EVE Search - Hammer's new ammo work discussion

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Hammer's new ammo work discussion

» 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 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Niki Silver	Posted - 2005.03.03 23:55:00 - [91] Originally by: Face Lifter No. All those 0.5 charges do same amount of raw damage, the difference between them is not significant enough to justify more than 10% cap bonus. Gotcha
Riddari	Posted - 2005.03.03 23:57:00 - [92] Originally by: Thanit Unless ofc you fight angels, which would suck anyway with a blasterthron. I am fighting angels which is why my tank and cap go so low. Those double 1m spawns are nasty but I just about can take it so it's not dull, far from it. If the changes go through, looks like I'll have to go Raven to hunt Angels ¼©¼ a history
Mortuus	Posted - 2005.03.04 00:57:00 - [93] Edited by: Mortuus on 04/03/2005 01:47:07
DigitalCommunist	Posted - 2005.03.04 02:00:00 - [94] I dunno, while I can't really complain about these changes, here's my thought. You nerf the amount of optimal ranges we can select from, but compensate with more selection. I don't believe I have more selection. The highest kinetic damage ammo for blasters is now Uranium (which btw is great for npcing), but its an even 50/50 split between kinetic and thermal, whereas antimatter was more towards kinetic previous to these changes. Standard shield tanks use 1x EM, 1x Thermal, and 1x Kinetic. Or 2x EM and 1x Thermal, so having antimatter do mostly thermal only helps me in the first case but in the second case i'd still rather do kinetic. For armor tanking, which is probably the only thing I struggle with, doing thermal is not good. Most armor tanks run 1x Explosive, 1x Kinetic and 1x Thermal. Overall I'm going to be having a harder time on armor since thermal will be much better resisted, and only in some cases will I benefit more on shields. I like choice but this doesn't exactly give me more choice, I lose out on damage and possible ranges. I haven't done the math like Rod but speaking from experience, rails hit for crap above optimal, and track like crap below 30k. On 425mm Railgun II, my optimal is 71.25km or 35.6km with close range ammo. Since the best engagement range with rails is around 45-50km it means I'm forced to use medium range ammo. Lower damage. With targetting range around 85k, I can't even shoot at my optimal one step above 71k without fitting a sensor booster. Not that I care since sniping is for pussies, but with sniping you want range. Top range just dropped from 114km to 106km :/ Less choice, less damage, more reasons to junk the mega and buy a raven. _____________________________________ Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning. "Can I be a consultant for EVE II?" - WhiteDwarf
Kayinan Malrean	Posted - 2005.03.04 03:51:00 - [95] This post falls into the category of "crying out", as requested by the original poster. So.. As I use solely Apoc - as I have for the past 9 months - my damage output at the sensible 60-80km range was just cut down by 1/6? Is CCP trying to tell me that it was a bad idea to train Pulse spec and nobody should've done that? Mind switching those 2m+ sps into Beam spec, or just combining those specs while you're at it? Before the specs, you didn't lose too much switching from one weapon to another. With specs and three high rank skills at level IV just to use one gun it's a bit different thing. I'd be glad if there'd be a warning text in the spec skill books reminding players about that the specs are hefty sp investment, which may become useless pretty fast. I do quite fully understand that Pulses and/or 'geddons could use redesigning so that people could move on and start whining first about the missiles and when they're nerfed, about projectiles. Not just not exactly certain what I should make of this "you can't fight like this anymore because we couldn't think of a better way to solve it" approach. I'm quite certain I don't like it. Will this be the end of nerfing my pool lil Apoc, or are more changes being prepared?
Kayinan Malrean	Posted - 2005.03.04 03:53:00 - [96] Originally by: DigitalCommunist Less choice, less damage, more reasons to junk the mega and buy a raven. Make haste. Raven's the next ship waiting at the end of the death row.
jamesw	Posted - 2005.03.04 04:02:00 - [97] Just throwing this into the equation: With all the encouragement to use different ranges of ammo as the situation calls for it, where does this ammo fit??? I would like to see the size of ammo/cap boost charges reduced in some way, so that it is actually feasible to carry enough to switch damage types on the fly. A lot of Gallente bs setups use Cap injectors, and due to that almost all cargo goes towards them. With the ability to switch ranges/damage types comes the need to tank for that extra 10 seconds - making cap charges more important and cargo space even more at a premium. On most of my setups that use cap charges, I can't even afford to carry a full reload, let alone a different ammo all together. -- jamesw Rubra Libertas Militia Originally by: RollinDutchMasters I fly a dominix, its like a portable blob in a can
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.04 04:14:00 - [98] You guys gotta make the long range ammos into 1.6x, and add a -25% range and +30% range ammo. Other than that its fine for the ammo. Except that you need to decrease reloading times. Better, add a freaking skill that cuts it down by 10% per level. Then you need to decrease ammo volume. Also... why can railguns outrange artillery with long range ammo, while tracking better? Boost optimal of artillery to what the railguns are at. If they're so long range then why can even a tach hit better at higher ranges? Falloff is a pain in the ass and is only worth anything using low-range ammo. Which is where tracking stinks.
