 140km optimal with Tremor. One usually does not have more slots if the ship should have beyond wet paperbag HP. But even dedicating 4 slots, anything beyond 160km is virtually impossible without officer gear, T2 rigs, implants and Frentix boosters. 160-165km optimal with 2 slots for range would be a real help. - Small Autocannons: 200mm AC with Barrage has 1.5km optimal + 7.5km falloff. Kiting outside webrange meant ridiculous DPS losses (I'd guess around 20-25% effective DPS including hit quality loss), but it could be done. Since the introduction of Heat, small AC kiting on a hull without falloff bonus became pointless. At 14.5-15.5km range, we are talking 3% dps if I remember the old tracking guide correctly. And that one was without hit quality degradation. - Medium Artillery: this one is the .5 problem weapon. It lacks a bit, but not as much as Large Artillery. [Projectile DPS] Small Autocannons: imho, fine Small Artillery: imho, fine Medium Autocannons: imho, fine Medium Artillery: could use a small nudge upwards Large Autocannons: could use a nudge upwards Large Artillery: could use a small improvement if their range is increased, need an improvement if their range stays to counter falloff losses at realistic engagement ranges.
Mioelnir Minmatar Meltdown Luftfahrttechnik	Posted - 2009.09.25 12:51:00 - [256] Edited by: Mioelnir on 25/09/2009 12:52:00 Originally by: Soyemia In order to make large ACs viable, we need bigger boost. Now they still will be beaten by blasters at 0-5km and by lasers always. That is partially how it is supposed to work. Inside webrange, Blasters should win against Autocannons. Successfully dictating range from outside webrange, Autocannons win. Against Pulse Lasers, the other way round. Autocannons should out-track and win up close and personal, and die horribly at range. This still works sometimes, even nowadays, but is getting ever the more rarer with more and more Amarr ships that don't suffer from a distinct lack of med slots. The pulse laser tracking boost a year back or so didn't hurt either.
Soyemia Minmatar Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.09.25 13:02:00 - [257] Originally by: Mioelnir Edited by: Mioelnir on 25/09/2009 12:52:00 Originally by: Soyemia In order to make large ACs viable, we need bigger boost. Now they still will be beaten by blasters at 0-5km and by lasers always. That is partially how it is supposed to work. Inside webrange, Blasters should win against Autocannons. Successfully dictating range from outside webrange, Autocannons win. Against Pulse Lasers, the other way round. Autocannons should out-track and win up close and personal, and die horribly at range. This still works sometimes, even nowadays, but is getting ever the more rarer with more and more Amarr ships that don't suffer from a distinct lack of med slots. The pulse laser tracking boost a year back or so didn't hurt either. umm lasers win from zero kilometres to any range
Uncle Smokey	Posted - 2009.09.25 13:26:00 - [258] Originally by: Mioelnir Against Pulse Lasers, the other way round. Autocannons should out-track and win up close and personal, and die horribly at range. This still works sometimes, even nowadays, but is getting ever the more rarer with more and more Amarr ships that don't suffer from a distinct lack of med slots. The pulse laser tracking boost a year back or so didn't hurt either. And speed nerfs iirc.
Nyveg Hyperborea Re	Posted - 2009.09.25 13:36:00 - [259] This should be the time to fix damage types on Minmatar and simplify ammunitions. Decouple range and damage-types. Reduce ammo-variants of all races turrets; 8 t1 + 4 t2 are unnecessary and hard to differentiate. Explosive must stay Matar main focus. Second should become thermal to deal with shields at barrage-range, T2 armor-resists on Amarr as well as most NPCs. Why not remove electromagnetic and/or kinetic damage entirely? This will make EM unique on Amarr-turrets as explosive is on Minnie ones. It will remove one "advantage" of Minmatar turrets to justify poor overall performance. 3 or 4 t1 variants from long to close range where the one with higher none-explosive damage gets higher range-penalty should do the trick. And ffs give large ACs more character, punch and range.
Don Pellegrino	Posted - 2009.09.25 13:50:00 - [260] Edited by: Don Pellegrino on 25/09/2009 13:51:13 Originally by: Soyemia Originally by: Mioelnir Edited by: Mioelnir on 25/09/2009 12:52:00 Originally by: Soyemia In order to make large ACs viable, we need bigger boost. Now they still will be beaten by blasters at 0-5km and by lasers always. That is partially how it is supposed to work. Inside webrange, Blasters should win against Autocannons. Successfully dictating range from outside webrange, Autocannons win. Against Pulse Lasers, the other way round. Autocannons should out-track and win up close and personal, and die horribly at range. This still works sometimes, even nowadays, but is getting ever the more rarer with more and more Amarr ships that don't suffer from a distinct lack of med slots. The pulse laser tracking boost a year back or so didn't hurt either. umm lasers win from zero kilometres to any range Sadly, it is almost always true. Some people will argue that it drains a lot of cap.. but Amarr ships have a huge cap and almost never active rep. The projectile changes seem perfect to me, I can't wait to see them in action, awesome job, Nozh. edit: fixed a typo

Muschiu	Posted - 2009.09.25 14:11:00 - [261] Like allot of ppl sayd here before me, large Artys need a bit of optimal range boost; increasing Alpha but keeping same dps/clip size won't help except maibe, in large fleet battles. also you'll have to look a bit at fiting req of those 1400s. in the same time, tempest will need a boost on locking range; atm, it has a smaller locking range then a dominx, , so even the introduction of that fallof script won't change nothing, you can't kill what you can't lock Large autocanons need allot of love, they lack dps/tracking baddly about amunition changes, it will be a nice thing to have let's say 2 types of dmg/ammo type, and that dmg being split @ 80-20%; ad this to every type of ammo having a diferent "main" dmg type, and we can finally use that "minmatar can choose dmg types" slogan
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.25 14:26:00 - [262] Originally by: Cpt Branko Ah, you meant "old cane" - sure, but the new cane still wins by 20%. ~4320 alpha at max skills with RF EMP is nothing to sneeze at, although still don't find it so amazingly useful except vs frigs/ceptors with sensor boosters. That's my point. The new muninn should be better at sitting on the gate and popping anything frig/dest size that comes through. I haven't run the numbers, but it should have enough to 1-shot just about anything small and slippery. Now if it only had a 4th med for another SeBo...
Endless Subversion The Accursed	Posted - 2009.09.25 14:56:00 - [263] Edited by: Endless Subversion on 25/09/2009 14:58:02 Very much support ammo reordering. Fusion as closest range is a very cool idea. I'd also like to see instant ammo change (like lasers). Having tons of really cool ammo options is great, but real dps lost to changing ammo mid fight is for the loss. Missiles and projectiles could really use instant ammo change, just like lasers.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.25 15:36:00 - [264] Edited by: Seriously Bored on 25/09/2009 15:37:43 Originally by: Psyflame Boost to what size weapons? I don't think there is any real issue with small projectiles. Small autocannons are so good that ships with a rocket bonus usually forgo their bonused weapons in favor of the higher-dps autos. Thrasher is generally considered the best destroyer for virtually any pvp situation and is hilariously good at what it does. Perhaps rebalance a few ships instead of the entire small proj platform? Medium projectiles are iffy. Rupture is undeniably one of (if not the) best t1 cruisers. A significant boost to medium autocannons would make rupture quite overpowered. On the other hand, the hurricane can be a bit slim on their gank/tank ratio. Need to be very careful with medium projectile changes imo. The only huge need for a boost has been to large projectiles. These have been substandard for quite some time. Over-boosting the small and medium classes may cause some serious balance issues. Barrage L: I realize you are changing the t1 ammo and am very happy about this, but Barrage L could use a SLIGHT damage buff to bring it in line. If you improve autocannon tracking (see: flavor) and give Barrage L a slight damage increase it should balance out the lower overall damage output. So, I'm going to go over something that may shock a few people. All turrets have the same relative performance to each other at all weapon sizes (with the exception of Tachs, but I won't get into that here). For example the highest stat ACs, Blasters, and Pulse lasers at all sizes, the base stats work out like this. ACs: Base comparative stats. Optimal = 1. Falloff = 1. DPS = +0%. Blasters: Optimal = x1.5. Falloff = x0.625. DPS = +30%. Pulses: Optimal = x5. Falloff = x0.5. DPS = +11%. So at small, medium, and large weapon sizes, pulses do 11% more DPS, and blasters do 30% more DPS before you even take ammo into consideration. If using the highest damage ammo, blasters currently do 46% more DPS, and pulses do 25% more DPS base at all weapons sizes. I think that ACs need to have the lowest DPS base stats, but with ammo the way it currently is, projectile weapons are gimped right out the door. The smaller Minmatar ships mask the poor performance of projectiles with other things that matter in the game. The Rifter has a perfect slot layout to fit tackle, tank, and speed at the same time. Though small Artillery has the same relative balance at the small size as it does at the large (excluding Tachs), EHP is much lower and so alpha counts for something on the Thrasher. The Rupture is one of the few cruisers that can easily fit a BS sized plate, and is good because it can simply outlast its competition. As for Barrage, I think it should be left alone. At all sizes, Null, Scorch, and Barrage have the exact same base damage and it should stay that way.
