Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
41
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 02:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
Allow faction weapons (and all weapons greater than meta 5) to use T2 ammunition and be affected by the specialization skills. This would provide better modules to reach for in the offensive category, just like the defensive modules have their faction variants. |
Ridic Poison
Alpha Strategy The Unthinkables
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 03:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
NO |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
41
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 03:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
Good answer. Well thought out. You could be a philosopher. |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
51
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 03:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
Why?
Train T2s to use T2 ammo. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
41
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 03:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Why?
Train T2s to use T2 ammo.
This would make Faction weapons better than T2. Which is as it should be. As it is there is no point to faction weaponry because you get less dps. Now you could get more. There would be an extra level to achieve when pimping a ship a little. |
Ridic Poison
Alpha Strategy The Unthinkables
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 03:49:00 -
[6] - Quote
in guns it goes t1>faction>t2>officer
you get more dps out of faction then t1 and they take the same skill to use. t2 take more skills to use and are better for that reason if you want to make faction guns strong then you will need to add more skill req to use to balance it out. |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
51
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 03:57:00 -
[7] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Why?
Train T2s to use T2 ammo. This would make Faction weapons better than T2. Which is as it should be. As it is there is no point to faction weaponry because you get less dps. Now you could get more. There would be an extra level to achieve when pimping a ship a little.
As it should be? According to whom?
Faction weapons are better than t2 in many circumstances when used with faction or t1 ammo. A lot of PvE nightmares for example use faction guns because they use significantly less cap. Faction launchers do more dps than t2 launchers loaded with t1 or faction ammo.
Faction guns are fine. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
41
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 04:00:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ridic Poison wrote:in guns it goes t1>faction>t2>officer
you get more dps out of faction then t1 and they take the same skill to use. t2 take more skills to use and are better for that reason if you want to make faction guns strong then you will need to add more skill req to use to balance it out.
I'm fine with that. A faction heavy missile launcher cost upward 60 mill last I checked. Just how many noobs are going to take advantage of the slightly better than T1 dps at that price tag? Faction stuff is bling. It should be useful bling. Besides, faction ballistics are better than T2 yet have the skill requirements of T1 ballistics. So why is every 10 day old character not sporting CNB? Cost of course. They cost 100 million apiece. My change just makes more faction stuff useful. Seriously. Just how many people do you see using CNML? |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
51
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 04:02:00 -
[9] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Ridic Poison wrote:in guns it goes t1>faction>t2>officer
you get more dps out of faction then t1 and they take the same skill to use. t2 take more skills to use and are better for that reason if you want to make faction guns strong then you will need to add more skill req to use to balance it out. I'm fine with that. A faction heavy missile launcher cost upward 60 mill last I checked. Just how many noobs are going to take advantage of the slightly better than T1 dps at that price tag? Faction stuff is bling. It should be useful bling. Besides, faction ballistics are better than T2 yet have the skill requirements of T1 ballistics. So why is every 10 day old character not sporting CNB? Cost of course. They cost 100 million apiece. My change just makes more faction stuff useful. Seriously. Just how many people do you see using CNML? Price isn't really that much of a factor in balancing. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
41
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 04:10:00 -
[10] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Ridic Poison wrote:in guns it goes t1>faction>t2>officer
you get more dps out of faction then t1 and they take the same skill to use. t2 take more skills to use and are better for that reason if you want to make faction guns strong then you will need to add more skill req to use to balance it out. I'm fine with that. A faction heavy missile launcher cost upward 60 mill last I checked. Just how many noobs are going to take advantage of the slightly better than T1 dps at that price tag? Faction stuff is bling. It should be useful bling. Besides, faction ballistics are better than T2 yet have the skill requirements of T1 ballistics. So why is every 10 day old character not sporting CNB? Cost of course. They cost 100 million apiece. My change just makes more faction stuff useful. Seriously. Just how many people do you see using CNML? Price isn't really that much of a factor in balancing.
Then how do you respond to the noobs argument? Theoretically every new char should be able to use the CNB, but they don't. Price clearly has something to do with it. By the way I just checked my eft. I don't know anything about pve nightmares but as for the tengu you only get 14 extra dps from a set of faction launchers (using an rr tengu max skills and cn scourge missiles) 300 million for 14 dps is not realistic which is why I don't think these missile launchers see much use. One of the main challenges of EVE is cost effectiveness. Right now i don't think faction launchers and other weapons have a role, partially due to high cost and partially due to their being worse than T2. |
|
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
41
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 04:13:00 -
[11] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Why?
Train T2s to use T2 ammo. This would make Faction weapons better than T2. Which is as it should be. As it is there is no point to faction weaponry because you get less dps. Now you could get more. There would be an extra level to achieve when pimping a ship a little. As it should be? According to whom?
Me of course. On a more serious note, I was merely pointing out that there would then be a consistency between the progression of defensive faction equipment and offensive faction equipment. I just don't see faction weapons in their current state as having much of a role.
|
Ridic Poison
Alpha Strategy The Unthinkables
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 04:36:00 -
[12] - Quote
But your forgetting that you don't need any special skills to use them. and your getting 14more dps with faction launchers then t2 which take aleast one month to get the skills need to use.
As for T2 Large guns it take 2-3 months of train to get them the first time, while it take less then a month to get faction large guns. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
41
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 05:38:00 -
[13] - Quote
Ridic Poison wrote:But your forgetting that you don't need any special skills to use them. and your getting 14more dps with faction launchers then t2 which take aleast one month to get the skills need to use.
As for T2 Large guns it take 2-3 months of train to get them the first time, while it take less then a month to get faction large guns.
Yeah but my counter point to that was that anyone who has not yet trained up to bs sized weaponry is probably not going to have that much in the way of cash anyway. Therefore those people will not have the capacity to use the expensive faction gear. Btw we could just set it so that you need the necessary T2 skills to use the T2 ammo and get the T2 benefits in the launchers. That way the launchers can still be used as a way to save training time but they can also be used as an overall improved weapon choice. This would definitely make the faction weapons flourish.
|
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks The Volition Cult
432
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 07:53:00 -
[14] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Price isn't really that much of a factor in balancing. Really? Tell that to T3 cruisers or shield boosters or most things in the game actually. The more costly an item the better it is, a lot of the time. Those item types where that isn't the case, the expensive high meta versions simply don't get used. Like the faction weapons, for example.
How many of you have actually used faction weapons? Did you really use them between getting tech I and tech II weapons? I certainly didn't and I don't know anyone in the game who did. I doubt that many people do.
Personally, I think that faction weapons should be buffed to make them competitive with Tech II but rather than allow the use of tech II ammo they should have a bonus to using the same faction's faction ammo in order to give them a little bit more dps than tech II guns and tech II ammo. |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
142
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 08:03:00 -
[15] - Quote
Tchulen wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Price isn't really that much of a factor in balancing. Really? Tell that to T3 cruisers or shield boosters or most things in the game actually. The more costly an item the better it is, a lot of the time. Those item types where that isn't the case, the expensive high meta versions simply don't get used. Like the faction weapons, for example. How many of you have actually used faction weapons? Did you really use them between getting tech I and tech II weapons? I certainly didn't and I don't know anyone in the game who did. I doubt that many people do. Personally, I think that faction weapons should be buffed to make them competitive with Tech II but rather than allow the use of tech II ammo they should have a bonus to using the same faction's faction ammo in order to give them a little bit more dps than tech II guns and tech II ammo.