RollinDutchMasters	Posted - 2005.03.04 04:19:00 - [99] Originally by: Kayinan Malrean Is CCP trying to tell me that it was a bad idea to train Pulse spec and nobody should've done that? Mind switching those 2m+ sps into Beam spec, or just combining those specs while you're at it? As someone with large blaster specialization, I feel that my reply can best be summed up in a single, highly offensive hand gesture. So now your midrage guns dont work as well at long ranges. Oh no. Spend the extra 300k SP on training up large beam specialization and start using long-ranged turrets for long range. Originally by: Sochin CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
Percivs	Posted - 2005.03.04 04:47:00 - [100] Originally by: CCP Hammer . . . Regarding the graphs, the tracking formula hasn't been made public so you won't be able to make them yourself unless reverse engineered the formula. If you had the formula you could make the graphs with Excel. It's been a dream of ours to add these graphs to the in game info windows but we haven't had the programmer time to do it. I vote you make this a high priority. Giving the player base the tools to evaluate the balancing you are doing will only improve our ability to quantify what we do or don't like, and to provide clearer evidence to support the positions we take. --- "All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field" - A.E.
Percivs	Posted - 2005.03.04 05:02:00 - [101] Originally by: Percivs . . . ...to provide clearer evidence to support the positions we take. Or make it so clear that we don't know what we're talking about that you can safely ignore us. --- "All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field" - A.E.
Gierling	Posted - 2005.03.04 05:10:00 - [102] I think consensus stands that moving hybrids to mainly thermal is another kick to the already down Gallente players. Can you please, just once, just once in the course of the entire history of the game... do something that doesn't HOSE Gallente players? I mean I'm trying to be polite and everything but its kinda sad how every nerf to Amarr or Caldari (Whom about 2/3rds of the playerbase play as becuase they are such ungodly powerful races) comes with a corresponding nerf to Gallente to prevent them from ever possibly enjoying one day of even being remotely balanced. It is kind of exasperating to see that this is all to "make hybrids fit thier flavor better" thats not exactly a sound argument. Could you at least plot it on a graph, like you did the pulse nerfs? Or are we doomed to see every logical thought out attempt at balancing Amarr and Caldari matched with some random shoot from the hip solution towards Gallente to make sure they keep thier place on the bottom of the pecking order. I really WANT to believe that we're moving towards better balance, but I'm not reassurred when some pretty fundamental changes are made on basis of flavor(!?!?!) Bastards we are lest Bastards we become.
Niki Silver	Posted - 2005.03.04 05:49:00 - [103] Originally by: Gierling I think consensus stands that moving hybrids to mainly thermal is another kick to the already down Gallente players. Can you please, just once, just once in the course of the entire history of the game... do something that doesn't HOSE Gallente players? I mean I'm trying to be polite and everything but its kinda sad how every nerf to Amarr or Caldari (Whom about 2/3rds of the playerbase play as becuase they are such ungodly powerful races) comes with a corresponding nerf to Gallente to prevent them from ever possibly enjoying one day of even being remotely balanced. It is kind of exasperating to see that this is all to "make hybrids fit thier flavor better" thats not exactly a sound argument. Could you at least plot it on a graph, like you did the pulse nerfs? Or are we doomed to see every logical thought out attempt at balancing Amarr and Caldari matched with some random shoot from the hip solution towards Gallente to make sure they keep thier place on the bottom of the pecking order. I really WANT to believe that we're moving towards better balance, but I'm not reassurred when some pretty fundamental changes are made on basis of flavor(!?!?!) /Agree
Zyrla Bladestorm	Posted - 2005.03.04 06:05:00 - [104] I was under the impression that one of the goals of the ammo changes was to remove differing damage levels of ammo from the balance equation to make it a little simpler/clearer .. I'm saddened to see that the projectile ammo will not get evened with the hybrid and laser ammo for that reason.. And I'm not at all Biased because Ive always used little but projectiles .. no .. well maybe a little . ----- Apologys for any rambling that may have just occurred.
