EVE Search - Blaster Dilemma?

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Blaster Dilemma?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Crazy KSK	Posted - 2010.11.13 05:58:00 - [1] I've been thinking a lot about how it could be possible to get blasters in line with other weapons while keeping its uniqueness i.e. short range for the most. the thing is that I think its impossible to balance them in a way that you don't have to drop at 0 on your target to not get a disadvantage so you can't make blasters so strong that in a fight that starts at range blasters don't have a disadvantage due to the long travel without making them overpowered on 'drop at 0' cases the only way out would be to make them have longer range or give them a competitive long range ammo which I think makes blaster kind of obsolete then another possibility to minimize the effect would be to make gallente ships substantially faster which would throw off balance at another point ok thats some raw thoughts of the last hours I've been thinking about the issue Discuss! or throw stones at me whatever you like better
mchief117	Posted - 2010.11.13 06:56:00 - [2] unfortunatly giving blasters a "long range" ammos will simpky make them auto cannons , the only needed fix for the weapons is vastly increases tracking so they can actualy hit things close to them
Lemmy Kravitz Minmatar Rebirth.	Posted - 2010.11.13 06:58:00 - [3] It's called fitting a webifier ------------------------------------------------- "Vae Victis" -Brennus
Infinity Ziona Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2010.11.13 07:03:00 - [4] Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 13/11/2010 07:03:58 Blaster ships need one or more of the following: 1. Reduction in cap use 2. Better tracking 3. Reduction in MWD cap use or increase in MWD duration 4. Increase in agility / speed. 5. Bonus to web range and / or bonus to web modifier. The problem is not the guns, they're pretty good. Problem is getting into range and having enough cap / hp left by the time you get in range to fight. Sig --- Quote: Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
Lemmy Kravitz Minmatar Rebirth.	Posted - 2010.11.13 07:15:00 - [5] Blasters melt ****, don't touch em ------------------------------------------------- "Vae Victis" -Brennus
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2010.11.13 08:46:00 - [6] Edited by: The Djego on 13/11/2010 09:02:50 The problem is and never was range. The problem is that blaster ships above frig since are far to ineffective at point blank in hitting and holding stuff down, directly related to the web nerf. Also they lack dps, speed and utility. However this are secondary problems and fixing them without addressing point blank first is rather pointless. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Bluejacket CT Percussive Diplomacy	Posted - 2010.11.13 10:21:00 - [7] Tracking buff. It's a simple fix, CCP. The ships that have the shortest range logically should have the best tracking. There's no reason why longer range weapons like autocannons should have better tracking than the shortest range weapon platform in the game. ~
Kai Yuen	Posted - 2010.11.14 20:29:00 - [8] The problem isn't necessarily range, its that they put blasters on the slowest ships in the game. Why put a point blank weapon on a slug and give swallow a highly variable range weapon with better tracking? Fixing the tracking alone won't solve the problem. They nerfed webs, so holding anything in range is a *****, not to mention getting into range in the first place. Buffing their range seems to be the only way out. It might make them similar to autocannons, but autocannons are OPed anyways. If you don't want blasters to end up like ACs then nerf ACs and force the faster ships into web/scram range.
Slimy Worm Lonetrek Salvage and Scrap	Posted - 2010.11.15 00:20:00 - [9] Originally by: Lemmy Kravitz It's called a super-expensive ship with a webifier bonus Fixed for you. Blasters need better tracking and Gallente ships in general need to be able to actually fit a full rack of ions or neutrons without fitting mods. Plus, Gallente ships pretty much have to fit a mwd and are thus even more vulnerable to cap warfare than Amarr ships. Make each cycle on an mwd eat up more cap but make fitting an mwd nix a lower percent of a ship's capacitor so that ships that only pump them once or twice aren't at a disadvantage. Doing this would also give Angel ships a much-needed nerf. ---------------
Alara IonStorm Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate	Posted - 2010.11.15 00:55:00 - [10] All good points but to add something, the fitting and bonuses needs a re-work. Look at the best example, the Megathron that runs an Ion or Nuetron fit with a Tracking Bonus. Even with the Web nerf it is an effective ship in smaller gangs. Now look at the Thorax, most fits require Electron Blasters even if you only want a 800mm Plate a MWD. Ions are not a lot to ask, compaired to the 425mm Rupture. On another point they made it's bonus a MWD Cap Penalty Bonus. An actual MWD bonus like 5% Speed or 5% Cap use would have been a lot more handy. Even the Brutix and Myrmidon are forced into Electrons when they have an Armor tank, and Sheild tanked Ion and Nuetron fits are impossible to fit a Web w/o hurting your buffer compaired to it's peers. I can understand the Mega's bonus to tracking but the Brutix doesn't have the slots for an Active Tank and the Thorax bonus is a bad joke. But the Mega's bonus should be base blaster stats and there bonuses redone to get them to range. Or for the Brutix moving a High Slot to a Low Slot and giving it the ability to fit MWD + Duel Rep + Cap Boost + Ions. They should finally think about the Armor Rigs cutting something other then speed in a world where Minmatar Armor Tankers would rather Sheild Tank with longer range high tracking guns that don't need a webber. -- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen! For Great Justice!
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.11.15 01:20:00 - [11] Edited by: Torothanax on 15/11/2010 01:24:43 It's called fit a double web. Gallente ships have plenty off utility mid slots. Cap issues? Cap booster and nos. Or you could bring more tackle and make sure they have webs. Fit tracking enhancers instead of 4 mag stabs. Blasters are fine. If you can't get them to work in a fight, you are doing somthing wrong. If you are going for a gank set up, lose the 1600's. Your mwd will work better. Train some drone skills. All gallente ships use em. Seriously, you don't need to run to the forums and ask for a boost to the race that was the only real option for pvp for most of eve. I lived through the gallente only pvp hayday. I'd rather not go back because you all can't figure out how to fit and use the ships now that they are balanced.
Mauricius	Posted - 2010.11.15 01:28:00 - [12] Originally by: Infinity Ziona Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 13/11/2010 07:03:58 Blaster ships need one or more of the following: 1. Reduction in cap use 2. Better tracking 3. Reduction in MWD cap use or increase in MWD duration 4. Increase in agility / speed. 5. Bonus to web range and / or bonus to web modifier. The problem is not the guns, they're pretty good. Problem is getting into range and having enough cap / hp left by the time you get in range to fight. NOT THE RANGE!? The range exactly! Minmatar use acs aling and shoot. Amarr use pulses, align and shoot. Caldari use missiles align and shoot. Gallente uses blasters, mwd in and die, or align and miss. I'd not touch blasters. I'd BUFF RAILS. so they come in line with pulses with scorch damage and tracking. And there you go, you have a useful Gallente ships (with maybe just a little PWG added or/and rail cap usage changed). And dear God, reduce sig radius of Deimos.
Alara IonStorm Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate	Posted - 2010.11.15 01:29:00 - [13] Originally by: Torothanax Edited by: Torothanax on 15/11/2010 01:24:43 It's called fit a double web. Gallente ships have plenty off utility mid slots. Cap issues? Cap booster and nos. Or you could bring more tackle and make sure they have webs. Fit tracking enhancers instead of 4 mag stabs. Blasters are fine. If you can't get them to work in a fight, you are doing somthing wrong. If you are going for a gank set up, lose the 1600's. Your mwd will work better. Train some drone skills. All gallente ships use em. Seriously, you don't need to run to the forums and ask for a boost to the race that was the only real option for pvp for most of eve. I lived through the gallente only pvp hayday. I'd rather not go back because you all can't figure out how to fit and use the ships now that they are balanced. Cool show me your double web, cap boosted Thorax, try for similar EHP numbers of a Rupture, shouldn't be to hard Minmatar tanks are speed relient. Don't forget that since the Rupture fits 425mm, 800mm Plates and a MWD W/O fitting mods or rigs, you should be able to make a similar fit work with at least an Ion Thorax. -- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen! For Great Justice!