I use faction weapons when fitting is tight generally, but given the recent rebalancing of ships and some weapons it's become less of an issue and taken a little of the need for better fitting weaponry out of the game. Cosmos particularly fits into this category with often very comfortable fittings but poorer dps (sometimes even below the meta 3/4 items). |
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front
287
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 08:39:00 -
[16] - Quote
When talking about cost, fitting a full rack of faction weapons is enormous. It simply doesnt scale with the rest of faction stuff and the fact that people say T2 is better than faction then what the hell is going on with faction webs and scrams and resists and hardeners?
Tiercide to ships is going well. The next step would be to fix the massive issues with the tiered modules. Modules should be "roled" like ships and not be "This is the best so use this and nothing else"( I'm looking at you rolled tungsten plates). Faction weapons fall into this mess and do need a rebalance. An easy fix would be to make specialisation skills effect all weapons/drones instead of just T2. This would give a decent buff to faction weapons and drones and also make using High meta T1 weapons appealing with the specialisation skill. T2 then retains the versatility of T2 ammo. |
Meditril
T.R.I.A.D
293
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 08:43:00 -
[17] - Quote
No.
In my opinion faction weapons need to be changed as following:
a) give them a 30% bonus to optimal range / fall off range / missile flight time. b) reduce their costs in LP store so that taking everything into account they cost no more than 3 times of the same T2 weapon.
Thats's all. This gives them a role, haveing a bit less DPS than T2 weapons, but having better range than T2 weapons with T1 ammo. |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
51
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 08:48:00 -
[18] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Then how do you respond to the noobs argument? Theoretically every new char should be able to use the CNB, but they don't. Price clearly has something to do with it. Lol what do noobs have to do with balancing? The power of ships aren't balanced on their accessibility to newbie players.
Vassal Zeren wrote:By the way I just checked my eft. I don't know anything about pve nightmares but as for the tengu you only get 14 extra dps from a set of faction launchers (using an rr tengu max skills and cn scourge missiles) 300 million for 14 dps is not realistic which is why I don't think these missile launchers see much use. If price determined cost-effectiveness than a lot of officer gear should be multiple times more effective than what they currently are. They're at that price because clearly enough people are willing to buy them at that price.
Vassal Zeren wrote:One of the main challenges of EVE is cost effectiveness. Right now i don't think faction launchers and other weapons have a role, partially due to high cost and partially due to their being worse than T2. If your answer to the challenge of cost-effectiveness is faction mods you're doing something wrong.
|
Spugg Galdon
APOCALYPSE LEGION The Obsidian Front
287
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 10:52:00 -
[19] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote: If price determined cost-effectiveness than a lot of officer gear should be multiple times more effective than what they currently are. They're at that price because clearly enough people are willing to buy them at that price.
Wrong. Cost and effectiveness do not scale proportionately in EvE. They scale exponentially. People pay through the nose to gain very small advantages. This is as intended.
Faction weapons are expensive because of LP to ISK exchange rate. People will not trade for less than the current LP rate. People won't pay for faction weapons when T2 is very accessable and for a tiny fraction of the price. (faction drones are in a similar state.
Like I said above. Make the weapon specialisation skill effect all the weapons and not just T2. Then it will buff faction gear fairly well. |
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks The Volition Cult
432
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 11:03:00 -
[20] - Quote
Meditril wrote:No.
In my opinion faction weapons need to be changed as following:
a) give them a 30% bonus to optimal range / fall off range / missile flight time. b) reduce their costs in LP store so that taking everything into account they cost no more than 3 times of the same T2 weapon.
Thats's all. This gives them a role, haveing a bit less DPS than T2 weapons, but having better range than T2 weapons with T1 ammo.
I like this idea although the cost would need to be dropped as well. They're just too expensive for that role, currently. |
|
voetius
L V B Industries STELLAR CONSTELLATION
45
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 11:18:00 -
[21] - Quote
I agree with the idea of making them more useful but my approach would be different.
Rather than making them more powerful, make them cheaper.
While there are some faction mods that are always in demand, like Fed Navy Webs and CN Ballistic Controls most of the guns and launchers are rarely seen on the market because the tag / insignia cost sets a floor on the price you can sell them at and compared to T2 guns or some rare instances of COSMOS they are too expensive for what you get.
I would suggest either increasing (doubling or tripling) the drop rate of insignias in anti-faction missions and either removing the NPC buy orders (which sets a price floor) or dropping the floor down, or a combination of these.
At first sight I can see mission runners complaining that doubling the drop rate halves the value ... but then if you sell more you get the isk back that way.
If the insignias required for some faction gun were halved or more that would encourage people to start selling them on the market at e.g. half the current price but a similar isk / lp price conversion. This in turn would exert upwards pressure on insignias so the net effect could be cheaper faction guns / launchers and some modules without destroying the total value of insignia drops over time, even increasing their value.
End result:
Mission runners are no worse off if they want to sell the tags on the market Mission runners are better off if they want to convert LP to faction guns / launchers etc It's not inflationary Creates a market for faction guns etc that doesn't currently exist so potential buyers are better off |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
51
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 11:34:00 -
[22] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote: If price determined cost-effectiveness than a lot of officer gear should be multiple times more effective than what they currently are. They're at that price because clearly enough people are willing to buy them at that price.
Wrong. Cost and effectiveness do not scale proportionately in EvE. They scale exponentially. People pay through the nose to gain very small advantages. This is as intended. You're pretty bad at understanding sarcasm because you just repeated my point lol.
Spugg Galdon wrote:Faction weapons are expensive because of LP to ISK exchange rate. People will not trade for less than the current LP rate. People won't pay for faction weapons when T2 is very accessable and for a tiny fraction of the price. (faction drones are in a similar state. LP:ISK ratio set the limits to what people will pay on the market before they decide it's so expensive they'll just grind the LP themselves. What is on the market currently is the price that enough people will buy it at for sellers to sell it at. This is just common sense.
Spugg Galdon wrote:Like I said above. Make the weapon specialisation skill effect all the weapons and not just T2. Then it will buff faction gear fairly well. If you're making the skill apply to all weapons, you're not just buffing faction but all weapons. The net result is really just a T2 nerf. This isn't needed. |
Meditril
T.R.I.A.D
293
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 12:54:00 -
[23] - Quote
Tchulen wrote:Meditril wrote:No.
In my opinion faction weapons need to be changed as following:
a) give them a 30% bonus to optimal range / fall off range / missile flight time. b) reduce their costs in LP store so that taking everything into account they cost no more than 3 times of the same T2 weapon.
Thats's all. This gives them a role, haveing a bit less DPS than T2 weapons, but having better range than T2 weapons with T1 ammo. I like this idea although the cost would need to be dropped as well. They're just too expensive for that role, currently.
You should not forget that you can build them with a BPC without any T2-Components. So in far-off low-sec or end-of-the-universe 0.0 this is a real pro, since they are much easier to produce. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1162
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 13:06:00 -
[24] - Quote
Faction weapons are functionally fine they just need there cost reduced to about 3~4 times of what T2 is Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Unclaimed.