Megan Maynard Minmatar Clown Punchers. Clown Punchers Syndicate	Posted - 2009.09.25 17:27:00 - [265] Edited by: Megan Maynard on 25/09/2009 17:27:57 Originally by: mazzilliu what about range? the tempest and maelstrom are the worst ranged fleet snipers compared to all other races. in fleet fights you hardly ever see minmatar ships. because even with maxed out range they cant touch what the other races can bring. Yes but none of them can match the damage output in the minnie range... Alpha is everything and this change is awesome. And Liang is spewing idiocy again I see... Originally by: F'nog Originally by: Stareatthesun No no no ... Polaris is where CCP keeps the death star that will destroy eve when the servers shut down. Thankfully I've got Interceptors trained to V. S
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.25 17:59:00 - [266] Originally by: Megan Maynard Yes but none of them can match the damage output in the minnie range... Alpha is everything and this change is awesome. And Liang is spewing idiocy again I see... Liang has his own abrasive quality to him, but if by idiocy you mean careful analysis of the situation and running all the numbers before making a logical assertion, then yes. He spews that stuff. I personally don't think Alpha is everything, but this opens up the door for new tactics, and that in itself is great. So I'm with you there.
Ath Amon	Posted - 2009.09.25 18:28:00 - [267] Originally by: Megan Maynard Edited by: Megan Maynard on 25/09/2009 17:27:57 Originally by: mazzilliu what about range? the tempest and maelstrom are the worst ranged fleet snipers compared to all other races. in fleet fights you hardly ever see minmatar ships. because even with maxed out range they cant touch what the other races can bring. Yes but none of them can match the damage output in the minnie range... Alpha is everything and this change is awesome. And Liang is spewing idiocy again I see... because alpha was so usefull before hp boost... there where no coalitions asking minnie pilots to train for mega... arty was good when you had 6 gyros in the low and tracking was not implemented... there yep alpha was pretty nice. about AC as lowest base dps... (other post) personally i dont agree... dps should follow mostly range imo, expecially now that tracking is kinda similar for all the weapons Originally by: Diana Merris Unfortunately, rather than address the slot layout/tanking issues for Minmatar the Devs have simple declared that it makes us "versitile".
Hyllus	Posted - 2009.09.25 19:33:00 - [268] I support the alpha boost but Can we have a skill that decreases the reload times say 10%/level. This would help everyone but amarr and give more tactical flexibility into changing damage types while in combat (with some panalty) Already there is a skill that cannot be used on projectiles (controlled bursts) so wouldn't hurt to have a skill that is not very beneficial on lasers. This skill would fill the following: -Add a little bit of damage for arties -Make the phrase "Minimatar can chose their damage" half true -Would also benefit hybrids to change ammo types -Would make the changing of crystals in lasers even faster (can it be any faster?) Your thought? Regards-
Etho Demerzel Gallente Holy Clan of the Cone	Posted - 2009.09.25 20:20:00 - [269] Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 25/09/2009 20:22:27 Originally by: Megan Maynard Yes but none of them can match the damage output in the minnie range... Alpha is everything and this change is awesome. And Liang is spewing idiocy again I see... Alpha is only relevant when it is high enough to matter. With this change it will be MARGINALLY relevant in some situations in the battleship realm. About your remarks concerning Liang, well, Liang thinks, you don't. I guess that when a person reads what he cannot possibly understand given his own limitations, what must happen to you all the time, his first impression is that it is nonsense. I pity you. Originally by: Ath Amon dps should follow mostly range imo, expecially now that tracking is kinda similar for all the weapons. Yes I agree. It is just common sense that dps should follow range. Superior range AND superior dps is a recipe for lack of balance. ===== "If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs." - CCP kieron...
Sri Nova	Posted - 2009.09.25 20:23:00 - [270] I know there is almost 0% chance of this happening but i just want to float it out there . Artillery should be area of effect and damaging to All including Self. and would be great if you could fire artillery without targeting. so that way artillery based ships could wreak havoc on drone swarms and grouped frigs . balancing would be a task . but it sure would be fun :)



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 .. 90 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.