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.11.15 02:00:00 - [14] Originally by: Alara IonStorm Cool show me your double web, cap boosted Thorax, try for similar EHP numbers of a Rupture, shouldn't be to hard Minmatar tanks are speed relient. Don't forget that since the Rupture fits 425mm, 800mm Plates and a MWD W/O fitting mods or rigs, you should be able to make a similar fit work with at least an Ion Thorax. You need a cap booster on a passive tanked thorax? Really? Even with the cap bonus the ship gives to fitting mwd? Really??? Train some skills dude. The double web admittedly doesn't work so well on a thorax, but if you expect a one on one fight, you're in the wrong game. Where's you're buddy and his web? Try a MWD/scram/web. How many cruisers pvp without a mwd? Yeah turn that off and web him, he aint moving fast enough to out track your guns anymore. Hell, lose the plates altogether and kite him to death with your drones at warp disruptor range. You've got 5 mediums II's right? Oh maybe you better train for those. If he does manage to close, then hit him with the blasters. He should be plenty softened up by then. Or just fit rails and hit him the whole time. You talk like the rupture is sooo much superior. It isn't. Most people skip it and go right to the hurricane. You want tight fits, try the zealot. You want paper thin tank, go to the stabber. You wan't complete pvp suckage, try a moa some time. Don't act like the thorax is the worst ship on the block or the rupture is the best. Or that anything you've put forward proves blaster ships need a boost.
Failgun Owner	Posted - 2010.11.15 03:15:00 - [15] Originally by: Torothanax ...bla-bla-bla... Did you use Gallente ships? Rails? Thorax?
Mauricius	Posted - 2010.11.15 11:27:00 - [16] Guys stop missing a point. 1v1 disaperd from eve more or less. That made Gallente shops loose their purpose. Even in 4v4 Gallentians have serous disadvantages already. The biggest of all is missing grid for rails, missing damage&tracking on rails, missing range on blasters (at least with null), too weak dampeners! Ok blaster are still awesome at close range, but with all other races buffed the effective, non EFT but in-game DPS it is just crap. U gotta perfectly choose the distance and have 2 rapiers or something for it... or you are just weak. I have perfect gunnery support skills and still... even mega with neutrons is missing webbed ab cruiser at 6 km. Pulses with scorch and acs with barrage, also beams and projectiles ate just awesome compared to blasters and rails. I think rails need to be buffed. So that they can both snipe and do similar like scorch pulses, especially on medium ships. double their tracking, give them to shoot 20% faster, and consume 25% less cap and you will have decent gallente ships. And **ing signature radius need buff. Gallente are fast fighters along side Minmatar they need to be tiny too or all the buff is for nothing. Webs are OVERNERFED obviously, and so are dampeners. All Gallente ships should have web bonus like Serpentis tend to have. Also with falcons having such an awesome multitasking purpose and jamming out of things even with overheated eccm, Arazues and such really need a buff, so that finally we can counter the falcon *es. while Falcon can efectively jam 5 targets or so Arazu can effectively damp just one. I mean come on! I know damp Drakes and Ravens were utter OP but still there was no need to get dampeners damp for 12 % now! :P Unfortunately someone really liked the Gallente when they created the game and now they just hate them. It is all cuz of wining forum ***s that have no clue bout game mechanics, especially turret and missiles.
Orion GUardian Caldari	Posted - 2010.11.15 11:33:00 - [17] I remember a time, when Thorax was the omgwtfbbqpwn Cruiser out there ebcuase it could close in fats deal tons of dmg at CR and good dmg with drones at longer range... I agree mor tracking would help the Blasters, because they are up close. But omgwtfbbq dmg through Blasters and Drones somehow needs some disadvantages. Hell lookat the Caldari Ships: Which of them REALLY is useful for solo or small fleet PvP (except ECM)? HTFU Rails need to be balanced as well.
Infinity Ziona Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2010.11.15 13:02:00 - [18] Originally by: Torothanax Originally by: Alara IonStorm Cool show me your double web, cap boosted Thorax, try for similar EHP numbers of a Rupture, shouldn't be to hard Minmatar tanks are speed relient. Don't forget that since the Rupture fits 425mm, 800mm Plates and a MWD W/O fitting mods or rigs, you should be able to make a similar fit work with at least an Ion Thorax. You need a cap booster on a passive tanked thorax? Really? Even with the cap bonus the ship gives to fitting mwd? Really??? Train some skills dude. The double web admittedly doesn't work so well on a thorax, but if you expect a one on one fight, you're in the wrong game. Where's you're buddy and his web? Try a MWD/scram/web. How many cruisers pvp without a mwd? Yeah turn that off and web him, he aint moving fast enough to out track your guns anymore. Hell, lose the plates altogether and kite him to death with your drones at warp disruptor range. You've got 5 mediums II's right? Oh maybe you better train for those. If he does manage to close, then hit him with the blasters. He should be plenty softened up by then. Or just fit rails and hit him the whole time. You talk like the rupture is sooo much superior. It isn't. Most people skip it and go right to the hurricane. You want tight fits, try the zealot. You want paper thin tank, go to the stabber. You wan't complete pvp suckage, try a moa some time. Don't act like the thorax is the worst ship on the block or the rupture is the best. Or that anything you've put forward proves blaster ships need a boost. Nonsense. Sig --- Quote: Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
Spugg Galdon	Posted - 2010.11.15 13:07:00 - [19] The problem with Hybrid weapons is that they are used by two different races with very different battle ideologies. Yes Blasters need more tracking and DPS and Failguns need something other than range to give them a "quirk" but the only way to make Hybrids work for both races is to drastically modify the ammo. Ammo is the "variable" for these weapons. Ammo should offer more than just damage or range (and cap usage). The ammo should be offering (different types of ammo) tracking, super high damage bonus with a ROF penalty to give alpha strike, a ROF bonus and tweak some ship bonuses to ROF instead of damage etc etc. I've also noticed that there is a base shield/armour damage to ammo types (not damage type). Is it possible to give one ammo very high base shield damage and very low base armour damage and vice-versa so we could have an anti shield and an anti armour ammo type?
Douchie McNitpick Money Liberation Services Corp	Posted - 2010.11.15 15:21:00 - [20] Little thought experiment: What would happen to blaster ships if there was a medslot module, similar to a cap booster, that allowed a ship greatly increased agility and top speed for just a few seconds, effectively making it possible to a close range ship to cross a distance of 10-20km in a very short time before slowing to a crawl again? (Actually, reducing the mass instead of agility would work well too, to reduce the bumping problem) The one biggest problem of blaster ships, apart from their mediocre tracking, is that even in small scale engagements, the time required to cross even tiny distances makes the difference. AC are great because minmatar have more mobility even with plates fitted while having similar dps (and vastly more effective dps thanks to range). If a blaster ship could close small distances quickly to get into blaster and tackle range, we'd have a unique role without having to tweak lots of different things and without just making them like AC or lasers.
Spugg Galdon	Posted - 2010.11.15 15:49:00 - [21] We don't need a new module for blaster boats. What they need is much higher straight line speed. Agility + speed is minnie territory. Gallente blaster boats should charge straight at the enemy with immense speed but have low agility meaning a clever pilot can out manouver them.
Chock Nurris	Posted - 2010.11.15 16:15:00 - [22] Edited by: Chock Nurris on 15/11/2010 16:18:10 nm
Infinity Ziona Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2010.11.15 16:18:00 - [23] Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 15/11/2010 16:18:33 The Solution: Blunk 12% of capacitor Instant cast15 sec cooldown Teleports the ship 20 kilometres forward, unless something is in the way. Also frees the ship from webs and warp scrambles. I thought it up all by myself.. really 00 Sig --- Quote: Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2010.11.15 19:24:00 - [24] Originally by: Alara IonStorm Look at the best example, the Megathron that runs an Ion or Nuetron fit with a Tracking Bonus. Even with the Web nerf it is an effective ship in smaller gangs. It is not, actually it is completely useless if you compare it with the abilities it got before the web nerf. At least as solo/small gang damage dealer. If 95% of eve are vastly prevented from getting face melted and pinned down the ship doesn't make this much sense, if you want a damage dealer. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
Mortimer Civeri Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2010.11.15 19:33:00 - [25] Originally by: Infinity Ziona Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 15/11/2010 16:18:33 The Solution: Blunk 12% of capacitor Instant cast15 sec cooldown Teleports the ship 20 kilometres forward, unless something is in the way. Also frees the ship from webs and warp scrambles. I thought it up all by myself.. really 00 Go back to WOW
Tarron Sarek Gallente Biotronics Inc. Initiative Mercenaries	Posted - 2010.11.15 20:30:00 - [26] From my point of view the problem with blasterbooats is a lack of superiority in their role. They need to be fast enough, they need to have sufficient buffer, and their dps must be considerably higher. All this is not the case. - Slight increase in dps - Better tracking - Easier fitting - A bit more speed - Slightly better T2 ammo Go from there. Or weaken pulse lasers and perhaps autocannons a bit. But since that would cause mass-whining, a buff seems more viable. ___________________________________ Balance is power, ~~guard~~ hide it well "Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam"
Ogogov Gallente Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.11.15 21:24:00 - [27] Check SiSi for T2 ammo changes. I'd like to see how that plays out before potentially unbalancing things, but yeah... blasters (or the ships that use them) are weak and need a rethink.
Infinity Ziona Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2010.11.15 23:15:00 - [28] Originally by: Mortimer Civeri Originally by: Infinity Ziona Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 15/11/2010 16:18:33 The Solution: Blunk 12% of capacitor Instant cast15 sec cooldown Teleports the ship 20 kilometres forward, unless something is in the way. Also frees the ship from webs and warp scrambles. I thought it up all by myself.. really 00 Go back to WOW I'm guessing that means you don't wanna hear my idea regarding the Frostbolt charge. Fires a charge of frost at the enemy, causing 593 to 755 Frost damage and slowing movement speed by 40% for 9 sec. :( Sig --- Quote: Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
Kai Yuen	Posted - 2010.11.16 00:58:00 - [29] Originally by: Ogogov Check SiSi for T2 ammo changes. I'd like to see how that plays out before potentially unbalancing things, but yeah... blasters (or the ships that use them) are weak and need a rethink. Oh please. That's all you have to say? "Maybe tech 2 ammo will save them?" Every other weapon type in the game functions fine with faction ammo and you expect t2 ammo to save blasters? It ain't the ammo. It's the weapon. Any idiot can see that. The whole hybrid system needs a serious upgrade. If that means giving blasters more range then so be it. They made projectiles too good. If turning hybrids into projectiles makes them viable then hell, make them projectiles and make them viable. I'd rather see balance with no variety than variety with no balance.
Kabaal S'sylistha Caldari The Technomages Comrades-Of-Two	Posted - 2010.11.16 04:41:00 - [30] Originally by: Kai Yuen I'd rather see balance with no variety than variety with no balance. So that explains your comments on my thread at least. As for blasters, I always viewed them as shotguns. I think just longer range is taking away from this. I think giving them an incredibly high alpha, high tracking, very short optimal and a falloff that places their intended dps for normal ranges to a reasonable level while allowing the up close killshot effect is the only way to keep them unique and usable. I'll disclaim this with I haven't gone into a fight with blasters fitted yet and don't have the familiarity with the weapon, just offering up my perception. This idea also doesn't really address the concerns with the ships they are fitted on.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: 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.