159
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 14:18:00 -
[25] - Quote
correct me if i am wrong, but t2 weapons give a 2% bonus per level to damage or ROF.
t1 do not get this bonus. i made this argument a couple months ago on the forums.
officer weapons should be able to use t2. they should not gain the 2% bonus for that ammo, but "should" be able to use it.
i do not think faction should. but, having faction have better range would be a good thing. faction isnt really useful and officer is just blingy.
ive had the brokara mega pulse on a nightmare and a paladin once. they did massive damage, but couldnt use the t2 ammo.
to me, if i am spending 650M for a pair of lasers, it better use all ammo. if these weapons are going to be modified and put on officer ships, they better use the best ammo available. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
1449
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 15:34:00 -
[26] - Quote
Faction ships using same faction mods should get a "synergistic bonus"! Including faction weapons firing faction ammo!
Anyways... continue on.
|
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 15:46:00 -
[27] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Then how do you respond to the noobs argument? Theoretically every new char should be able to use the CNB, but they don't. Price clearly has something to do with it. Lol what do noobs have to do with balancing? The power of ships aren't balanced on their accessibility to newbie players. Vassal Zeren wrote:By the way I just checked my eft. I don't know anything about pve nightmares but as for the tengu you only get 14 extra dps from a set of faction launchers (using an rr tengu max skills and cn scourge missiles) 300 million for 14 dps is not realistic which is why I don't think these missile launchers see much use. If price determined cost-effectiveness than a lot of officer gear should be multiple times more effective than what they currently are. They're at that price because clearly enough people are willing to buy them at that price. Vassal Zeren wrote:One of the main challenges of EVE is cost effectiveness. Right now i don't think faction launchers and other weapons have a role, partially due to high cost and partially due to their being worse than T2. If your answer to the challenge of cost-effectiveness is faction mods you're doing something wrong.
Ok I think you are not understand my points so I will rephrase them because you have a cool bio.
1) The newbie point is obviously not to say that we should make everything accessible to newbies. Just the opposite. I was pointing out (and I still am) that the idea that cost does not balance things is wrong, because in the case of a newbie the only thing thats stopping him from fitting a faction module is cost. Do see my point? He can use the module so skillpoints do not factor into the balancing in this case, merely cost. Therefore cost plays a factor in balancing, thats all I'm saying.
2) This should be obvious but I guess it isn't. BY ITS VERY NATURE price determines cost effectiveness. That is what cost effectiveness IS. How expensive is something vs how useful it is. This is perfectly related to my point which is that there is not a significant benefit (and indeed in many cases there is an uncompensated drawback) for using faction weaponry. Perhaps you thought when I said cost effectiveness I meant cheap. That would be incorrect. I am talking about the principle of cost vs use. This principle is proven when you see tons of tengus with CNB. There is a use for the CNB to compensate for the cost. There is not for faction launchers, in general. |
Zaknussem
Everybody Loves Donuts
33
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 16:01:00 -
[28] - Quote
Allowing Faction weapons to use T2 ammo? No. Just no. It's been explained pretty well why that is not a good idea.
Allowing Faction weapons to gain from the weapon Specialization skills? Maybe. At least it makes more sense than the T2 ammo suggestion.
Allowing Officer weapons to use T2 ammo? Possibly. I'd be more interested to see a bigger variety of Officer or Deadspace weapons, personally.
Making Faction weapons cheaper? That's due to the market, YOU go tell the market how to behave. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 16:08:00 -
[29] - Quote
Zaknussem wrote: Making Faction weapons cheaper? That's due to the market, YOU go tell the market how to behave.
You don't understand, yet you are sarcastic. Know more before being a smart alec. The prices of all faction things are directly a result of the amount of LP and tags need to be exchanged for them. Lower that amount and you guarantee a lower price. Your other declarations go out the window if you don't even understand that, which is funny considering other people have already posted how this work in the comments. |
Hopelesshobo
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade
26
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 16:20:00 -
[30] - Quote
Faction guns are fine the way they are at being basically on par with T2 guns, but restricted to T1 ammo. Officer guns should be able to use T2 ammo however. The way I see it, faction guns are modified versions of T1 guns while officer guns are modified versions of T2 guns. |
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
174
|
Posted - 2013.06.13 22:18:00 -
[31] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Zaknussem wrote: Making Faction weapons cheaper? That's due to the market, YOU go tell the market how to behave. You don't understand, yet you are sarcastic. Know more before being a smart alec. The prices of all faction things are directly a result of the amount of LP and tags need to be exchanged for them. Lower that amount and you guarantee a lower price. Your other declarations go out the window if you don't even understand that, which is funny considering other people have already posted how this work in the comments.
Yes and no. Even if LP prices dropped via a tag reevaluation (which I would support, the stores are using criteria that are way outdated) the market now has an established price. In an inflated economy. Price change with tag adjustment won't fix human greed. For players like me this would work. I can spam me some LP's and I can hit the stores for personal use (tags currently make this not possible even for me). Your noob won't be running level 4's like a 3 year player like me with time tested mission power grinding ships/fits and tactics however.
Sadly this is how markets work. Example, I run a 2 X Gist B SSB tengu I go back to alot. Same setup and mods I have for years. For you or a noob to buy this setup today (just SSB) is like 120mil per shield booster in todays market last I hit up jita. I got my boosters years ago at the low low price of 20 mil a pop. I used to run these in pvp on AF's in fact, at 20 mil why the hell not if you are making good isk 0.0 ratting. Market said oh, people like gist now, lets drain them wallets.
rest of this stuff....faction guns get their bene's. It may not be what you like, but they are there. Another example: I have a love/hate with rokh and I try to do fun things with it in pve time to time when I am on the love side. t2 425 II rails even with my max fitting skills gives me PG issues out the ass with certain off the wall builds I have in eft.
If I replace those t2's with CN's....I have lots og PG to play with. The pg this gets me would not have me missing t2 ammo (I don't use it in pve anyway,) and I would not miss the large spec 4 bonus as these builds give me other more desirable effects. I just don't want to roll around in a gank bait rokh with 700-800 mil in guns alone lol.
And I am a cheap mission runner. So I settled for plan B...a MJD T2 425 II rokh sniping with uranium /plutonium. Sure the tracking sucks. But atter a hop cruisers fly straight into you to instapop at 90 km's. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
42
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 01:25:00 -
[32] - Quote
Thanks for the well thought out response. I was just pointing out that the market isn't completely random and that it can be influenced by the rarity or abundance of things. For example a dramatic increase in those small dead space SB's would certainly lower their price. So this thing that people seem to be saying about the market being fickle and cost has nothing to do with balancing is untrue. I don't deny that a player run economy has trends like a real one, I'm saying that unlike a real one, CCP can rebalance the abundancy of things easily if it so desires. That said the problem of inflation seems to be greater than just the problem of faction weapons. The truth is the EVE economy is unstable because it is inflating quite rapidly. Just think of the price of a PLEX in 10 years! So I hope CCP is on the ball with this stuff. |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
53
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 01:50:00 -
[33] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Ok, I think you are not understanding my points so I will rephrase them because you have a cool bio.
1) The newbie point is obviously not to say that we should make everything accessible to newbies. Just the opposite. I was pointing out (and I still am) that the idea that cost does not balance things is wrong, because in the case of a newbie the only thing thats stopping him from fitting a faction module is cost. Do see my point? He can use the module so skillpoints do not factor into the balancing in this case, merely cost. Therefore cost plays a factor in balancing, thats all I'm saying.
