Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
30
   |
Posted - 2011.10.28 17:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
Quote:Specifically speaking to the changes proposed in the OP's link, I get a strong impression CCP still does not understand the underlying weaknesses of hybrids. They are:
-Blasters need to be practical. They either need improved ranges which will allow them to compete with autos and "scorch'd" pulses or they need to be on the fastest ships. It's that simple.
-Railguns, and to a certain degree blasters, need something which fits a niche. Most of the questions every pilot/gang/fleet asks themselves when fitting a ship is, how is using weapon-type X going to give me an advantage on the field? In most cases (shown above), the answer is amost always projectiles or lasers. Hybrids need to be the answer to at least a couple of these questions. Presently, they do not.
I agree completely. Hybrid simply have no role - there is no situation where you say "we need blasters/rails", and CCP's changes do not address this in the slightest. This is because the roles that hybrids had have been usurped by ACs and lasers. This cannot be fixed by boosting hybrids by any sensible amount, because the problem isn't really hybrids, it's ACs and lasers. Hybrids are balanced because the have defined roles - the others are overpowered because they are too good in too many situations.
In general, the utility of a weapon as fleet size increases is in proportion to its range. In a blasterboat, you can't afford to sped all day MWDing about, when you can just sit still and fire Scorch. This straight away means that blasters need to be better than ACs in solo combat, as ACs are better as gang size increases. But, of course, they're not, because if you're soloing, you want mobility and the ability to apply damage from outside web range - hence you want Minmatar hulls and ACs. If you choose blasters, you have a slow ship with no ability to apply DPS from outside web range, and the requirement to go into web range yourself to apply your DPS. Tackling yourself in every fight, with no ability to GTFO when Teh Blob arrives, when a Minmatar AC option is available, is basically a complicated form of Russian Roulette - brave and exciting, but foolish.
Even despite this, if blasters really had a damage advantage close up, they would have a minor niche. But thanks to slot layouts, the greater viability of shield gank fits on AC boats and selectable damage, they don't. ACs are supposed to be used in falloff - so why do they have such high damage and tracking close up? I've run numbers on the new t3 BCs and, ignoring tracking, a shield gank Tornado with Hail will kill a Void Talos even if the fight starts at blaster optimal. It has less raw DPS, sure, but the damage-type selectability and ease of fitting LSEs means that Talos runs out of EHP first. If those are the final stats, then it's just stupid.
The only proper fix will involve one race with fast ships and short-ranged weapons, and the other with slower ships and high falloff. The fast ships will be able to use their speed to avoid unfavourable fights and choose favourable ones, but they'll have to go inside web range to apply their DPS. The slower ships will not be able to get tackle or avoid tackle nearly as easily, but will have better DPS application at range in compensation.
You'll know when blasters and ACs are balanced because you'll face a tough decision about whether to fly a Vaga or Deimos. Call it the Deimos test - if the Deimos is not balanced with the Vagabond, then blasterboats and AC-boats are not balanced.
As for rails, well, they're pointless in a world that instant probing and on-grid warping to eliminate the ranged niche. But even if you fix the "warp-to-enemy" problem, then Tachyons on optimal-boosted hulls have still usurped rail's long-ranged role. |