|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
   |
Posted - 2010.05.06 23:08:00 -
[1]
I'm taking this approach:
I need a t1 battleship with t2 fitting that can perform really well in small gang roaming pvp. Having Level 5 skills in all battleships and having fought 3000~ battles, I have a pretty good "feel" for what works and what doesn't.
Right now, I feel that my best options for close range PvP battleship are the Dominix, Typhoon, and Tempest. Megathron would be pretty down on my list, below Rokh, Geddon, and Abaddon
That said, Megathron used to be my 2nd favorite ship - like 3 years ago.
The main issue with Megathron, and I suppose with blasters in general - fitting requirements are too harsh.
The damage advantage of blasters is completely insignificant in light of all the other variables that need to be considered. Ideally, I want to think that blasters are kings of close range pvp. But that's simply not true.
I give up on blasters, except when I decide to fit some electrons on Dominix - as something extra. I adapted by using other ships.
I don't believe there can be any meaningful progress regarding Blaster issue while CCP designer suffer from "damage phobia" illness. I don't think they have even acknowledged that they have this problem. It's much easier for playerbase to find work around this issue.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.10 18:05:00 -
[2]
I notice some people discuss improving speed, agility, and weapon tracking.
I believe those attributes should be for AC ships. Blaster ships should still be slow and cumbersome, they just need to have high damage as the main advantage over all other weapons.
Cause if you improve blaster ships in those other ways, then the next thing we'll see is AC/minmatar 10+ page threads calling for fixes.
We should never lose focus of the relationships between 3 close range gun types. Each have advantages and disadvantages, which need to be emphasized, not made more similar.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.10 19:49:00 -
[3]
Speaking from personal preference as long time battleship user, I'd say a 20% raw dps increase for blaster will make me want to fly Megathrons again, even tho I'll still hate how hard it is to fit one.
Likewise, if blaster damage was increased 10%, I may try Mega and Hyperion once, but would stick to my preferred Dominix and Typhoon. Ability to fit heavy energy neutralizer >> extra dps.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.11 18:17:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Ephemeron on 11/05/2010 18:19:15
 Quote:
- Make lasers (and therefore projectiles and torps and pretty much everything else) do less damage.
I want to point out why that would be a horrible idea, in case someone may accidentally take it seriously.
Not only that is unrealistic request due to overwhelming protest it would cause from entire community. But you need to understand that tanking has been continuously boosted for last several years, while weapon damage seen much smaller increases.
The latest boost was to make 15% buffer rigs for cruisers, bc, frigates very affordable - essentially giving everyone who wants another free Full Grade Slave Set or equivalent shield tank set. Something that normally would cost at least 1500 million now costs 9 mil. And that's just one of the many tanking boosts.
And in case it's not clear to some people, excessive tanking ability leads to blobbing - as it both requires more people to efficiently kill the target and gives victim more time to call in friendly blob from nearby. I was under impression we didn't like the blobbing trends.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.11 21:14:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Ephemeron on 11/05/2010 21:17:11
Originally by: Goumindong
That means that the only proper response is to make them faster and more agile.
Once again I'm reminded how messed up in the head Goumindong is. I haven't forgotten the Nano Nerf fiasco. The sad part is that CCP game designer seem to be just as messed up as this guy.
He simply cannot be reasoned with, cause his logic obeys the rules of some parallel universe, not quite like ours.
There's really no point arguing with him. But if the devs are messed up in similar ways and they follow this bad advice, I can assure you that the next big threads are going to be cries of the minmatar. The game will shift one more notch toward boredom, as the differences between ships are erased. Balance through sameness is achieved.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.11 23:22:00 -
[6]
Gypsio III, I believe that a 20% damage increase (a free damage mod) would go a long way to helping Deimos, without making that ship overpowered due to its other shortcomings.
There's an alternative solution tho - changing MWD bonus to 90% web bonus, it would make Deimos highly desirable in small gang pvp. But then it takes away from Vigilant advantage.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.12 17:59:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev
Anyone thought of "charge mode?""
We have triage module, should we have "charge module" that would make your speed go though the roof, but have a big reactivation delay?
It is an interesting idea, but it would mess up PvP dynamics badly.
People would us it to get past gate camps, usually charging back toward the gate for jump out. That tactic is already powerful with MWD. But at least MWD can be turned off by scramble. The webs are too weak to stop anything. Such a module would become a must-have for all PvP.
It may also lead to new bumping tactics, with unexpected results.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.12 19:44:00 -
[8]
Quote:
Blasters can't get a increase in damage because then they are OP when they land on ships in a gank.
I fail to see this as a valid point. Anyone care to enlighten me?
I have seen many gank squads in my time, and I have not noticed any emphasis on blasters. Even if you ignore all the practical hurdles of getting perfect blaster damage, it's still only marginally better than ACs and lasers after ship bonuses. And a damage mod makes more difference in ship dps than weapon type.
Very few "practical" Gallente ships utilize 3 damage mods (for short range), because that would leave them with very weak tanks. But likewise, all other factions can achieve same type of DPS with 3 damage mods on short range weapons. And actual dps of theirs will match that of blasters when you factor in fall off and tracking.
So no, I just don't see any significant differences in practical or theoretical damage output of blasters relative to other ships.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 00:34:00 -
[9]
Quote:
Complicated solution: total strategy change for Gallente ships. Base speed increasing, signature decreasing, special bonuses like stasis web speed factor or other
Congratulations on inventing Minmatar
I said it before and I say it again: there will be no proper solution to this issue until CCP deals with damage phobia.
Any "alternative" solution to blasters, such as the one I quoted, will simply decrease diversity by making things same. Or infringe on special roles of other races, thus guaranteeing future headache of fixing emergent problems with those other races.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 19:06:00 -
[10]
Originally by: The Djego
Originally by: Ephemeron
Any "alternative" solution to blasters, such as the one I quoted, will simply decrease diversity by making things same. Or infringe on special roles of other races, thus guaranteeing future headache of fixing emergent problems with those other races.
Putting peak DPS at the target within web range quickly, stop targets at gates solo without gimped tackling range and the ability to control range within web range where things that made blaster ships good at her niche.
Putting back the "lethal" in web range for gank style blaster pvp is a long overdone step and provides a lot more diversity than a bit more DPS would do.
My idea for Gallente niche is that operating blasters should be difficult, but those who can manage it, overcome the obstacles, would get rewarded by unparalleled DPS strength. And that means a difference of more than a single damage mod on any other ship.
Minmatar should do what you mentioned, be optimized for ease of use as opposed to dps power.
|
|
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 21:58:00 -
[11]
tweaking close range in positive manner would be undoing the Great Nano Nerf. Make webs 90%, remove MWD deactivation for scramble, make ships fast again.
That has worked in the past, then CCP had to **** things up.
Raw damage is a single factor that can be used to manipulate balance in this case. It is the easiest way that would involve least amount of unexpected errors. Alternative balancing requires adjustment of multiple variables, the consequences of which are harder to predict and harder to tune properly.
While I don't doubt that balance can be achieved by adjusting many different factors, I simply find it unnecessary complication. And I don't trust CCP with anything complicated. We gotta keep things as simple as possible for them to get it right.
|
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.21 22:47:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Fistme
rack of ions and 2x rep with 6 lows would be more than enough to bring a dual rep brutix in line with other ganky bcs.
active tanking BC don't make sense as long as you can get 1.52x more armor for just 6 mil worth of rigs. And the 1600mm plate is significantly better than armor rep.
Just calculate how long you need to active repair in order to break even with the plate on HP added - forget the cap requirements
1600mm plate: 4200 hp, *1.25 from skill, *1.52 from rigs, total hp bonus: 7980
medium armor repper: 320 hp over 9 sec (after skill), *1.375 hp ship bonus, *1.2 from combat booster, *1.41 from active boost rigs (stacking penalized), you get: 744.48 / 9 sec or 82.72 hp/sec
Therefore, to active repair 7980 you need 96 seconds and about 1715 cap
This doesn't even include the added HP bonus from passive HP rigs to base ship armor, which for typical bc adds at least another 2000 hp, while active rigs get nothing like that.