2) This should be obvious but I guess it isn't. BY ITS VERY NATURE price determines cost effectiveness. That is what cost effectiveness IS. How expensive is something vs how useful it is. This is perfectly related to my point which is that there is not a significant benefit (and indeed in many cases there is an uncompensated drawback) for using faction weaponry. Perhaps you thought when I said cost effectiveness I meant cheap. That would be incorrect. I am talking about the principle of cost vs use. This principle is proven when you see tons of tengus with CNB. There is a use for the CNB to compensate for the cost. There is not for faction launchers, in general.
3) As stated Previously, faction mods ARE cost effective. They are not cheap. But there is about a 100 dps increase from them at least for Tengu's which means less time doing sites more safety and more profit. Cost effectiveness can be summarized like this: Does it make sense to buy this item at this price? Can my money be better spent elsewhere? In the case of the CNB's the answer is NO! CNB's are the best mod for you money if you want to add faction gear to you ship. The answer to CNHML is YES! your money can be spent better in a million other areas! CN HML and other faction weapons are overpriced and inferior to T2 in the vast majority of situations. No I understand, I'm jsut not sure you do.
Faction mods in general aren't cost effective, therefore talking about cost-effectiveness in terms of faction mods is rather moot. There are very limited circumstances where they are (points and webs for example are arguably worth it when used in combination with links). Some people get faction mods because they're easier to fit. Navy Launchers for example are easier to fit. The rest I'd wager simply do so because they're spacerich and can afford to so... why not?
In terms of your tengu example. How many Navy BCUs do you need to get that extra 100DPS? 3? 4? You could buy a brand new fully t2 (aside from rigs) tengu with that money. In otherwords you can dual box your alt with the 2nd tengu and literally get double your dps. That's cost-effective. Faction mods not so much.
What you're really saying is faction guns/launchers are even more ridulously cost-inefficient than other faction mods. In which case you're right. But then its a tricky thing to balance in comparison to its relative low importance. In either case, letting t1 use specialisation skills or t2 ammo is something I strongly disagree with since I don't think T2s, given their requirements need a nerf, which is the real effect of your proposition. I perhaps agree to lowering their LP store requirements to assemble, but that's about it. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
43
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 14:58:00 -
[34] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Ok, I think you are not understanding my points so I will rephrase them because you have a cool bio.
1) The newbie point is obviously not to say that we should make everything accessible to newbies. Just the opposite. I was pointing out (and I still am) that the idea that cost does not balance things is wrong, because in the case of a newbie the only thing thats stopping him from fitting a faction module is cost. Do see my point? He can use the module so skillpoints do not factor into the balancing in this case, merely cost. Therefore cost plays a factor in balancing, thats all I'm saying.
2) This should be obvious but I guess it isn't. BY ITS VERY NATURE price determines cost effectiveness. That is what cost effectiveness IS. How expensive is something vs how useful it is. This is perfectly related to my point which is that there is not a significant benefit (and indeed in many cases there is an uncompensated drawback) for using faction weaponry. Perhaps you thought when I said cost effectiveness I meant cheap. That would be incorrect. I am talking about the principle of cost vs use. This principle is proven when you see tons of tengus with CNB. There is a use for the CNB to compensate for the cost. There is not for faction launchers, in general.
3) As stated Previously, faction mods ARE cost effective. They are not cheap. But there is about a 100 dps increase from them at least for Tengu's which means less time doing sites more safety and more profit. Cost effectiveness can be summarized like this: Does it make sense to buy this item at this price? Can my money be better spent elsewhere? In the case of the CNB's the answer is NO! CNB's are the best mod for you money if you want to add faction gear to you ship. The answer to CNHML is YES! your money can be spent better in a million other areas! CN HML and other faction weapons are overpriced and inferior to T2 in the vast majority of situations. No I understand, I'm jsut not sure you do. Faction mods in general aren't cost effective, therefore talking about cost-effectiveness in terms of faction mods is rather moot. There are very limited circumstances where they are (points and webs for example are arguably worth it when used in combination with links). Some people get faction mods because they're easier to fit. Navy Launchers for example are easier to fit. The rest I'd wager simply do so because they're spacerich and can afford to so... why not? In terms of your tengu example. How many Navy BCUs do you need to get that extra 100DPS? 3? 4? You could buy a brand new fully t2 (aside from rigs) tengu with that money. In otherwords you can dual box your alt with the 2nd tengu and literally get double your dps. That's cost-effective. Faction mods not so much. What you're really saying is faction guns/launchers are even more ridiculously cost-inefficient than other faction mods. In which case you're right. But then its a tricky thing to balance in comparison to its relative low importance. In either case, letting t1 use specialisation skills or t2 ammo is something I strongly disagree with since I don't think T2s, given their requirements need a nerf, which is the real effect of your proposition. I perhaps agree to lowering their LP store requirements to assemble, but that's about it.
I disagree about the cost effectiveness of faction BCUs. Since my experience is mainly in wormholes I'll give an example from a C3 wh. You can farm a C3 site in 1 faction BCU tengu in about 15 minutes. It takes about 25 minutes in a T2 fit Tengu. Now you get about 50 million on average for 1 c3 site. So in an hour with the faction Tengu you have received 200 million vs in an hour with the non faction Tengu you have a little over 50 million. Yes the initial investment is considerate but it is still worth it-- which is why people buy CN BCU's. They don't buy the launchers.
As for dual boxing, that is not a valid comparison because you conveniently left out the added cost of paying for 2 plexes instead of 1 or an extra 15 dollars per month. I don't think when arguing over game balance it is apt to compare something that would require paying for an extra account. CCP definitely doesn't balance things based on whether or not people will dual box.
Also 3 CN BCU cost 300 million. A tengu is 570 with rigs. There is another point I'd like to make: necessity. In some cases the extra DPS that CN BCU bring is necessary for the operation such as farming C5 sites with as few RR tengus as possible (if you don't have many guys) the extra dps will keep you alive by killing the sleeps faster than they can neut you. You can't say that about the missile launchers. So the ballistics have a role to play and the faction missile launcher role, while it may exist is pretty narrow. |
Verity Sovereign
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
457
|
Posted - 2013.06.14 15:16:00 -
[35] - Quote
Faction guns are the only faction item class where T2 completely outclasses faction.
Most egregious are the blasters, where meta 3 and 4 have more optimal.
There is no reason they can't require T2 skills to load T2 ammo, just the same as they require skills to load defenders or FOF missiles in launchers.
Caldari/DG launchers are the exception
Faction weapons need a boost. Either to base stats (moar optimal+falloff+damage), or through applying T2 attributes to them (load T2 ammo if skills allow, let T2 skills benefit faction weapons).
I'll keep making these suggestions until CCP gets around to module rebalance (a long time given the ship rebalance that still has a lot of work left) |
PavlikX
You are in da lock
73
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 15:00:00 -
[36] - Quote
System T1 (meta0)--->Meta1-4--->Meta8--->T2 (meta5)--->Meta11... is obviously broken It should be 0--->1-4--->5--->8--->11 How? Posible solutions: 1. Allow T2 ammo to be used 2. Allow specialisations to give their bonuses to the 8 and 11, but without that specialisation skills in prequirements 3. Boost basic specs (each faction can boost it's own spec greatly, meantime officers boosts few specs) 4. Decrease fitting and cap demands
Personnaly I like those combinations Navy weapons p.2 and p.4 with slight p.3 Pirate weapons p.2 and p.3 with slight p.4 Officer weapons p.1, 2, 3 and slight p.4 or 1,2,4 and 3.
Another option is to bring new skills, available in LP shops of factions and exploration, increasing stats of faction ammo and weapons. For example skill Amarr Navy large pulse specialisation works only with Amarr navy large pulses, but gives no T2 ammo usage. This option can replace p.2 according to the faction weapons |
Naomi Anthar
Loza Szydercow Li3 Federation
59
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 15:57:00 -
[37] - Quote
It's pathethic that for some (insert word describing some clueless idiot) really do think that faction guns shouldn't be better than t2.
Why?
Because it's against entire fitting theory created by devs. Look at almost every single module except weapons and you will see that faction stuff is BETTER. It is intended to be VASTLY BETTER. Because it's harder to acquire , more expensive and often produced (via lore) by SUPERIOR to tech 2 technology. The only people who are against faction guns/launchers/drones (yes they suck aswell compared to cost) are manufacturers who do T2 stuff. They fear that suddenly people would mount faction guns (tho they wouldnt ... its expensive after all) , and people from FW would earn thier money (buying faction guns from store).
Truth is that if someone THINKS it's easy to get for example faction gun - i can give someone entire day for farming and lets see how many guns he can dish out from rats. Very often it will be 0 guns.
Damn meta 8 and more is supposed to outclass meta 5 by all means. If you are against it, then i vote for t0 and t1 stuff to be better than meta 5 (aka tech II). Beacause WHY NOT. Then i will drink your tears. |
Aston Martin DB5
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
18
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 17:39:00 -
[38] - Quote
Fking NO! You are basically advocating golden ammo and pay to win. Dumb dumb dumb. Players that have trained t2 should have the advantage with damage output for their ship even if the player has implants.
If you disagree then remove skill training in the game. |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
830
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 17:42:00 -
[39] - Quote
Tchulen wrote:Personally, I think that faction weapons should be buffed to make them competitive with Tech II but rather than allow the use of tech II ammo they should have a bonus to using the same faction's faction ammo in order to give them a little bit more dps than tech II guns and tech II ammo.
In a players driven game content and economy you want NPC stuff to be superior?
No, this would be bad. Why spend hundreds or thousands of hours training tons of skills to build/invent Modules requiring far more training than NPC ones just to build lower value items?
It's a player driven economy and content, officer and A-B-X type modules are already far powerful than they should be. Now if the idea behind it is to make it so a each item used on whatever ship from the very same faction brings a small bonus on top so that if you want a space pinata with awesome bonus, why not, worth the gank at least.
Every change to NPC stuff or players stuff must keep this "lei motiv": players create the content and the items, NPC stuff should be a simple bling to cater to poor mindless red cross shooting people that will never do anything else whatever the game is than farm, farm farm farm farm and still farm NPC crap.
Notice I'm not saying it needs to be nerf, except industry/market/high sec POS slots, but NPC items are already far too good as they are:
want a 109km point on your Lachesis arazu? -RF or True sancha for 99km
Want webs at sniper ranges? true sancha or Fed Navy
Ammo/Probes/Cap booster charges
Navy Drones
Probe launchers/Cap injectors/neutralizers
Shields extenders and hardeners/passive resists
Armor plates and hardeners/platings
MWD's and Afterburners
Pirate ships worth a billion not even requiring the amount of minerals of an old Tier 3 BS but the same of a Tier 1 BS for far better performances in all aspects.
And the list goes on and on about modules frequently used in PVP that are already far too good compared with player build items. PVE is not and should never be a reference for balance, PVP does since it's what this game is about.
Faction guns are fantastic already, they don't need more buffs in any aspect.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Naomi Anthar
Loza Szydercow Li3 Federation
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 17:43:00 -
[40] - Quote
Aston Martin DB5 wrote:Fking NO! You are basically advocating golden ammo and pay to win. Dumb dumb dumb. Players that have trained t2 should have the advantage with damage output for their ship even if the player has implants.
If you disagree then remove skill training in the game.
No pay to win ? Then i say T2 is too expensive too ! I want to roam around in meta 0 stuff pwning and it must be as strong as officers stuff !! No pay to win !!! meta 0 invu must give 50% resists as Estamel !!! NO PAY TO WIN !!
Dude please biomass for your own good... |
|
Aston Martin DB5
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
18
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 17:45:00 -
[41] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:Aston Martin DB5 wrote:Fking NO! You are basically advocating golden ammo and pay to win. Dumb dumb dumb. Players that have trained t2 should have the advantage with damage output for their ship even if the player has implants.
If you disagree then remove skill training in the game. No pay to win ? Then i say T2 is too expensive too ! I want to roam around in meta 0 stuff pwning and it must be as strong as officers stuff !! No pay to win !!! meta 0 invu must give 50% resists as Estamel !!! NO PAY TO WIN !! Dude please biomass for your own good...
Not sure what I had just read there. Please point me to where there was one complete sentence. Dumb post along with dumb logic!
|
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
334
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 17:48:00 -
[42] - Quote
yall continuously miss the tag bottleneck that most of the faction guns suffer from.
Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
Naomi Anthar
Loza Szydercow Li3 Federation
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 17:55:00 -
[43] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote: stuff
I think you what you did here is just counter your own arguments. Basically if i for example someone fights in 24th crusade(just an example) AND HE WANTS JUST PEW PEW and just PVP. After all you said game should be about pvp and fun. Then why he is forced to buy from damn PVE industrials. He should be able to get his guns from 24th store. This player should have his damn right to actually **** on industrials all the time. But no he is directly connected to what those risk awerse players do, what prices they set. If he could buy GOOD enough guns from his own faction store. Then it would be good, not the other way.
You are trying to say game should be balanced about PVP, but in fact you support PVE over PVP all the way.
Don't fool yourself guys, a big part of ship cost is in guns/ammo/drones. And as now it's that there IS NO option among weapons - its either T2 or ... nothing. With ammo it's diffrent story but not much better tbh. It's still often better (scorch for example). Drones ? Another bullshit. Since when Gallente Federation cannot produce superior drones to ordinary T2 hobgoblins ? I though they are best drone race around (maybe after Rogue Drones lol). Atm some random industrial guy can outdo best Federation Navy work in some random deep in ass industrial station.
Hell yeah work as intended...
|
Naomi Anthar
Loza Szydercow Li3 Federation
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 17:58:00 -
[44] - Quote
Aston Martin DB5 wrote:Naomi Anthar wrote:Aston Martin DB5 wrote:Fking NO! You are basically advocating golden ammo and pay to win. Dumb dumb dumb. Players that have trained t2 should have the advantage with damage output for their ship even if the player has implants.
If you disagree then remove skill training in the game. No pay to win ? Then i say T2 is too expensive too ! I want to roam around in meta 0 stuff pwning and it must be as strong as officers stuff !! No pay to win !!! meta 0 invu must give 50% resists as Estamel !!! NO PAY TO WIN !! Dude please biomass for your own good... Not sure what I had just read there. Please point me to where there was one complete sentence. Dumb post along with dumb logic!
Read your own post , before you complain , let me quote one or two of your "sentences": "Dumb dumb dumb." , "Fking NO! ".
I though i can come up with language you use and understand. Right ? |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
50
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 19:42:00 -
[45] - Quote
Aston Martin DB5 wrote:Fking NO! You are basically advocating golden ammo and pay to win. Dumb dumb dumb. Players that have trained t2 should have the advantage with damage output for their ship even if the player has implants.
If you disagree then remove skill training in the game.
