EVE Search - Railgun balance, when do they get some love ?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Railgun balance, when do they get some love ?

» 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 .. 25 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.12.21 14:11:00 - [1] Now that Projectiles got their much needed buff, when are Railguns going to get something that makes them something other than the drawbacks of the other two turret based weapon systems. Currently Railguns have: Cap usage problems on their respective ships like lasers. Battleships need to fit around the cap draw in order not to cap out in a few minutes. Limited damage types like lasers, Kin/Therm and ummm, Kin/Therm ? Ammo and reloading time like projectiles, no 1 second ammo switching here, not to mention the fastest shooting weapon system has the largest size ammo,why ?? no room for ozone, cap booster charges in here, Poor tracking without a good initial alpha strike, "oh no that pod I hit once just got away. :(" So, do they have dps ? sure 8-9% more than a capless, smaller ammo size, big alpha strike , different damage type one. But also less damage than the higher tracking, tiny ammo, insta reloading, better alpha weapon system. TLDR version: Railguns share much more disadvantages with the other weapon systems than advantages.
Lindsay Logan	Posted - 2009.12.21 14:24:00 - [2] I'd like to see some rail changes as well, especially on the medium sized ones. They just underperform for the most part.
Eli Porter	Posted - 2009.12.21 14:33:00 - [3] Signed. Especially the reload part, this is something i've proposed in the past. Halving Hybrid ammo reload and ammo change times. After the speed nerf this is really needed, when a Mega takes a while getting into range and switching from Null to AM is a pain in the ass. Making the hybrid charges smaller as well would be nice indeed.
TimMc Gallente Extradition	Posted - 2009.12.21 14:59:00 - [4] The reload time is same as projectiles, so I don't see that as a problem. Would be nice though if railguns got a damage buff so they were the highest dps long range weapon, making up for such a horrible alpha and inflexibility.
Dr Fighter	Posted - 2009.12.21 15:11:00 - [5] my experience with rails says that actually all things said and done, everything into account they need: more tracking and a bit less cap use, 10-15% in both cases.
stoicfaux	Posted - 2009.12.21 15:28:00 - [6] Be greedy. Ask for a new medium range hybrid weapon. Current we have blasters which are painfully short ranged and railguns (the AC/2 of Eve) which are impressively long ranged but lacking in DPS. They both have their place, well more niche than place, but it's nearly impossible to get either to perform decently at medium ranges. ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Nietzsche, and PvP"
Tagami Wasp Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.12.21 15:57:00 - [7] Up the damage of rails by 10%. Perfect midrange buff. ----------------------------------------------- This is a line of text without any meaning. -----------------------------------------------
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2009.12.21 17:29:00 - [8] Edited by: Grimpak on 21/12/2009 17:29:12 you guys fail to account the fact that rails have the highest base optimal, coupled with 2nd best falloff (altho very small compared to projectiles). however it is right to say that they lack something atm, since they are supposed to be middleground between beams and arties, as far as the other stats go. one of the changes I would surely do was to remove the target cap of 249km. believe it or not, this limits rails greatly. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.12.21 17:43:00 - [9] Originally by: Grimpak Edited by: Grimpak on 21/12/2009 17:29:12 you guys fail to account the fact that rails have the highest base optimal, coupled with 2nd best falloff (altho very small compared to projectiles). With the falloff buff,on t2 sniping ammo two tracking enhancers gives 425 rails the same optimal + falloff as 1400 arty. You can argue that the rails have higher optimal, but the falloff on the arty will make it hit further out. With close range ammo, the enhancers help arty much more due to the falloff bonus.
Seishi Maru The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.12.21 18:03:00 - [10] Rails are the longer range weapons. Lasers were the highest damage and arties the high alpha. RAils don t need ship bonuses neither 3 range mods to reach excelent sniping range. Rails have far better tracking than arties... and while they do use cap, they are not omg cap hungry as beams. Rails are much easier to fit than 1400mm and tachyons. Those are their main advantages. The only problem i see with large rails is the stupid 150 km lock range that limits so much the usefulness of rokh bonus. Fixed damage types.. sure.. but you have a GOOD damage type, not like EM. So not a HUGE deal.

Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2009.12.21 18:06:00 - [11] Originally by: Rastigan Originally by: Grimpak Edited by: Grimpak on 21/12/2009 17:29:12 you guys fail to account the fact that rails have the highest base optimal, coupled with 2nd best falloff (altho very small compared to projectiles). With the falloff buff,on t2 sniping ammo two tracking enhancers gives 425 rails the same optimal + falloff as 1400 arty. You can argue that the rails have higher optimal, but the falloff on the arty will make it hit further out. With close range ammo, the enhancers help arty much more due to the falloff bonus. damage reduction of falloff applies here, don't forget. but nevertheless, they need a boost, that's for sure. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Liang Nuren The Lollypop Factory	Posted - 2009.12.21 18:10:00 - [12] Originally by: Rastigan With the falloff buff,on t2 sniping ammo two tracking enhancers gives 425 rails the same optimal + falloff as 1400 arty. You can argue that the rails have higher optimal, but the falloff on the arty will make it hit further out. With close range ammo, the enhancers help arty much more due to the falloff bonus. Wait, are you actually claiming that Arty ships are better snipers because of falloff? The Mega drops 180km optimal and the Rokh 250km and you're saying that having high falloff matters? Man, don't get me wrong - I've got a Caldari/Gallente rail pilot (Liang, as a matter of fact) - but don't just make random bull** up to get your boost. IMO, start by removing the 250km lock cap. Then we can start to talk about how rails "suck". -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum *** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.12.21 18:15:00 - [13] And too much pg/cpu need, and lower tier railguns doent have optimal advantage at all over lower tier beams/arties. -200mm railgun t2 21,6km opt +10km fo vs -focused medium beam t2 21km opt +6km fo the advantage is minimal and neglectible especially as beams have highter dps and tracking + 1 sec ammo change -650mm arty cannon t2 19,32km opt 17,5km falloff or -350mm railgun t2 43,2km opt +20km fo vs -dual heavy beam laser t2 42km opt +12km fo hybrid guns+ships should be redesigned just like minmatar projectiles were
london Gallente Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2009.12.21 18:19:00 - [14] /signed Hybrids and hybrid based ships need to be looked at again. Not just rails either, Blasters need major love. As I've said before, the game has changed too many times since the original design of these ships. It's time for them to catch up.
Eli Porter	Posted - 2009.12.21 18:29:00 - [15] The problem with increasing the range cap from 250km to say 300km is that only Rokhs could reach it, forcing you take a Rokh only fleet if you want a fleet at that range, which sounds balancing in theory but in reality won't happen. Currently only the Apoc and Rokh can reach 250km with decent DPS(300+), so you can have 250km fleets usually. You have to find a range both the Apoc and Rokh can reach and where the Rokh deals a bit more DPS, and make that the max targeting range. Apocs can just barely reach 250km optimal as it is, so just a slight increase is needed. 260km would do? Another problem with the Rokh/Ferox/Eagle is their design, being both snipers and tanky ships, which is a downright contradiction if you ask me. If they had more PG then maybe they'd be more worthy of that versatility.
Zenst Aliastra	Posted - 2009.12.21 19:29:00 - [16] Originally by: Eli Porter The problem with increasing the range cap from 250km to say 300km is that only Rokhs could reach it, forcing you take a Rokh only fleet if you want a fleet at that range, which sounds balancing in theory but in reality won't happen. Currently only the Apoc and Rokh can reach 250km with decent DPS(300+), so you can have 250km fleets usually. You have to find a range both the Apoc and Rokh can reach and where the Rokh deals a bit more DPS, and make that the max targeting range. Apocs can just barely reach 250km optimal as it is, so just a slight increase is needed. 260km would do? Another problem with the Rokh/Ferox/Eagle is their design, being both snipers and tanky ships, which is a downright contradiction if you ask me. If they had more PG then maybe they'd be more worthy of that versatility. I disagree, alot of ships could hit that range if you used logistics to boost tracking. fact is at 250km you have alot of people able to hit solo setup, this only premotes teamwork to the extent of focus fire and - rep me please I should of warped out. If we had 300km then the whole area of specialising becomes more open and when you can get say a tempest with full damage using a logistics to boost its range and sort tank for it and couple of others you more than make up for having somebody in a logistics role over another battleship. Back to the remote sensor boosting badger alts I say :). You aregue that people will fly Rohks or the like to hit 300km, well they still dont stop the other side going for close range and having a silly fast ceptor spot up upon them and utterly grape them. Buy increase the range somewhat you also increase the versatility requirments placed upon fleet fights and too me this would be alot more fun on more levels than not. Beyond that if people will insist on having fleet fights with everybody flying the FOTM becase it hits/locks and does good damage at Nkm silly range then the question should be why change anything and leave the smudge on the side of the plate it already is. AS for railguns, well as it stands there not supposed to shoot as far as 1400's, but on the right ships they can and do, there more medium/long range weapons not primary Long/Longer range weapons. So for there range there alright, tracking wise - maybe some love. Fittingwise, maybe a little bit CPU heavy. But on a whole there not too bad for what there supposed to be. Now blasters - ew, they sooo need some love with the way eve is now. But if you think about it, range weapons are used in 0.0 and closerange are used in empire, mostly as a rule. Each ship and weapon type has its role, but as it stands fleetfights have and still do lean towards sitting eitherside of the largest feild possible and keep taking pot shots with the odd charge. But how about some rigs or modules that transpose dmg types - ie damage mappers that will convert all em damage to thermal and vice versa, heck even have the penalty effect incomming damage as well, would make things most colourful and interesting as well as solve alot of problems. But bottom line, blasters were inline for love before railguns so your looking at 2011 at teh earliest for any love there.
Undertow Latheus Minmatar Monolithic.	Posted - 2009.12.22 01:42:00 - [17] I like how you conveniently don't mention the advantages. - Longest Range - Easiest to Fit I'm not saying if they should get a buff or not, but if you're going to complain about something at least be honest about it.
Anonymous Trader	Posted - 2009.12.22 02:24:00 - [18] +9000
Sumelar	Posted - 2009.12.22 02:29:00 - [19] Damage type on hybrids is irrelevant, both races that use them have the ability to use specific damage types with drones or missiles. Plus Kin/Therm is the best combo, since it works decently well on everything already.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.12.22 05:18:00 - [20] Originally by: Sumelar Damage type on hybrids is irrelevant, both races that use them have the ability to use specific damage types with drones or missiles. Plus Kin/Therm is the best combo, since it works decently well on everything already. So the eagle is fine because it can use missiles ,while fitting up rails? Or if i skill up for hybrid guns I get the missile/drone skills as a bonus? Dmg type is not irrelevant at all. Also it is not only the dmg type which makes hybrids weak and unwanted.

markedfordeletion	Posted - 2009.12.22 08:57:00 - [21] Soo much whining.. They are good especially large rails on caldari rokh. What do you want? Super damage, super range, super tracking all in one place? I think they are good as they are.. You need middle range? go for the other turrets types... I agree though on the medium and light versions. Maybe a small up on those would be needed.
Pod Amarr	Posted - 2009.12.22 11:18:00 - [22] /signed For the small and especially medium versions only.
Beltantis Torrence Groovy Guns	Posted - 2009.12.22 13:55:00 - [23] They don't have enough higher optimal to stand out. Their damage is too low as well and most rail ships don't have the grid to easily fit their guns - especially the so called "sniper ships".
Tagami Wasp Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.12.22 15:24:00 - [24] I think that Large rails/ blasters are OKish, can live with them as is just fine. However, I would suggest a buff of small and med rails/ blasters just like the one the ACs got. Don't forget that the rails should have an alpha midway between Lazor and Arties, but at the moment they are at about 10% less. I should repeat that as an alternative to the damage being buffed by 10%, there is the option of changing fitting requirements. If instead of damage buff rails where given a 10% discount in PG across the board, then they would be easier to fit allowing for more damage mods. The PG discount is an alternative that leaves the blasters in the cold though, and I think all blasters need a falloff buff, not sure how much though. Eyeballing it, I'd say 15% would be too much, but 10% is not enough. How about 12.5%? ----------------------------------------------- This is a line of text without any meaning. -----------------------------------------------
Ogogov	Posted - 2009.12.22 15:44:00 - [25] In fact since the big damage hole has been moved to EM and Explosive, not to mention that hybrids also have a nerfed short range/high DPS weapons system (see the numerous complaints about blasters and their inability to track targets after the web nerf), and ALSO not to mention that drones despite being selectable damage types are slow, hard to manage effectively and destroyable (and rats love to go after them now).... .. it just gives you the impression CCP really hates Gallente, amirite? Large railguns are NOT easy to fit (8x 425mm are very grid hungry, for instance) and even though they have a nice range, they hit like wet noodles at that distance. But really what makes them wildly unbalanced is the fact that their damage is limited to kinetic and thermal, and that the mid range and short range options for Gallente pilots also suffer from serious flaws that not only nobody seems interested in fixing, but were in fact deliberately introduced. I'll also echo what's already been said here, that small and medium railguns have extremely limited usage outside of PvE ratting/missioning (and even then they have extremely lackluster performance - you're better off in a drone boat) and that they are absolutely outperformed by missiles and lasers. Ever hear of a PvE Thorax? thought not. I can see how maybe gallente weapons are designed along a range ethos (rails/long range, drones / mid range, blasters / short range) - but their limitations in the face of changes to other game mechanics have made them extremely unappealing. TO use a couple of examples as to how all this ties together: See a hyperion used to pvp often? I'll tell you why. Not only does it have to have the grid to fit 8 large high DPS and power-sucking guns, it also has to fit an MWD AND an active tank - and then has to deliver some damage at the end of it all. Given the cap-sucking nature of hybrids (especially using antimatter charges) how does this design even begin to make sense? Of course it might not be so bad if the blasters it uses were capable of hitting anything, but as several threads on this board and several others have discussed, blasters very rarely reach their full damage potential. As for fitting railguns, it can't even do that and manage a decent tank due to grid issues. On the other end railguns can't even track without a shedload of mods eating up lowslots or mids, and in a sniping situation if your target is within 40k you'll have a very hard time of hitting them (this also happens to be your optimal if you're using max damage/AM charges - again) Oh and if anyone knows what you're flying they've already tanked thermal/kinetic damage up the wazoo so not only will your powergrid-and-capacitor-hungry weapons do next to no damage, but you're reliant on drones for your real damage anyway Also railguns look and sound weedy - which right now is appropriate sadly. /signed - look at hybrids next. NOT just railguns. ALL hybrids.
Arrador	Posted - 2009.12.22 16:00:00 - [26] Edited by: Arrador on 22/12/2009 16:05:26 Originally by: Undertow Latheus I like how you conveniently don't mention the advantages. - Longest Range - Easiest to Fit I'm not saying if they should get a buff or not, but if you're going to complain about something at least be honest about it. I'm guessing you haven't tried fitting a rack full of 425MM II on a Rokh recently. The single biggest boost CCP could give to hybrids. Is remove the tracking and speed penalty of Void & Javelin. Yes - I wish Rails had either higher DPS like lasers, or higher Alpha's like projectiles. But they are performing the role CCP has in mind for them. What we the player need to point out is, that there is little need for the role that Rails offer, when its surpassed by other weapon systems. I want to see more variety out there with rails, and T2 ammo in whole needs to be revamped and looked at. My reasoning is that removing some/all of the drawbacks of T2 ammo will open up a world of variety. Currently we spend all this time training simply for weapons with a higher damage modifier as 3/4's of the T2 ammo is obsolete and useless. Oh I Would love to see the penalties of Void & javelin Removed. Hell, just by fixing those two ammos would resolve most of the complaints with blasters+Rails. The primary blaster complaint is lack of range and boost the DPS to make them stand out. Guess what? Void offers more Damage and a pinch more range over Caldari navy antimatter!! Oh, but that tracking, yea too bad you can't hit anything with it. Yes I'd love it. My caldari boats with their 10% bonus to hybrid range suddenly become a force to be reckoned with! (1000+ DPS Rokh of Doom @ 10k anyone?) Primary complaint of Rails is lack of DPS. 600DPS Rokh @ 30km anyone? Too bad with javelin you can't move, can't track and cap out in record time. Not to mention you can't even fit 8 425mm's with all level 5 and still need a PG implant or PG mod. Yes, Hybrids need tweaking, but I don't think they require a major overhaul.
Meeko Atari	Posted - 2009.12.22 16:13:00 - [27] Originally by: markedfordeletion Soo much whining.. They are good especially large rails on caldari rokh. What do you want? Super damage, super range, super tracking all in one place? I think they are good as they are.. You need middle range? go for the other turrets types... That sounds suspiciously Ammar
markedfordeletion	Posted - 2009.12.22 16:23:00 - [28] Originally by: Meeko Atari Originally by: markedfordeletion Soo much whining.. They are good especially large rails on caldari rokh. What do you want? Super damage, super range, super tracking all in one place? I think they are good as they are.. You need middle range? go for the other turrets types... That sounds suspiciously Ammar Well, i am caldari/gallente trained and i am happy with it. Among my chars i can use them all though, and each has to have weak and strong points, otherwise we'll be back into the "one ship for all" era, which is not good
london Gallente Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2009.12.22 16:27:00 - [29] Originally by: Ogogov I can see how maybe gallente weapons are designed along a range ethos (rails/long range, drones / mid range, blasters / short range) - but their limitations in the face of changes to other game mechanics have made them extremely unappealing. This ^
Lindsay Logan	Posted - 2009.12.22 16:28:00 - [30] Originally by: Undertow Latheus - Easiest to Fit nope.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: 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.