Golgrath	Posted - 2005.03.04 06:15:00 - [105] Originally by: CCP Hammer What you say is absolutely true and I tend to suggest PP and Fusion ammo to people in their 1400mm because of tracking issues. I need to ponder this one for a bit and try to come up with a solution that doesn't nerf the 1400mm but doesn't give the 800mm too much damage. I was origianlly going to give the short range projectile ammos more damage but when asked point blank by TomB if I truely thought that the projectiles needed more damage after I just boosted them I couldn't honestly and whole heartedly say that yes I felt they should. I don't like to put changes like this out unless I feel it's for the better so max damage stayed at 11. Regarding the graphs, the tracking formula hasn't been made public so you won't be able to make them yourself unless reverse engineered the formula. If you had the formula you could make the graphs with Excel. It's been a dream of ours to add these graphs to the in game info windows but we haven't had the programmer time to do it. I think dividing the Projectile ammos into 4 range categories would be a good solution to this: +50%, +25%, -25%, -50% each category having a 'good for shields' and a 'good for armor' type of ammo (for example -50% would have EMP and Fusion). And yes, you are completely right, short range proj ammo doesnt need any more dmg. I think releasing the tracking formula (in game or in a dev blog) would bring in some interesting player made web apps and other useful tools. Besides, you have hinted about how it works in past dev blogs so why not release the whole thing.
Niki Silver	Posted - 2005.03.04 07:19:00 - [106] Originally by: Golgrath I think releasing the tracking formula (in game or in a dev blog) would bring in some interesting player made web apps and other useful tools. Besides, you have hinted about how it works in past dev blogs so why not release the whole thing. Golgrath check out this thread, for some good tracking info. You've probably already seen it, but just in case.
Riddari	Posted - 2005.03.04 11:08:00 - [107] Topic languishing at page 2! ¼©¼ a history
Synaig0	Posted - 2005.03.04 11:12:00 - [108] One other thing that I'd like to point out is that with such limited ammo range choices you cant straighten out you optimal of your guns, for example I use 2 different ammo types in my guns to get their optimals to match. With only the choice between 0.5 1.0 or 1.5 range ammo I obviously cant... --------------------- I'm the guy with the sleepy look...
Juneau Daley	Posted - 2005.03.04 11:40:00 - [109] Woot another kick to Gallente. Though the idea of a 10 damage over the norm looks good but for the argument well take into consideration shields have an already good therm resistance and any PVP with hardners runs a therm and em hardner.. so well now look at the kinetic damamge which was the only way my hybrids seem to get damage.. oh yeah its been nerfed.. emoteswears -- -- The last person alive in a war suffers the most for he has seen nothing but the deaths of the ones he loved.
Tannis Maya	Posted - 2005.03.04 12:19:00 - [110] I am just trying to have a good time here in Eve, but everytime I start getting a grip on the various bits of technology everything changes. This is supposed to be fun, but it seems in order to keep up you have to make a career out of studying CCPs next change as well as what is currently in the game to make sure you don't invest millions of SP and ISK on technology that will be rendered worthless by the time you have acquired it. Surely balance should be achieved by introducing new technology rather than changing fundamental aspects of the game? I could handle it if my ship/weapons become obsolete because it is superceded by new technology - that's life. I don't expect the rules of physics to suddenly change so that my large cache of ammo is transmogriphied into something I never would have bought in the first place! [WTS] Megathron, comes complete with useless cap, useless weapons, useless ammo, and useless ammo BPOs. - all fine at time of purchase
snutt	Posted - 2005.03.04 12:58:00 - [111] Edited by: snutt on 04/03/2005 14:35:46 Tbh, I'd rather see Gallente being bias to kinetic, then having some vary on thermal. Mostly due to the thermal being the most certain harderner type because all races can deal it. With lasers going more towards EM and less thermal (and taken the bias for hybrids will be kinetic), there will be somewhat of a gap in thermal, many may feel it's enough with just one (or more) EM harderners to tank Amarr. This may trigger less players to fit thermal harderners, which would leave Gallente room for switching to that more thermal dealing ammo instead of kinetic, which deal more damage. Same can be said with Amarr as applies to them aswell. It creates a.. trait, or uniquness with thermal. Projectile ammo looks fine tbh, Artillery are affacted less by the range gaps than Railguns due to their very high falloff. And if I belive I can manage with Rails, you Artillery users should have little trouble . To sum it up; I like the grouping/gaps. I like the new crystals. I like the new projectile ammos. I dislike the new hybrid bias. Mess with the best, die like the rest Real men structure tank
Gabriel Karade	Posted - 2005.03.04 15:41:00 - [112] Originally by: Tannis Maya I am just trying to have a good time here in Eve, but everytime I start getting a grip on the various bits of technology everything changes. This is supposed to be fun, but it seems in order to keep up you have to make a career out of studying CCPs next change as well as what is currently in the game to make sure you don't invest millions of SP and ISK on technology that will be rendered worthless by the time you have acquired it. Surely balance should be achieved by introducing new technology rather than changing fundamental aspects of the game? I could handle it if my ship/weapons become obsolete because it is superceded by new technology - that's life. I don't expect the rules of physics to suddenly change so that my large cache of ammo is transmogriphied into something I never would have bought in the first place! [WTS] Megathron, comes complete with useless cap, useless weapons, useless ammo, and useless ammo BPOs. - all fine at time of purchase The number of people on this forum blowing things out of proportion never ceases to amaze me. NOTHING IS BEING RENDERED USELESS, THE SKY IS NOT FALLING! The megapulse changes bring Amarr ships more into line with everything else, once the Raven's 'no-brainer' ability to kill frigates is looked at, and once the EW changes everything there will be peace...and tranquillity, and no more 'Flavour's of the month' (\_/) (O.o) (> <) "That's no ordinary rabbit!...that's the most foul, cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever set eyes on"
Ithildin	Posted - 2005.03.04 15:58:00 - [113] Gabriel, I'd not count on the Megapulse getting in line with everything else, but it's a step in the right direction. Now instead of nerfing, why not make someone happy and boost what is falling behind? As to the blowing things out of proportion: playing the underdog is only fun for so long, eventually the few 10% that your behind will come and bite you. Overreacting to make an argument is a time-tested human reaction. Sadly it's something we'll just have to take. P.S. I am still interested in what advantage there are of choosing ammo inside the currently suggested hybrid categories. Choosing anything but Uranium/Lead/Iron makes you only loose capacitor. -- If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please.
vammathar	Posted - 2005.03.04 16:21:00 - [114] Hi all. I fly a Megathron BS lvl3 for most of my lvl 3 and 4 missions and after trying every possible weapon combination (250/350/425mm and blasters) and every ammo type plus different combat tactics (close, medium and far ranges) I found that hybrids indeed suck. I recently switched to megabeams and tachions and guess what? It rocks. The most wrecking hits I ever got with hybrids were in the 250's and they were far in between. With a mere megabeam I'm scoring in the 450's and I get over 600 with my tachions and far more often than hybrids. Plus the added benefit of just hauling a few crystals make this choice very smart indeed. Just my 2 pennies. "What is a man what as he got if not himself then he as not. To say the things he truly feels and not the words of one who kneels. The record shows I took the blows and did it my way"
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2005.03.04 17:00:00 - [115] Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu Radio S: 5 EM Iron S: 3 Kin 3 Therm This alone is broken. I know it's really fun for CCP to keep ruining one race while making the next a Flavor of the Month® but, for a change, could we maybe try achieving equilibrium? How do you even justify this? You don't have to wait 10 seconds to reload. How is this unbalanced? Not everyone can have their cake and eat it too... minmatar haven't even had cake in almost a year. -------------------- The Nest
Elaine Threepwood	Posted - 2005.03.04 17:35:00 - [116] Originally by: Ithildin P.S. I am still interested in what advantage there are of choosing ammo inside the currently suggested hybrid categories. Choosing anything but Uranium/Lead/Iron makes you only loose capacitor. There are still 2 points I want to see adressed here. The first is that one, the second is the long range hybrid ammo being brought up to match the projectiles, but the short range projectile ammo not being brought up to match hybrid... I'd like to see either equal damage through the ranges, or projectiles keeping their weak close range/strong long range ammo variations.
sableye	Posted - 2005.03.04 17:45:00 - [117] perhaps if they want to make some of hybrid ammo do more thermal damage they should add soem new ammo that does mainly kinetic as well.
CCP Hammer	Posted - 2005.03.04 17:57:00 - [118] Hi, I'm mad because the forum ate a long post that I didn't save in a text file or to my copy buffer like I usually do. Here is how I've tweaked the hybrid charges. The other images are also updated with normailzed damage. It doesn't take hardening into account but it's interesting for comparison sake. Sorry there isn't more to the post but I have too many other things to do right now and can't rewrite it. Please test this out on SISI.
Fay Gallas	Posted - 2005.03.04 18:00:00 - [119] Edited by: Fay Gallas on 04/03/2005 18:06:52 I think these changes may cause a new set of problems. Can I make a case from the point of view of a Eagle pilot. With the new ammo changes, the gap between op ranges on the different ammo's will become very large. With the proposed changes, a good skilled pilot will have op ranges as follows. AM/P/U = 38km Lead/T = 78km Ir/T/I = 118km Now the highest three wont be able to be used without a sensor booster, and as there is a large gap (40km!!!) between AM and lead ammo, engagements around 45-65km's would be awkward and lower damage ammo would have to be used. I can understand and agree that so many different ranges that we have at the moment are not needed, but please keep at least one ammo type at -25% range, and hopefully +25%. Also, I just dont think things dont need to be made quite as simple as -50%/0%/+50% Fay
Face Lifter	Posted - 2005.03.04 18:05:00 - [120] I like the new hybrid ammo much better now. 1 minor thing tho - why not switch damage of lead around: - 5 kinetic, 4 thermal ? It's really minor, but it feels better knowing you have more distinct choices of medium ammo, 1 thermal bias, 1 kinetic bias

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 :: 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.