So in best case scenario, your active rep plays you your advantage if the battle duration is at least 100 seconds and you don't neuted. And you are willing to pay for boosters.
With passive mode you get all those benefits upfront, not 100 seconds later. And if you are in a real pinch, you WANT those hp up front, or you die.
Thank's to CCP's carelessness with defensive rigs, making them vastly superior to offensive ones and making them ridiculously cheap, active armor rep has became near obsolete.
Since passive armor rigs are so advantages to have, they are nearly a must-have, and that means you have to sacrifice speed, at least 15% less speed.
I suppose this is a rant for another topic. But the root of the problem is the same - CCP has incompetent game designers.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.26 19:38:00 -
[13]
In addition to all the problems mentioned, there's another small but noticeable issue:
Hybrids damage type is worst for general PvP.
A lot of PvP ships are t2/t3
Hybrid damage type is strongly resisted by Gallente and Caldari t2/t3, with weaker resists on Minmatar and Gallente
Projectiles have switchable damage types so they can always hit weak resists. That makes it very attractive for PvP in addition to all the tracking and range advantages.
Lasers are strongly resisted by Minmatar t2/t3, weakly resisted by Gallente/Caldari, and no extra resists on Amarr t2/t3
Naturally, lasers look more attractive than hybrid damage due to less overlap with t2 resists.
In addition to that, majority of sub-battleship PvP ships are shield buffer tanks, which makes lasers more attractive than hybrids.
So even when fighting t1 ships without special resists, you are more likely to encounter shield buffers, so you want EM and Thermal damage. Both lasers and projectiles offer that. Hybrids are weaker.
This isn't a big thing, but it's worth about 10% damage to me, intuitively. Meaning that if I have a choice between 1 ship with lasers and another identical ship with hybrids and 10% more damage, I'd seriously think about which to choose. And if both ships were identical, 1 dealt laser damage, other dealt hybrid damage - the choice would be lasers 99% of the time
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.26 20:13:00 -
[14]
I am aware that there are many cases where EM is not preferred, besides the Minmatar t2
But as someone with lots of experience, I can see that the cases where EM is preferred happen more often than when EM is not desired. If I had to put a distribution percentage on it, I'd say it's about 65% in favor of EM, 35% against
And as someone who flew Minmatar on my main for last couple months, with about 200 kills worth, I found that the based combo of ammo is Fusion and EMP. I believe that resorting to Phased Plasma in PvP is for noobs
Anyway, I said that wasn't a big issue. It's a small one, about 10% worth.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.26 21:33:00 -
[15]
the point is that blasters suck in more ways than one
I believe blasters need 20% more damage - all blasters. That would be equivalent of a free damage mod. That would ensure that projectile and laser ships can't overturn that advantage by fitting 1 damage mod of their own. And it would make up for the bad tracking, bad optimal+falloff, hard fitting requirements, energy use, and damage type of blasters.
But I'm pretty sure it would fall on death ears at CCP, as they are suffering from collective case of damage-phobia
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.27 01:53:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Ephemeron on 27/01/2011 01:54:00
it would be a bit unfair if blasters had best damage AND best tracking.
It would make them more general purpose, easier to use. Damage should be high, but it should be hard to use. Damage should be high enough to make overcoming tracking difficulties a useful thing. Employ web + scram, take advantage of falloff, try match traverse velocity. Things that take real player skill. Cause if you get high damage and ease of use, then it's unbalanced.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.28 23:26:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
Any news?
So far the devs don't even recognize there is a problem.
They are looking at the game, but they should be looking at themselves. The devs have a problem, a personal problem that bleeds into bad game design.
|
|
|
| |
|