If you noticed, I previously said that in order to get said benefits from the faction guns either the skill requirements would be changed or you wouldn't get the benefits without the skills. Please take you childish declarations of Apocalypse Now elsewhere. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
50
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 19:46:00 -
[46] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:yall continuously miss the tag bottleneck that most of the faction guns suffer from.
It was also proposed that said bottleneck be lowered. does anyone read the previous comments? |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
334
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 20:49:00 -
[47] - Quote
the bottleneck is not the drop rate but which tags are required for which things. Large guns require the same tags as medium guns and small guns require the same tags as the universally useable modules such as sensor boosters and tracking computers.
were they adjusted to require tags specific to the module "size" faction weapons would become more common and the price would drop.
some modules like armor and shield resistance boosters dont have a size and thus ought to require more specialized tags or tags separate from the weapons and classed modules.
reducing the tag numbers required for redemption would do some of the same thing, but would only lower the prices for universal modules and not the specialized ones. Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
548
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 21:38:00 -
[48] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Allow faction weapons (and all weapons greater than meta 5) to use T2 ammunition and be affected by the specialization skills. This would provide better modules to reach for in the offensive category, just like the defensive modules have their better faction variants. Absolutely not. Faction guns are tech 1.
What they need is to not be worse than base t1, but actually be good. They should have a damage bonus of 5-10% over the meta 4, and at minimum the same range. If one had less range, it should have better tracking to make up for it.
Navy faction guns could have a 5% damage bonus and the same range across the board, with reduced CPU and the same powergrid costs as t1 for the meta 8s, while the meta 9s could have CPU cost similar to metas 1-4 but have either slightly better tracking, range, or damage. With a max damage bonus of 10%, with the same range and tracking but lower than meta 0 CPU cost, the weapon will have exactly the same attributes as fully skilled tech 2 (when fitted with tech 1/faction ammo), but will cost less CPU and powergrid, and have lower skill requirements. This is the ultimate expression of faction stuff and should be reserved for the very best and most expensive faction guns. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
51
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 22:29:00 -
[49] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Allow faction weapons (and all weapons greater than meta 5) to use T2 ammunition and be affected by the specialization skills. This would provide better modules to reach for in the offensive category, just like the defensive modules have their better faction variants. Absolutely not. Faction guns are tech 1. What they need is to not be worse than base t1, but actually be good. They should have a damage bonus of 5-10% over the meta 4, and at minimum the same range. If one had less range, it should have better tracking to make up for it. Navy faction guns could have a 5% damage bonus and the same range across the board, with reduced CPU and the same powergrid costs as t1 for the meta 8s, while the meta 9s could have CPU cost similar to metas 1-4 but have either slightly better tracking, range, or damage. With a max damage bonus of 10%, with the same range and tracking but lower than meta 0 CPU cost, the weapon will have exactly the same attributes as fully skilled tech 2 (when fitted with tech 1/faction ammo), but will cost less CPU and powergrid, and have lower skill requirements. This is the ultimate expression of faction stuff and should be reserved for the very best and most expensive faction guns.
No thats not true. Many Faction things are universally better than their T2 counterparts. You can easily spot those items: they are used. Faction invulns, faction ballistics, faction reppers, faction adaptive nano membrane, the list is pretty long. How can you say the ultimate goal of faction stuff is easier fitting when all of these modules exist? It seems that the modules that are ONLY better for their fitting and are indeed worse in the actual specialty of that module, are hardly used at all. I point again to caldari navy heavy missile launchers. In order to be used the wepons have to be better at their jobs than T2 because T2 is cheeper. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
549
|
Posted - 2013.06.15 22:53:00 -
[50] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:It seems that the modules that are ONLY better for their fitting and are indeed worse in the actual specialty of that module, are hardly used at all. But the faction modules that are only slightly better than tech 2 but with easier fitting are highly sought after.
Giving a faction gun +10% dps and the same range and tracking makes it better than t2 unless you have the t2 weapon skill at level 5.
I'm okay with faction guns having slightly better attributes than tech 2, but only very slightly. As it stands, the problem is that a lot of the faction guns are much worse than basic tech 1 meta 0. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. |
|
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
51
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 01:20:00 -
[51] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:It seems that the modules that are ONLY better for their fitting and are indeed worse in the actual specialty of that module, are hardly used at all. But the faction modules that are only slightly better than tech 2 but with easier fitting are highly sought after. Giving a faction gun +10% dps and the same range and tracking makes it better than t2 unless you have the t2 weapon skill at level 5. I'm okay with faction guns having slightly better attributes than tech 2, but only very slightly. As it stands, the problem is that a lot of the faction guns are much worse than basic tech 1 meta 0.
Why shouldn't they be better than T2? They cost 60 million a pop. for 60x the price of a T2 weapon, I should have all the capabilities of a T2 weapon. The fact is, that without the flexibility of using ammunition types like fury and scorch faction weapons are overall worse than T2 so there is no purpose to them. They need to do significantly more DPS to the point where it makes sense to invest money in them. I am having a hard time understanding how people keep saying the faction weapons are good for fitting. No proffesional fits use faction weapons. It is very unusual for someone to go for less dps just for ease of fitting. All staple fits are pretty much based around fitting T2 weapons. Its the other modules such as invuln's, BCU's , PDU. that are fit as faction modules. Because in addition to being easier on fitting, they are better People fit faction weapons in a pinch (and only people with tons of cash to burn for that matter) No standard fit will have you using faction weapons but many will have you use faction BCU's. |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
830
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 02:59:00 -
[52] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote: stuff
I think you what you did here is just counter your own arguments. Basically if i for example someone fights in 24th crusade(just an example) AND HE WANTS JUST PEW PEW and just PVP. After all you said game should be about pvp and fun. Then why he is forced to buy from damn PVE industrials. He should be able to get his guns from 24th store. This player should have his damn right to actually **** on industrials all the time. But no he is directly connected to what those risk awerse players do, what prices they set. If he could buy GOOD enough guns from his own faction store. Then it would be good, not the other way. You are trying to say game should be balanced about PVP, but in fact you support PVE over PVP all the way. Don't fool yourself guys, a big part of ship cost is in guns/ammo/drones. And as now it's that there IS NO option among weapons - its either T2 or ... nothing. With ammo it's diffrent story but not much better tbh. It's still often better (scorch for example). Drones ? Another bullshit. Since when Gallente Federation cannot produce superior drones to ordinary T2 hobgoblins ? I though they are best drone race around (maybe after Rogue Drones lol). Atm some random industrial guy can outdo best Federation Navy work in some random deep in ass industrial station. Hell yeah work as intended...
Should read again, I'm not English native nor ever pretended to be but thought it was quite clear as post and not a wall of text on top.
You say there's no option for guns, then Meta4 are what for? -you should know those are as good as T2 but can't use T2 ammo nor profit from the increase in damage well deserved after over a month training for lvl5+spec up to 4
In short you don't want to put effort in whatever, click and go, why bother training skills? -you're smarter than everyone why should you train skills?
Ammo not much better: you're kidding right? good enough to be the best choice while moving around because you don't have the range bonus but you don't have the range penalty neither and ranges where you can do stuff with is right in between, so, good enough.
Again, take your faction guns and put faction ammo, get faction dmg mods, once it's done compare with T2, then compare the difference in amount of time training for both; faction guns are OK, don't need buffs If you think they are bad, if you think they need buffs you really need first to start training your skills past lvl3, there's no other explanation. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
51
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 03:20:00 -
[53] - Quote
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Naomi Anthar wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote: stuff
I think you what you did here is just counter your own arguments. Basically if i for example someone fights in 24th crusade(just an example) AND HE WANTS JUST PEW PEW and just PVP. After all you said game should be about pvp and fun. Then why he is forced to buy from damn PVE industrials. He should be able to get his guns from 24th store. This player should have his damn right to actually **** on industrials all the time. But no he is directly connected to what those risk awerse players do, what prices they set. If he could buy GOOD enough guns from his own faction store. Then it would be good, not the other way. You are trying to say game should be balanced about PVP, but in fact you support PVE over PVP all the way. Don't fool yourself guys, a big part of ship cost is in guns/ammo/drones. And as now it's that there IS NO option among weapons - its either T2 or ... nothing. With ammo it's diffrent story but not much better tbh. It's still often better (scorch for example). Drones ? Another bullshit. Since when Gallente Federation cannot produce superior drones to ordinary T2 hobgoblins ? I though they are best drone race around (maybe after Rogue Drones lol). Atm some random industrial guy can outdo best Federation Navy work in some random deep in ass industrial station. Hell yeah work as intended... Should read again, I'm not English native nor ever pretended to be but thought it was quite clear as post and not a wall of text on top. You say there's no option for guns, then Meta4 are what for? -you should know those are as good as T2 but can't use T2 ammo nor profit from the increase in damage well deserved after over a month training for lvl5+spec up to 4 In short you don't want to put effort in whatever, click and go, why bother training skills? -you're smarter than everyone why should you train skills? Ammo not much better: you're kidding right? good enough to be the best choice while moving around because you don't have the range bonus but you don't have the range penalty neither and ranges where you can do stuff with is right in between, so, good enough. Again, take your faction guns and put faction ammo, get faction dmg mods, once it's done compare with T2, then compare the difference in amount of time training for both; faction guns are OK, don't need buffs If you think they are bad, if you think they need buffs you really need first to start training your skills past lvl3, there's no other explanation.
Meta 4 guns don't cost as much as faction guns. As a result they see slightly more use than faction guns, which is to say still hardly any. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
551
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 06:27:00 -
[54] - Quote
When the guns have the powergrid and CPU cost of meta 1-4 but the DPS of tech 2, they ARE better. There's still a use for tech 2 guns (tech 2 ammo) and it comes at the cost of the skill requirements for those weapons.
I think faction stuff in general is too expensive, because it's too difficult to obtain (Navy faction stuff is). But navy faction stuff is not supposed to be super good. If you look at all the navy faction modules (and a lot of pirate faction modules even) you'll notice that none of them are a lot better than tech 2.
I also think tech 2 stuff is too cheap. It is supposed to be pretty badass stuff. Also, I use tech 2 guns a lot and often do not use tech 2 ammo with them. I get better DPS than with meta 4 and have the option to use tech 2 ammo even if I often don't. Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. |
PavlikX
You are in da lock
73
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 09:57:00 -
[55] - Quote
Still i think that CCP should bring new faction's weapons and ammo skills. And faction weapons will be slightly boosted, without interference with T2 stuff. Important note, unlike T2 those new faction skills will give bonuses, but not be prequirements. In this case we will have this two different groups of weapons T2 will have T2, faction, T1 ammo, their existing specialisation skills and lower price Faction weapons with faction and T1 ammo, new specialisation skills, greater effiency and price |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
595
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 11:18:00 -
[56] - Quote
no |
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers
144
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 11:37:00 -
[57] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:When the guns have the powergrid and CPU cost of meta 1-4 but the DPS of tech 2, they ARE better. There's still a use for tech 2 guns (tech 2 ammo) and it comes at the cost of the skill requirements for those weapons.
This situation is not fixed. With all other relevant skills at lv5 the faction gun will have higher dps than the T2 version until you reach lv3 in that weapon's specialisation skill after which the T2 gun will have the higher dps - this applies to the close range ammo. Long range T2 ammo is a different matter altogether and arguably far too powerful compared to the T1 medium to long range variations. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
52
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 14:53:00 -
[58] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:It seems that the modules that are ONLY better for their fitting and are indeed worse in the actual specialty of that module, are hardly used at all. But the faction modules that are only slightly better than tech 2 but with easier fitting are highly sought after.
I think you might be overlooking the % difference in the module effectiveness (12.5% damage vs 10% damage in the case of CNB's) and the actual damage increase. (which is 100dps ish) However raw dps is not enough. Unless faction weapons have all the capabilities of T2's + a little more their price will never be justified. |
Ager Agemo
Kiith Paktu Curatores Veritatis Alliance
328
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 15:13:00 -
[59] - Quote
Not sure about faction weapon themselves but cosmos weapons having high skill requirements and being able to use T2 ammo would be an option to upgrade for those who already maxed weapons on a given ship but are unwilling to shell out 7 bill per gun for an officer fit, you know a middle ground. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Tribal Band
551
|
Posted - 2013.06.16 21:21:00 -
[60] - Quote
I'm leaving this thread but I want to repeat that I am much in favor of the idea that faction weapons need a huge buff. I think letting em use T2 ammo is a bad idea, so the buff should be elsewhere. I think I agree with most people here in that the net usefulness of these weapons should at least somewhat match the price. We may disagree on the specific mechanics but I like that we all see the problem the same way overall. :)
o/ Fit a warfare link to your tech 1 battlecruiser. Train Wing Commander. Get in the Squad Commander or Wing Commander position. Your fleets will be superior to everyone else's. |
|
Trajan Al'Thor
Trajan Al'Thor Corporation
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 19:35:00 -
[61] - Quote
IMHO Faction guns, no t2 ammo, price reduced to 3x t2. Some sort of bonus to range, probably falloff. Officer guns, t2 ammo |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
55
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 21:33:00 -
[62] - Quote
Trajan Al'Thor wrote:IMHO Faction guns, no t2 ammo, price reduced to 3x t2. Some sort of bonus to range, probably falloff. Officer guns, t2 ammo Yeah cept no one really uses officer guns. Now can you really make an argument for why someone who has the flexibility of picking different ammo types with T2 guns would settle for something many times the price that cannot even do what a T2 weapon can do? Its ridiculous. |
Berluth Luthian
Meltdown.
79
|
Posted - 2013.06.18 22:45:00 -
[63] - Quote
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246984&find=unread I brought this up in the market discussions room. I agree that the problem is LP/tag bottlenecks.
I'm surprised nobody has made the comparison yet to faction hulls. Yes they often are a bit more expensive than t2, but they aren't as specialized, and it's nowhere near as expensive as faction weapons are.
What might be interesting could be a sort of set bonus for using multiples of them or using them on faction hulls or something. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
57
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 01:20:00 -
[64] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:the bottleneck is not the drop rate but which tags are required for which things. Large guns require the same tags as medium guns and small guns require the same tags as the universally useable modules such as sensor boosters and tracking computers.
were they adjusted to require tags specific to the module "size" faction weapons would become more common and the price would drop.
some modules like armor and shield resistance boosters dont have a size and thus ought to require more specialized tags or tags separate from the weapons and classed modules.
reducing the tag numbers required for redemption would do some of the same thing, but would only lower the prices for universal modules and not the specialized ones.
I think the bottleneck is both. |
Pan Dora
Stardust Enterprises
26
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 02:53:00 -
[65] - Quote
Let me add my 0,02 ISK
0,01-> To me what its really wrong with the balance of modules its the fact that meta 5 its always much more skill intensive than any other option while, in most cases, it don't give any particular advantage over anything else. Weapons are a notable exception*. On top of that meta 5 tend to be hard to fit and cap hungry. To change it to a situation that make more sense** or all meta 6 and higher modules must be like meta 5 when it comes to skill requirements (imagine the tears) or give every single meta 5 module a distinguish advantage over anything else (good luck for devs figuring out what)
0,02->Maybe CCP would kill some modules tiers in a similar way they killed ship tiers. Actually there is very little reason to use a meta 2 instead of meta 3 item, that would be different if instead we had one with better fitting other with better performance.
*cov cloak also have a particular advantage while the Improved just fall in general case. I don't recall any other.
**its a game, don't need to make sense.
_____________________________________________________ -CCP would boost ECM so it also block the ability of buthurt posting. |
Verity Sovereign
Sovereign Fleet Tax Shelter
468
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 06:33:00 -
[66] - Quote
Pan Dora wrote:Let me add my 0,02 ISK
0,01-> To me what its really wrong with the balance of modules its the fact that meta 5 its always much more skill intensive than any other option while, in most cases, it don't give any particular advantage over anything else. Weapons are a notable exception*.
Meta 5 hardeners are significantly better than meta1-4. Same for resist amps and EANMs, damage controls, etc. The list of meta4 items that are as good as Meta 5 is rather limited. I think its limited to non-energized adaptive nano-plating, shield power relays, target painters, and tracking computers (although in this case, T2 does have the bonus of using less cap). T2 ABs are faster, T2 MWDs have a lower cap penalty, etc. This point of yours is rubbish.
Quote:On top of that meta 5 tend to be hard to fit and cap hungry. To change it to a situation that make more sense** or all meta 6 and higher modules must be like meta 5 when it comes to skill requirements (imagine the tears) or give every single meta 5 module a distinguish advantage over anything else (good luck for devs figuring out what) Umm, why? thats one of the appeals of faction stuff: paying to bypass skill reqs. T2 ships are harder to skill into than pirate ships, and as already noted, in the vast majority of cases, meta 5 >> meta 4.
Quote:0,02->Maybe CCP would kill some modules tiers in a similar way they killed ship tiers. Actually there is very little reason to use a meta 2 instead of meta 3 item, that would be different if instead we had one with better fitting other with better performance. cost - or should we tiericide everything, and have officer stuff be balanced with meta 4 and faction. Gankers will often not use meta 4, or even meta 3, due to cost considerations.
Quote:*cov cloak also have a particular advantage while the Improved just fall in general case. I don't recall any other. If moving 2.5x as fast while cloaked isn't enough of an advantage, then consider its lower scan res and retargeting delay.
I've jumped into low sec gate camps with a cloak on a small frigate, and I was glad I was plodding along at 25% speed (roughly 125 m/s) instead of 10% speed (50 m/s). They had some ships flying around trying to decloak me, and they got very close, I was having to move to avoid them (they got within 3.5 km)
Your arguments are bad and you should feel bad |
Trajan Al'Thor
Trajan Al'Thor Corporation
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 15:46:00 -
[67] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Trajan Al'Thor wrote:IMHO Faction guns, no t2 ammo, price reduced to 3x t2. Some sort of bonus to range, probably falloff. Officer guns, t2 ammo Yeah cept no one really uses officer guns. Now can you really make an argument for why someone who has the flexibility of picking different ammo types with T2 guns would settle for something many times the price that cannot even do what a T2 weapon can do? Its ridiculous. I just said price REDUCED to 3x t2. So about 10 mil each. Some small bonus to falloff or optimal. Equal damage to a T2 weapon without specialization 5. Maybe spec 3-4. Also, forgot, lower fitting requirements. |
Gorgoth24
Sickology
10
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 23:00:00 -
[68] - Quote
Making faction guns the premier PvE weapons I could go for.
But I don't like the idea of faction guns being superior to T2 in raw dps. Equal to, yes. Better fitting? Better tracking? But DPS and Range should be left alone, imo |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
59
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 01:01:00 -
[69] - Quote
Trajan Al'Thor wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Trajan Al'Thor wrote:IMHO Faction guns, no t2 ammo, price reduced to 3x t2. Some sort of bonus to range, probably falloff. Officer guns, t2 ammo Yeah cept no one really uses officer guns. Now can you really make an argument for why someone who has the flexibility of picking different ammo types with T2 guns would settle for something many times the price that cannot even do what a T2 weapon can do? Its ridiculous. I just said price REDUCED to 3x t2. So about 10 mil each. Some small bonus to falloff or optimal. Equal damage to a T2 weapon without specialization 5. Maybe spec 3-4. Also, forgot, lower fitting requirements.
so for all people with specialization 5 (aka the people who have money and want to invest in better weapons) these weapons are still useless. When you modify something it's silly to penalize people for having more training than others. Why are you so concerned with the faction weapons having more damage? As it was already stated numerous times, the faction equipment that fits better but functions worse is not used. I have no problem paying 300 mill for a set of faction launchers if they add 100 or so dps to my tengu. Cost simply augments the uselessness of the faction weapons; the root of the problem is that they are terrible compared to ordinary T2. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.23 23:46:00 -
[70] - Quote
bump |
|
Manfred Hideous
TOHOKU 9.0
10
|
Posted - 2013.06.23 23:57:00 -
[71] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Ridic Poison wrote:in guns it goes t1>faction>t2>officer
you get more dps out of faction then t1 and they take the same skill to use. t2 take more skills to use and are better for that reason if you want to make faction guns strong then you will need to add more skill req to use to balance it out. I'm fine with that. A faction heavy missile launcher cost upward 60 mill last I checked. Just how many noobs are going to take advantage of the slightly better than T1 dps at that price tag? Faction stuff is bling. It should be useful bling. Besides, faction ballistics are better than T2 yet have the skill requirements of T1 ballistics. So why is every 10 day old character not sporting CNB? Cost of course. They cost 100 million apiece. My change just makes more faction stuff useful. Seriously. Just how many people do you see using CNML?
The ridiculous cost is what makes them worthless. Rather than making them T-2 light, the tag requirements should be cut drastically. Noobs would be able to afford them if they are good savers and it wouldn't dumpster the T-2 guns. |
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
603
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 00:18:00 -
[72] - Quote
Vassal Zeren wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Why?
Train T2s to use T2 ammo. This would make Faction weapons better than T2. Which is as it should be. As it is there is no point to faction weaponry because you get less dps. Now you could get more. There would be an extra level to achieve when pimping a ship a little.
You get more dps when using faction ammo, than t2. You lose out on the t2 damage bonus, but you also dont get the t2 damage penalty.
This is the reason you see massively pimped tengus with CN launchers (that and fitting requirements) |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
60
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 00:23:00 -
[73] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Vassal Zeren wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Why?
Train T2s to use T2 ammo. This would make Faction weapons better than T2. Which is as it should be. As it is there is no point to faction weaponry because you get less dps. Now you could get more. There would be an extra level to achieve when pimping a ship a little. You get more dps when using faction ammo, than t2. You lose out on the t2 damage bonus, but you also dont get the t2 damage penalty. This is the reason you see massively pimped tengus with CN launchers (that and fitting requirements)
uhhh that is false. |
Vassal Zeren
Uncontrollable Innovations
61
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:29:00 -
[74] - Quote
Bump for Odyssey 1.1 A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |