Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zakarazor
Amarr Inadeptus Mechanicus
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 14:02:00 -
[1]
How would the game change if you increased the max lock range to 500km?
It would change fleet warfare in a intresting way. Fleets would be either:
Close range 0-50: megas geddons.
Medium 50-100: geddons, pest, abaddon
Sniper 100-250: artys, tachs.
Super Sniper 250: capital long range weapons, rails.
Rails and long range capital weapons lack a propper role. rails as supoused to be the ultimate long range weapon but the 250km lock limit is holding it back.
|
Zcorm Narwarr
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 14:50:00 -
[2]
Removing the 250km lock range cap isn't so simple because the grid is 250km diameter and they would have to change lots of game mechanics to make that change possible.
|
Wet Ferret
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 15:38:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Zcorm Narwarr Removing the 250km lock range cap isn't so simple because the grid is 250km diameter and they would have to change lots of game mechanics to make that change possible.
Grids aren't 250km. Can't imagine what gave you the idea they were...
I also don't see anything they'd need to change to make it "possible". Just fix whatever technical limitation is preventing it and call it a day.
But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
|
Zcorm Narwarr
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 15:57:00 -
[4]
Yes my mistake they are 500km across. Usually the ship just sit in the middle of it so you will not see any ships futher than 250km away.
|
Cire XIII
Caldari Ever Flow Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 16:15:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Cire XIII on 25/12/2009 16:18:46
Originally by: Zcorm Narwarr Yes my mistake they are 500km across. Usually the ship just sit in the middle of it so you will not see any ships futher than 250km away.
They are not 500km either. Grids are dynamic across wide ranges. Some are many thousand kilometers while others are less than 200 in a given direction. However, that is not a large part of the OP's argument, and it would be interesting to remove the locking cap on SiSi. .
|
Lady Spank
Amarr Sekret Kool Klubb
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 16:36:00 -
[6]
Yes, damps aren't nearly useless enough yet, boost lock range please. ~
|
Feyona
R.E.C.O.N. Talos Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 16:43:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Lady Spank Yes, damps aren't nearly useless enough yet, boost lock range please.
They're not saying increase the lock range of any particular ship, but rather, the maximum lock range of 250km. Only a few ships can shoot past this, but like the Rokh, I think, could shoot 300-400km if you weren't limited by the lock range limit. So it wouldn't really affect damps that much.
|
Lady Spank
Amarr Sekret Kool Klubb
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 16:49:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Feyona
Originally by: Lady Spank Yes, damps aren't nearly useless enough yet, boost lock range please.
They're not saying increase the lock range of any particular ship, but rather, the maximum lock range of 250km. Only a few ships can shoot past this, but like the Rokh, I think, could shoot 300-400km if you weren't limited by the lock range limit. So it wouldn't really affect damps that much.
A fair point, back to the mince pies for me ~
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 17:01:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Lady Spank Yes, damps aren't nearly useless enough yet, boost lock range please.
Not the lock range of each ship, just the 249km cap on lock range, which would have nothing to do with damps. ----------- FREE ABATHUR - HAVING GOOD 0.0 IDEAS IS NOT A CRIME.
|
superteds
|
Posted - 2009.12.25 17:06:00 -
[10]
Would make the Rokh shine a bit more.
|
|
SturmMiner
Erasers inc. Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.12.30 17:31:00 -
[11]
Edited by: SturmMiner on 30/12/2009 17:32:36 So lets reduce all weapon ranges little. No need to increase targeting range and rails get the love they need.
If reducing range would effect all weapons there would not be any disbalance. Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning EU |
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2009.12.30 17:49:00 -
[12]
Originally by: SturmMiner Edited by: SturmMiner on 30/12/2009 17:32:36 So lets reduce all weapon ranges little. No need to increase targeting range and rails get the love they need.
If reducing range would effect all weapons there would not be any disbalance.
and that causes 10 times more problems. All the balances between speed and modules ranges and weapons ranges, web, disruptors smartbombs. Everything change.. All the balance goes out the window.
|
Zeba
Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.12.30 17:58:00 -
[13]
See the only problem is getting ships to be able to target all the way out to a new limit. That is what I think lady spank was thinking of. I mean what use is an extended lock range with no real means to target anything that far away? My Apoc is pretty much locked at the current limit because if I fit it to lock all the way to the limit I can't extend the optimal of the tach any further which btw is right at 240km optimal with 50km falloff. So basically I would have to sacrifice gun range for targeting range which then renders the whole thing pointless. Only way I see of making it work is to extend the locking range of the sniper bs to reach the new limit. Not too bad as damps are not the usual thing to use on a sniping ship that is waaay out of your own locking range.
Originally by: Akita T We don't hate people like you, we look at you with mostly pity and a hint of disgust balled up in a big wad of "notto disu shi'tto agen".
|
Benco97
Gallente Shadow Veil Industrial
|
Posted - 2009.12.30 18:07:00 -
[14]
I like the idea but please, artillery in the 100-150km range? You're joking right? Artillery is meant to be long range, high damage, terrible tracking, terrible RoF. Nowhere does it say "Artillery: Meh" ______________________________________________
Originally by: P'uck
You're a DUMBASS - bold italic underline at the VERY LEAST.
|
Sonreir
Gallente Band of Builders Inc. Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2009.12.30 20:12:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Zeba See the only problem is getting ships to be able to target all the way out to a new limit. That is what I think lady spank was thinking of. I mean what use is an extended lock range with no real means to target anything that far away? My Apoc is pretty much locked at the current limit because if I fit it to lock all the way to the limit I can't extend the optimal of the tach any further which btw is right at 240km optimal with 50km falloff. So basically I would have to sacrifice gun range for targeting range which then renders the whole thing pointless. Only way I see of making it work is to extend the locking range of the sniper bs to reach the new limit. Not too bad as damps are not the usual thing to use on a sniping ship that is waaay out of your own locking range.
Useless for your Apoc maybe, but very useful for railgun ships which generally have no problem hitting up to the 250km limit.
|
Katarlia Simov
Minmatar Cowboys From Hell
|
Posted - 2009.12.30 23:02:00 -
[16]
Drastically changing game mechanics just so you can go 'ZOMG 300km ROKH' doesn't sound great to me.
It would either mean:
A) The only ships worth sniping in are Rokhs. If you can't hit out to the max possible range you may as well not have come. This is bad, because snipers are actually reasonably balanced just atm (although 1400mms could do with a bit more optimal)
B) Fleet composition stays exactly as it is now, and so you just stay fighting at 200ish km and your hard campaigned for change makes no difference.
I don't want it to be A, because then it'll add Caldari BS 5 to the list of mandatory pvp skills, and that ****es me off. Like the big alliances don't ask enough of people already, wanting you to have sniper HAC, HICtor, RR Bs and Recon skills already. And don't give me the bull**** 'not everyone has to be in the sniper fleet... They need tacklers too!', because I have never once heard an alliance leader say 'Nah its cool, we've got enough snipers'.
If its B, then why bother ? I mean, it takes 4 tracking computer AND 3 sensor boosters to get a rokh shooting out significantly past 250km anyway. Seriously... go run the numbers. 4 T2 tracking comps puts rail range out to a not exactly crazy long 286km.
|
Sigras
|
Posted - 2009.12.31 08:14:00 -
[17]
Seriously though, the rokh has no real role. . . Why bring a rokh when an apocalypse is cheaper and does more damage.
I can't even fly a rokh and I think it needs a buff!
|
Keitaro Baka
Babylon Scientific and Industrial Enterprises Babylon Project
|
Posted - 2009.12.31 09:31:00 -
[18]
no
also no, lol
the 250km lock limit was introduced for a very good reason, let's keep it and just buff medium and large rails and large blasters mkay. And tweak medium beams/amarr ships and large beams a bit. And fix/boost rockets. And all that other stuff :)
But lock range limit is a good thing. And only inexperienced people say the rokh is kinda useless.. really.. All the above is prolly crap
|
Grimpak
Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2009.12.31 10:51:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Keitaro Baka no
also no, lol
the 250km lock limit was introduced for a very good reason, let's keep it and just buff medium and large rails and large blasters mkay. And tweak medium beams/amarr ships and large beams a bit. And fix/boost rockets. And all that other stuff :)
But lock range limit is a good thing. And only inexperienced people say the rokh is kinda useless.. really..
actually, upping the limit up to 300km would be nice.
a number of ships are quite hard-limited due to the locking range. ---
Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
Lady Australia
|
Posted - 2010.01.03 04:44:00 -
[20]
I would stil rather do better damage at 200km in my mega then loldamage at 300km in my rokh.
|
|
Typhado3
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.01.03 05:31:00 -
[21]
/signed
Having game mechanics limit an attribute of certain ships is very crap imo. It would be like a max speed or max hp limit. ------------------------------ God is an afk cloaker |
Lirielee
|
Posted - 2010.01.03 16:07:00 -
[22]
i agree, and its not only rokhs that would benefit also dreads
|
Tray LiSans
|
Posted - 2010.01.05 08:56:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Katarlia Simov If its B, then why bother ? I mean, it takes 4 tracking computer AND 3 sensor boosters to get a rokh shooting out significantly past 250km anyway. Seriously... go run the numbers. 4 T2 tracking comps puts rail range out to a not exactly crazy long 286km.
I almost agree with you about most of your post. It's unlikely that uncapping locking ranges would change the lot of the Rokh very much, because of it's limited DPS. On the other hand, any hard limit to the capabilities of a ship purely for an artificial cap seems like a bad design flaw. This goes beyond the Rokh as well and affects capital engagement range. A single TE will take a Moros with rails out past 250. It might finally give a reason to equip some of the large long range turrets to poses.
Also, you're wrong about the modules on the Rokh. One tracking enhancer and one computer will let you hit a bit over 300km in the first falloff.
|
Ruhige Schmerz
Valhalla Naval Corp Valhalla Strategic Command
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 15:14:00 -
[24]
Another perfectly good idea being **** on by people who don't *personally* want to fit their ships to use it.
There is no reason for a hard limit on lock ranges. It doesn't make any ships pwnmobiles or make any useless.
You want to fit a bunch of boosters and rigs and shoot iron from 500km? Have fun.
|
Seriously Bored
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 16:58:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Benco97 I like the idea but please, artillery in the 100-150km range? You're joking right? Artillery is meant to be long range, high damage, terrible tracking, terrible RoF. Nowhere does it say "Artillery: Meh"
Right. The only thing that makes artillery "short range" is the lack of a range bonused BS to use them. By the base stats, they're technically longer range weapons than Beam lasers.
(Tachs, as always and in everything, are the exception.)
|
lil Ghork
|
Posted - 2010.02.18 18:19:00 -
[26]
i support upping the lock range
|
Trader20
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 01:28:00 -
[27]
CCP nerfing ecm range is obvious evidence that they're going to increase targeting range because their was no other reason to nerf ecm other then a precursor to a lock range increase.
|
Ziester
Caldari TAKAGI Corp
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 03:01:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Ziester on 19/02/2010 03:01:38
Originally by: Katarlia Simov
If its B, then why bother ? I mean, it takes 4 tracking computer AND 3 sensor boosters to get a rokh shooting out significantly past 250km anyway. Seriously... go run the numbers. 4 T2 tracking comps puts rail range out to a not exactly crazy long 286km.
you're forgetting the rigs in your maths
[Rokh, New Setup 2] Reactor Control Unit II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Tracking Computer II, Tracking Speed Tracking Computer II, Tracking Speed Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Sensor Booster II
425mm Railgun II, Spike L 425mm Railgun II, Spike L 425mm Railgun II, Spike L 425mm Railgun II, Spike L 425mm Railgun II, Spike L 425mm Railgun II, Spike L 425mm Railgun II, Spike L 425mm Railgun II, Spike L
Large Hybrid Locus Coordinator II Large Hybrid Locus Coordinator II Large Targeting System Subcontroller I
This with L5 skills gives out 297+39 range. If you switch a Tracking speed script for another Optimal range one it jumps to 310+49 ----------
Originally by: CCP Whisper Boo hoo. Cry some more.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 03:20:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Seriously Bored
Originally by: Benco97 I like the idea but please, artillery in the 100-150km range? You're joking right? Artillery is meant to be long range, high damage, terrible tracking, terrible RoF. Nowhere does it say "Artillery: Meh"
Right. The only thing that makes artillery "short range" is the lack of a range bonused BS to use them. By the base stats, they're technically longer range weapons than Beam lasers.
(Tachs, as always and in everything, are the exception.)
I think the apocs 7.5% might be a bit much with tachys, but the lolcap and lolehp that you get for fitting tachs is a bit of a justification. hmm the megabeam setup I have looks about on par with the megathron I have.
and lol, I like how the sniper rohk I have in my eft has 291+62 eftwarrior ftw!
hmm I wonder what all the devs think....
|
Tagami Wasp
Caldari Sarz'na Khumatari Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.02.19 03:23:00 -
[30]
Or we could fix the Railguns in general and stop asking for changes that are:
1) redundant, because if you can get one serious 0.0 alliance to field a full T2 fitted Rokh fleet, then you have won EvE and you don't even need a fleet.
2) technically difficult (bigger grid= more lag, cause you need to update more DB entries on one node, say hi to totalhelllagdeath, D-G will be every damn fight again)
In the end, increasing lock range to accommodate the Rokh is idiotic. Simplest solution is to fix the railguns to do better damage at a shorter range, which is what you are looking for.
If there only was a thread in Assemply asking CSM to bring this to CCP's attention. ------------
+15% to railguns' dmg modifier -reduce Spike optimal bonus to 70% +10% to Caldari railboats PG |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |